|
|
University official sentenced for child porn, blackmailDiversity and Equality Commissar Ronald Sinacore, age 56, has been sentenced to only 8 years in prison by Circuit Court Judge Jane Roush, who reduced a recommended 14 years. Sinacore told the court he was “deeply ashamed” of videotaping himself having sex with several young men in his home and campus office – and then trying to blackmail them. This is how much George Mason paid the homosexual pedophile. When I find a photo I’ll post it, in the mean time I hope he enjoys his stay in prison. Update: A more moderate Geoff Beck? Ok. But…. see comments. Posted by leslie on Saturday, September 24, 2005 at 09:02 PM in Education Comments:2
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 10:20 PM | # Blacks are notorious for holding social engineering positions, like the one at GMU. But I can’t find an image of Sinacore anywhere on the internet. 3
Posted by Lurker on September 24, 2005, 10:39 PM | # Ive looked for images just asking for “Sinacore”. Everybody with that name seems to be white (those that there are pix of) so dirty Ronnie may well be white too. My search doesnt prove it one way or the other though. 5
Posted by Martin Hutchinson on September 24, 2005, 10:46 PM | # http://www.co.fairfax.va.us/police/reports/101904ChildPornGMU.doc Bad luck, Geoff, the above link includes a picture. George Mason U is the local Republican college, intended to battle the leftie havens of Georgetown and GWU. It’s not very good—you’d be much better off at UVA or William & Mary. However, being in the VA subsurbs it has only a moderate number of African-American staff. This area is big with this stuff—the PhysEd teacher at my son’s elementary school was arrested for underage nookie halfway through the school year. It’s probably a function of the appallingly troll-like quality of the adult population! (it’s an anti-Hollywood—really ugly people with PhDs from obscure colleges and obnoxious personalities find their best employer is the government!) 6
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 10:54 PM | # Martin, It is well reported that Mestizos and Blacks prey upon Whites in prison, my guess is Sinacore will become their property. A fitting punishment considering the Whites whose lives he has ruined, via his post a Diversity Commissar. Sinacore is White, that is for sure. But most human resource departments I’ve encountered (quite a few I can attest) are staffed by White women and Black men. 7
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 11:32 PM | # Martin, There is another thing I might add. I spent many years in this nation’s institutions of lower learning - the universities. Many of these math departments have scores of instructors to handle the lower level classes. I witnessed many sudden departures of such instructors, leaving a wake of hushed rumor, and these incidents were always kept very quiet. Now, while I was in an advanced course I went to see a professor several times for additional instruction. Once I witnessed a female leave his office in tears and he himself had a very peculiar expression on his face and he was sweaty. One time I visited that same professor and I heard “rumblings” in the office. Not hard evidence to be sure. BTW, this professor was Chinese. All the instructors I knew of that “suddenly” departed were all Muslim types: Turks, Pakis and etc… I’m just reporting what I witnessed. Futhermore all seemed to be male/female relations, and all were confined to math departments - which women do poorly in. Never had I heard of such things happening in Lib Arts or Sciences - though I expect it does. I’m rather old fashioned about such things, raised in a rather puritannical family and I would enjoy beating the hell of a man that does such things - especially a foriegner manipulating White women. (Even though I recognize the debased status of Whites today.) 8
Posted by john rackell on September 24, 2005, 11:42 PM | # Sinacore will become their property. A fitting punishment But prison rape is a hideous crime and it serves the interests of a despotic state to have an extra-legal punishment to repress any righteous movement to bring the elites and their state back into line. The prison authorities can turn the heat on any political prisoner eg Nick Griffin if he’s convicted by charging the prison authorities to change his cell mate. I don’t think one should cheer on prison rape. Hey, riddle me ree. Name the biggest producer, publisher and distributor of child pornography in the United States. Bet you can’t guess? 9
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 11:48 PM | # John, I agree with you. The prison rape is shameful and the authorities allow it to continue. And I’d also add the powers above use this fact of Mestizo and Black predation upon Whites to intimidate Whites which might challenge the system. But even a poor kid caught Drinking and Driving might end up in such a jail and get raped. You can bet if he didn’t go into jail being a racist, he will when he comes out. ———————- John R., glad to see you posting again. You’ve contributed many positive things. 10
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 11:50 PM | # > Name the biggest producer, publisher and distributor of child pornography in the United States. Bet you can’t guess? Jews run the porn industry. 11
Posted by john rackell on September 24, 2005, 11:51 PM | # The prison authorities can turn the heat on any political prisoner eg Nick Griffin if he’s convicted by charging the prison authorities Oops…rather: the prison warden might just go along with whatever the Blair junta decides just to safeguard his pension. Quite a deterrent for any other activist to take the chance on speaking up and having his anal sphincter ripped 3 ways. Though Nick can certainly take care of himself, being a boxer and all. 12
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 24, 2005, 11:56 PM | # SOURCE >Jews run the porn industry Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped to transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the ‘true blue Jews’ Jewish Quarterly 13
Posted by john rackell on September 25, 2005, 12:04 AM | # Geoff, thanks, I read religiously. Actually, it’s the Federal government, the FBI. I’ll try and track down the reference, “Wired magazine” I think. But even a poor kid caught Drinking and Driving might end up in such a jail and get raped. You can bet if he didn’t go into jail being a racist, he will when he comes out. Yes, the case of the two white Texans who dragged the black man from the pickup - a very notorious case that to some extent is a recent watchword for white racism comes to mind. The New Republic had a pretty honorable (considering they’re liberals and shy away from reality) article on what the murderers background was and the TNR figured prison rape was a motivating factor in their actions - not excusing what they did but they went into prison for petty burglary and weren’t the types who could stand up for themselves - ie they were punked in the parlance: protection from prison violence in exchange for being a sexual slave. It sure built up a desire for revenge in them. 14
Posted by James Bowery on September 25, 2005, 01:44 AM | # It is well reported that Mestizos and Blacks prey upon Whites in prison, my guess is Sinacore will become their property. A fitting punishment considering the Whites whose lives he has ruined, via his post a Diversity Commissar. I disagree. No system of punishment should utilize perversion of sexuality even against sexually perverse criminals. He should be killed. 15
Posted by James Bowery on September 25, 2005, 01:57 AM | # How about this? An essay contest for the best legal theory for class action compensation for white males, at least in the US due, to the fact that they are the group most racially threatened by the government’s malign neglect of the prisoner rape situation. For example, it seems only fitting that taxes paid since the civil rights act of 1964 by white males be returned to them, with triple punitive damages, since those taxes were paid under duress of of racist cruel and unusual punishment—a violation of the 8th and 14th amendments. 16
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 11:28 AM | # In response to an email: Witch Hunt? The original post did not speculate as to the race of the perpetrator (As you can read). The main focus is the moral bankruptcy of university officials. As I searched for a photo it was only then I wondered about his race. Advocating Violence? Well, I know we have become a soft bunch, but I firmly believe the current therapeutic approach - talk, understanding, and even incarceration… - has failed. If the state will not return to caning, as does Singapore, individuals and groups will mete out justice. Futhermore, I think such measures are more effective, especially with those of lower intelligence. I recall reading a biography of T. Roosevelt, after we invaded Cuba the American authorities discovered the Cubans (probably the Blacks) were defecating in the streets. The American commander ordered that all persons caught in such circumstances were to be summarily horse whipped. Guess what? Public defecation stopped and the streets were clean. So that order returns to American society I think it imperative the return of citizen councils and rough justice. I think it axiomatic that in time - the best and the righteous shall emerge - and will return order to society, BUT the morally bankrupt “egalitarian” institutions must get out of the way. Perhaps one day, when order is again restored to American society, we can worry about the correct way to hold a tea cup. We are here, not here. 17
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 12:53 PM | # recall reading a biography of T. Roosevelt, after we invaded Cuba the American authorities discovered the Cubans (probably the Blacks) were defecating in the streets. The American commander ordered that all persons caught in such circumstances were to be summarily horse whipped. Guess what? Public defecation stopped and the streets were clean. Of course the difference between those Americans and contemporary Americans is like the difference between night and day. 18
Posted by Kubilai on September 25, 2005, 12:59 PM | # I have to agree with the few commenters who are against prison rapes for the sole reason that they are perpetuated unidirectionally, for the most part. There is no real White solidarity in the prison population to protect White prisoners, which is unlike the case with Hispanics and Blacks. I agree with John Rackell where he states… But prison rape is a hideous crime and it serves the interests of a despotic state to have an extra-legal punishment to repress any righteous movement to bring the elites and their state back into line. How many Blacks are “afraid” of the pen due to possibly getting raped? They view prison time as a right of passage of sorts. As for the pedophile predator, he deserves whatever he gets, however there are Whites in the prison population who may not deserve this due to some illegality, deserved or undeserved, that has landed them in prison. Does a White who is in jail for, say insurance fraud deserve being raped? Jail yes, rape no. How about someone who avenges a murder in kind? The list is long. Save for sexual predators and possibly homicidal murderers, serial killers, I am not for this secretly condoned, racially motived, predatory behaviour. 19
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 01:01 PM | # A devestating essay by Taylor, how far we have fallen as a people. 20
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 01:04 PM | # Kubilai, I expressed too much relish about Sinacore’s fate in the gentle hands of his rapists. While I feel no sorrow for him, I abhor prison rape and I call upon the authorities to restore order and stop prison rape. 21
Posted by Kubilai on September 25, 2005, 01:16 PM | # I understand what you meant Geoff and I think we are on the same line of thought regarding this matter. I have no sympathy for criminals of any race. As for Jared Taylor’s response, he is one of the best writers I have read on this subject, including the late Sam Francis. I loved his “Yitzhak Rabin” hammering of Horowitz. 22
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 01:34 PM | # ( BTW, a Peter Brimelow, from VDARE, speech is available here. An establishment setting to be sure. Where is his accent from? Is that Scottish?) 23
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 25, 2005, 02:20 PM | # “a Peter Brimelow, from VDARE, speech” (—Geoff) Brimelow was excellent in that talk he gave there (which I listened to a couple of months ago, from the link at the Vdare.com site). He’s always first-rate, by the way, whether through the spoken word or in print: it’s always well-worth hearing/reading what he has to say. In regard to the prison rape thing, what was the U.S. Supreme Court desicion directly or indirectly in relation to that within the past few months? Something about a prison wanting to segregate Mexicans, Negroes, and whites because of racial attacks, which the Court decided wasn’t to be permitted because segregation on the basis of race was not allowed. When I heard that on my car radio or wherever it was, I said to myself those bastards and bitches (Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of the ones who voted not to allow it, of course) secretly like the fact of Negro-on-white prison rape, or they would find some wording or reasoning consistent with the Constitution that allows segregation of prisoners by race. It’s not hard to do—I could’ve come up with such wording when I was in the fifth grade or thereabouts. These leftist Supreme Court Justices are pure scum. 24
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 02:27 PM | # Geoff, Brimelow’s accent is English. We do not have a uniform “English” accent across England. There are many regional accents (which now predominate). His accent is very Northern. Not surprising since he was born in Lancashire. 25
Posted by Lurker on September 25, 2005, 03:45 PM | # There are, I believe, more different accents across Britain than across the rest of the English speaking world put together. 26
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 04:13 PM | # > Accent I confess I’ve never heard something like that. I thought he may have lived in the Carribbean, Belize or some such place. Well, such things are what true diversity is all about. 27
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 04:27 PM | # Geoff, Interestingly enough, the accent that you would typically associate with England has almost completely disappeared. 28
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 05:19 PM | # I don’t hear the upper class style of English spoken anymore. That style heard on BBC radio in the 1930s or so. That style, perhaps like Malcolm Muggeridge. I also miss the affectations that go along with such an accent, like ear tugging and clenching of the teeth. And I’m sure people don’t dress like this anymore:
29
Posted by Martin Hutchinson on September 25, 2005, 05:29 PM | # Geoff, not the bowler, which my father abandoned about 1975, otherwise that’s pretty well spot on when I’m playing banker not journalist. And I know plenty of RP speakers, including I think myself, though very few under 40. My son may well be the last RP speaker on the planet! Which is why the Cockneys and naff Northerners of the 1960s wrecked the real Britain decades before the immigrants got there! 30
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 05:35 PM | # Good posture is a must if you dress nice, that fellow has excellent posture. What is RP? 31
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 05:36 PM | # Now that is a suprise - Martin taking a (another??) swipe at the Cockneys…. I don’t speak typical RP although I’d say I am close to it; my pronunciations are a bit “smoother” than RP with its heavy emphasis on the “rrrrrr”. 32
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 05:40 PM | # Ai what ‘av ya got against us ‘utchinson? Doncha ‘av anything better to do than make fun of us workin’ people? (Now if I spoke like that when I was growing up, my father’s face would have turned crimson red! 33
Posted by Phil on September 25, 2005, 05:44 PM | # Which is why the Cockneys and naff Northerners of the 1960s wrecked the real Britain decades before the immigrants got there! The immigrants started coming in the 1950s.......... 34
Posted by Mark Richardson on September 25, 2005, 06:47 PM | # I saw an old interview with Margaret Thatcher on TV last night. She pronounced a lot of “wh” words like an “hw” - something which (I’ve read) goes back all the way to Old English. (e.g. Hwat are you saying?) It’s not something I’ve ever heard in Australian English. 35
Posted by J Richards on September 25, 2005, 08:12 PM | #
Guys, what in the blazes is going on? Pedophilia involves sexual attraction to pre-pubescent boys. Sinacore is identified as having sex with young men, not young boys. Two of the young men that he has been reported to have sex with were a 16-year-old and a 17-year-old. You could consider males aged 16 or 17 as boys in a legal sense, but such males are close to being adults in a biological sense. None of the reports mention sex against the will of the young men, i.e., the young men are likely homosexual or bisexual themselves, and the sex acts can be classified as rape in a statutory sense only. The child pornography charge stems from him videotaping a sexual encounter with a 16-year-old, i.e., a person who is not a child in a biological sense. Now, don’t get me wrong. I do not condone child molestation or blackmail and do not consider buggery to be socially acceptable, though as long as homosexual adults do it in private, I have no interest in criminalizing homosexuality, but guys don’t let your emotions run amok. Some have delighted in Sinacore getting his just desserts in prison in the form of being raped, and although some have tempered their initial statements, it still appears that some of you wouldn’t mind Sinacore being raped in prison in spite of being opposed to prison rape in general. “An eye for an eye” justice is a disgrace to civilized man and is found in ass-backwards legal systems such as Islamic jurisprudence that we need to keep out of the West. I don’t care if a Negro has raped a white woman – he deserves to be incarcerated but not tortured or raped. Even if Sinacore had forcibly sodomized pre-pubescent boys, he would not deserve being beaten, raped or killed. Please note that pedophilia is a mental illness that is not chosen by pedophiles. The proper way of dealing with child molesters is some combination of incarceration and medical treatment, and given that Sinacore’s victims are children in a legal sense only, not a biological sense, incarceration is just enough for him. 36
Posted by Geoff Beck on September 25, 2005, 09:51 PM | # You make some good points. > Pedophilia? It should be noted that the report says he was caught with child porn. His youngest victim in this case was 17, so, yes, maybe you are right he is just a homosexual predator of young men. > Even if Sinacore had forcibly sodomized pre-pubescent boys, he would not deserve being beaten, raped or killed. I’m not sure about that. I would rather beat to a pulp the molester of my child/young man, and outright execution is not out of the question. I don’t trust the corrupt legal and judicial system in the US - where the thereuputic culture may wish to “understand” and “feel his pain” and “treat” him, instead of delivering the punishment he rightly deserves. > The proper way of dealing with child molesters is some combination of incarceration and medical treatment Really? Aren’t most child molesters recidivist? Medical treatment? What do you mean? 37
Posted by Lurker on September 25, 2005, 10:13 PM | # Is this the sort medicine you were thinking of Geoff?! 40
Posted by Kubilai on September 25, 2005, 11:16 PM | # JR, You make absolute sense and when I sit and think of your statements as a sensible, logical, emotionless, and civilized man, I agree with you. As a father, I do not. The big issue with me lies in the fact that pedophilia and the sexual predatory behaviour by these people completely destroys a child and most often the family as well. All the children that have been molested are screwed up. The only variable is how screwed up they get. Some can suppress it deep and function relatively normally, while others on the other end commit suicide. So you hit the proverbial nail on the head when you said emotions running amok. This is an extremely heinous crime and deserves any and all retribution as far as I’m concerned. And this is coming from someone who has strong negative feelings about the topic of prison rape. What treatment are you implying? Chemical castration or some such? If so, to me that is a given. If you are implying counselling, forget it. A pedophile can never be rehabilitated. 41
Posted by john rackell on September 26, 2005, 12:45 AM | # Government’s only concern is for the children. Here’s a “Cor, Blimey!” quote regarding the situation circa 1990 that states the FBI was the prime US distributor of child pornography – the proliferation of the internet changed the situation somewhat. “For decades, the federal government’s war on child pornography focused on arresting the manufacturers and traffickers of the images. The target was alleged molesters — like those accused by the Customs Service in August of exploiting their own children and photographing the abuse — not people who simply possessed pictures at home. That emphasis changed in 1990, when the Supreme Court wrote in Osborne v. Ohio that “much of the child pornography market has been driven underground; as a result, it is now difficult, if not impossible, to solve the child pornography problem by only attacking production and distribution.” To eradicate it required eliminating not just the existing supply of images but also the demand for new ones. A ban on private possession, the justices reasoned, would reduce demand and also encourage those who held on to the few illegal images still in circulation to destroy them. At the time of the ruling, practically the only publishers of child-porn magazines left in the US were law enforcement agencies, who used them as bait in sting operations.” http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.10/kidporn_pr.html The article says possession of child pornography is a ‘strict liability’ offense which means one picture on your hard drive, whether you’ve seen it or not carries a sentence of 15 years. It might seem paranoid to imagine that some malicious agency (S*P*L*C?) might go infect child porn on a political enemy’s computer, but it is a powerful weapon that if it exists someone will pick it up and use it. Wasn’t MR itself recently and maliciously declared a ‘phishing’ site. The lengths the US authorities have gone to to entrap people into buying child pornography, using their legal dispensation to manufacture and distribute the stuff (can we really be sure the perverts aren’t the guys in the FBI?) is extraodinary.
So OK maybe the guy was a perv but what he’d done was legal and the government was very assiduous in trying to create a sexual demand in him for these images. The prison-industrial can’t go hungry. (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=entrapment source of quote. Incidentally SCOTUS found entrapment. Certainly Sinacore is getting his just desserts. 42
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 12:53 AM | # Geoff Beck, Beating or killing child molesters—even in public—is not going to undo the crime or prevent children from being molested in the future. Many child molesters have to deal with overpowering desire and can be expected to give in to their desires no matter how drastic the consequences in the event that they are caught. Incarcerating them is good enough to protect children. The only justification I can see for beating/killing child molesters is for closure, but I hope you agree that whereas law enforcement has a duty to protect the public from criminals, it also has a duty to protect criminals from societal vengeance or unfairly harsh punishment, i.e., it is not justified to torture or kill child molesters. If my child were molested, I surely would want to beat up the molester, but I accept that law enforcement is justified in protecting the molester of my child from me and incarcerating him to prevent future crimes by him. You are right that many child molesters are recidivistic criminals, but even though pedophilia is rarely cured, it can be managed to some extent. As far as medical treatment goes, in extreme cases, one option is to go for [voluntary] administration of anti-androgens—this leads to sharply diminished sexual desire and usually an inability to obtain a proper erection. More benign treatment involves the use of opiod antagonists or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or other types of antidepressants in conjunction with psychotherapy to reduce libido and manage it. Because of the reluctance of many people to accept a biological substrate to pedophilia, there has not been enough research into the neurophysiology and pharmaceutical management of pedophilia, but this will hopefully change. Also, psychotherapy to help manage one’s libido is not covered by medicare. Whereas I am not in favor of socialized medicine, I do believe that it is worthwhile to provide free psychotherapy and drugs for the management of pedophilia—for the sake of our children. 43
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 12:58 AM | # Kubilai, I am a father, too, but you are again running amok with your emotions when you write:
Care to cite peer-reviewed literature in this regard? Let me cite some surprising literature, instead. In 1998, there was a huge controversy when the American Psychological Association published in one of its journals a big literature review (a meta-analysis to be more precise) that reported that there were few long-term negative consequences of childhood molestation, defined as voluntary or involuntary adult-child sex (Rind et al., 1998). This study was condemned by the U.S. Congress. The critiques of this study were emotional but the methodology was sound and has yet to be critiqued (Rind et al., 2001). All this study did was to compute the average trend over various studies already published in the literature. Some of the authors of this study are known to be sympathetic toward pedophilia, but a proper critique of their meta-analysis would critique their methodology rather than their ideology, and their methodology happens to be sound and hence cannot be critiqued. Now, how can such results be? To start with, many molestations that occur in real life are of a statutory nature and involve voluntary participation of the children as in the case of Sinacore. Some forms of molestations merely involve rubbing and touching but not penetration, and these cannot be expected to cause severe long-term psychological damage. Even horrible cases of forcible penetration do not necessarily lead to persistent psychological harm because a number of individuals are fairly resilient to adversity. It is also the case that many children that have been molested in childhood have also experienced other forms of negative childhood experiences—such as parental discord/fighting, neglect or poverty—that are known to be related to adverse mental health in adulthood, and that some people who have not been molested in childhood have mental problems in adulthood. So, the question is, how can you be sure that the adverse mental health outcomes seen in some people who were molested as children are entirely a consequence of their molestation and not other factors? This is what people don’t think about when their emotions run amok. The fact is that scientific analyses have shown that adverse childhood circumstances other than molestation are much more strongly related to mental problems in adulthood than molestation is. Once again, in the controversial meta-analysis above, 8.4% of the variation in mental problems in adulthood was explained by childhood family environment and only 0.8% by molestation. In other words, the study surely doesn’t argue that there are no long-term negative consequences of molestation but it shows that statements such as “All the children that have been molested are screwed up” are way off the mark and not supported by any evidence. This study does nothing to make me give up my view that adult-child sex is morally unacceptable, but the point that I would like to emphasize is that even if your statement quoted above were true, all one needs to do with a child molester that has a psychiatric diagnosis of pedophilia and is rated as highly likely to be a recidivist is to incarcerate him for life or till he is old enough to not be a threat to children; beating and killing these individuals will do nothing to prevent children from being molested. I do not see any justification for civilized man to avenge the heinous crimes of mentally ill individuals or to even emphasize retribution in general jurisprudence—incarceration is good enough to safeguard the public from repeated victimization by the same criminals. Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (1998). A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 22-53. Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (2001). The validity and appropriateness of methods, analyses, and conclusions in Rind et al. (1998): A rebuttal of victimological critique from Ondersma et al. (2001) and Dallam et al. (2001). Psychological Bulletin, 127(6), 734-758. 44
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 02:29 AM | # JR, My emotions run amok for a very good reason. What I know, have seen, and have read all point to my conclusions regarding pedophilia and child molestation. Here is an article that clearly states what I know to be true. Cited and all.
45
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 02:32 AM | #
46
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 02:36 AM | #
47
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 02:37 AM | #
More here… http://www.davidicke.net/medicalarchives/effects/pedophilia.html 48
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 05:33 AM | # Kubilai, You need not have pasted excerpts; the link would have been fine. Anyway, consider the quality of the article by Timothy J. Dailey that you cite. The article is not from a peer-reviewed journal, few of the citations in it are from peer-reviewed journals and the citations are hand-picked instead of being comprehensive and representative of the literature as in the study by Rind and colleagues. Additionally, a number of the citations consist of the beliefs of some people, which amount to an argument by authority. Dailey quotes Fink on the alleged methodological shortcomings of the study by Rind and colleagues, but Fink’s criticisms are completely unfounded, and if you bother to read the 2001 reply by Rind and colleagues that I have cited above, you will come across an effective rebuttal to the allegations of Fink and others like him. Dailey cites a study where the authors found that:
So, sexual touching is more harmful than unwanted anal or vaginal penetration? Does this make sense? The fact is that if Dailey knew any better, he would have noted that the negative correlates of molestation are highly inconsistent across individuals. This should make one question to what extent the negative outcomes associated with molestation actually result from molestation, but Dailey has done a sloppy job of citing the literature. Nobody disputes that a wide variety of mental problems are associated with childhood molestation, but as I have noted above, how can one be sure that mental problems observed in adults that have experienced child abuse result from the child abuse? It is not enough to compare rates of mental problems between the molested and the non-molested, as in the work of Finkelhor and colleagues that he cites, and naïvely assume that the difference is related to molestation. For instance, the majority of boys are molested by men, and since a good number of molestations are of a statutory nature, a number of these boys are homosexual or bisexual. It has been repeatedly shown that homosexuals and bisexuals have higher rates of mental disorders than heterosexuals (Meyer, 2003), which should not be surprising given that mentally normal men are not expected to be inserting their penises into each other’s rectum, and if a mentally disturbed individual is molested, is it reasonable to blame his mental disturbance on the molestation? It is ludicrous to cite evidence of higher rates of homosexuality among molested boys as proof that molestation is one of the causes of homosexuality when it should be obvious that homosexuals are known to experience sexually precocious development (Bogaert et al., 2002), which would make them receptive to sex with an adult man at an early age. Just as many heterosexual boys look forward to having sex with adult women, one can bet that many homosexual and bisexual boys look forward to having sex with adult men, and if you consider evidence for higher rates of pedophilia among homosexual men (Blanchard et al., 2000), an association between childhood molestation among boys and a homosexual adult outcome is bound to appear. Consider that a number of molestations are incestuous. You can bet that a mentally normal man does not molest his daughter, i.e., a man who molests his daughter is surely mentally disturbed. It should not be surprising for a mentally disturbed man to give birth to a mentally disturbed daughter—after all, many mental disorders are known to be related to genes—and it would be absurd to assume that the mental disturbances observed in a woman molested by her father are necessarily attributable to the molestation. Consider also the evidence that many child molesters report that they themselves were molested in childhood. Does this means that childhood molestation causes some people to become a child molester, as Dailey appears to imply? What a bunch of nonsense! Anyone that has experienced unwanted sexual contact as a child should harbor a grudge against child molestation due to personal experience and the last thing that you would expect this person to do is to turn into a child molester himself! It has apparently never occurred to Dailey that a child molester is unlikely to admit that he molested his victim(s) because of sexual desire and would instead try to blame something else for his act, as in blame his desires on having being molested himself as a child. It has been formally shown that many child molesters lie about having been molested in childhood (Freund et al., 1990; Hindman, 1988). Besides, correlation is not causation. More below… 49
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 05:34 AM | # Dailey quotes a statement from David Lisak, which includes the following alleged negative effect of molestation:
It is obvious that Lisak is assuming that all molestation must be abusive and that if a child is unable to see his molestation as an abusive act then his cognition is malfunctioning. How about the possibility that the child is unable to see his molestation as abusive because he was not abused and has therefore no reason to feel abused? Now, do you see the sloppy work of Dailey and the authors that he cites, such as Finkelhor? None of this is to say that child molestation is never harmful. Rind and colleagues themselves acknowledge that sometimes great and lasting harm results from molestation, but the belief that all molested children are permanently screwed up is without basis. Once again, I do not consider adult-child sex to be morally acceptable and the point that I would like to emphasize is that even if your beliefs about the devastation caused by molestation were correct, beating or killing child molesters would still not be justified. Literature cited: Blanchard, R., Barbaree, H. E., Bogaert, A. F., Dickey, R., Klassen, P., Kuban, M. E., et al. (2000). Fraternal birth order and sexual orientation in pedophiles. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29(5), 463-478. Bogaert, A. F., Friesen, C., & Klentrou, P. (2002). Age of puberty and sexual orientation in a national probability sample. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31(1), 73-81. Freund, K., Watson, R., & Dickey, R. (1990). Does sexual abuse in childhood cause pedophilia: An exploratory study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19(6), 557-568. Hindman, J. (1988). Research disputes assumptions about child molesters. NDAA Bulletin, 7, 1-3. Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674-697. 50
Posted by Svigor on September 26, 2005, 11:50 AM | # JR, I disagree that “an eye for an eye” is a disgrace to civilized man. I think it’s a perfectly valid starting point. I’d update it to “an eye for an eye, with interest” because otherwise initiating violence becomes a zero-sum game, but otherwise it seems sound to me. I’m not in favor of taking the words literally, of course. That does lead to disgraceful behavior. Instead, I consider it a starting point, to be followed by an approximation of exchange rates. 51
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 12:35 PM | # JR, I’ve read the refutation of the critiques by Rind et al. I do not agree with it for various reasons. I do not agree that Fink’s criticisms are completely unfounded and I agree with Spiegel’s refutation of THEIR refutation found here… http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/spie_real.htm I agree with Spiegel when he states the cohort studied is flawed because of self selection bias. I also agree that they over generalize their findings considering they looked at the mildest of forms of abuse or looked at a previous study with these same results. A quote from the above link…
To me, this makes absolute and logical sense. How do we know how many children have kept their abuse secret? How many have died unexpectedly for unassociated reasons before they thought of revealing this information? How many have committed suicide without letting anyone know the reason was overwhelming guilt and/or trauma from the abuse? How many tried to reveal their secret only to be laughed at, told to keep it a secret, told it was their fault etc? I would venture to guess these numbers are quite large. Children and adults should NOT be having sex, “consensual” or not. I agree with the valid belief that the authoritative nature of an adult over a child precludes any consensuality of the act. I see the authorative image I produce over some of my younger staff, who ARE adults in their 20s, and for someone to claim that children can 1) understand the complex workings of a sick, manipulative, pedophile mind and 2) say NO to it, is preposterous. I think you put too much weight on the homosexual angle of these interactions. I agree that there are some young boys that are homosexual and do willingly agree to sex with a pedophile, however, even with these examples, my point above about the consensuality of it is valid. Young homosexual males should find other same age homosexual males to experience sex, as do heterosexuals. While young hetero males may fantasize of bedding an older woman, it does NOT make it right for this woman to victimize a young male for the same power issue, though the trauma in this specific case is probably minimal. You state…”It is not enough to compare rates of mental problems between the molested and the non-molested” If taken at face value, this statement is correct because all other variables need to be looked at and controlled for, if possible. However, if the variables are statistically insignificant, then one can assume the difference is due to molestation. With respect to peer review, obviously you are correct in this though it is not the be all and end all as we witness the behind the scene workings of peer reviewed information from anti-racists. So, while it is important to get information from a peer reviewed source and not Readers Digest, all data needs to be looked at critically. Which leads me to this point and the meat of the matter. Rind et al. state that “sometimes great and lasting harm results from molestation”. Gee, that’s awful of nice of them to acknowledge even that. Nothing like putting forth incalculably damaging information (which NAMBLA uncontrollably salivated over) and then cover your ass with the disclaimer. My point is that it is all well and good for the ivory towerites to come up with some hogwash and pass it off as fact, the real issue would be putting their money where their mouths are. Not that it would ever pass an ethics board or even a “keeping yourself from puking” board, however a randomized, blinded study that enrolled children into a “molestation” group and non-molestation group would go a long way to solve this issue, wouldn’t it? Would Rind be open to enrolling his children into a study of this nature? I mean, the effects would be “minimal”, right? Would you JR? You know where I stand. more… 52
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 12:36 PM | # A final point. I can concede the issue you bring up about civility and not exposing criminals, including pedophiles, to prison abuse. Even though my reactions to molestation are quite visceral, as you are aware. I do not have to be in the “eye for an eye” group, though that is about the only concession I will give on this matter. No matter what the “research” states. I know that sounds tremendously close-minded, however with children, I follow the better safe than sorry motto. 53
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 10:00 PM | # Svigor, The historical development of jurisprudence is well-known. In the beginning, you have jungle law, i.e., kill or be killed. If you are criminally victimized, it is up to you and hopefully some friends/relatives to avenge yourself, and chances are that if you decide to avenge yourself, not only will you attempt to extract “an eye for an eye,” but also you will attempt to earn interest in the form of, say, making sure that your victimizer is incapable of victimizing you again or teaching your victimizer a lesson that he will never forget. In this scenario, punishment for a crime can easily exceed the harm caused by the crime. For example, a rapist may be castrated and tortured to death. Today, such justice is most extensively seen among the primitives in Negroid Africa. Primitive societies would even punish the affiliates or relatives of the criminal/offender. Later, you have an arbitrator to settle disputes between two people, and because the arbitrator is not a victim or related to the victim, the arbitrator can ensure that the magnitude of the punishment does not exceed the magnitude of the crime, i.e., you obtain true “eye for an eye” justice in a number of situations but also excessive punishment for some types of crimes. Later still, you allow the victim or his relatives to lessen the magnitude of the punishment to some extent for some types of crimes, as in Islamic jurisprudence. So far, the arbitration system or a more advanced system that is a primitive form of a modern court emphasizes punishment, vengeance, closure and punishment proportionate to the magnitude of the crime; the criminal is viewed as having lost most of his rights by virtue of his criminal behavior. Later still, sentencing for criminal infarctions shifts focus on incarcerating to prevent further criminal offending rather than incarcerating to punish; loss of freedom as a result of being incarcerated is also seen to double as sufficient punishment. There is hope that incarceration will be used to try to rehabilitate the criminal. It is recognized that the criminal retains the same rights to just treatment as non-criminals do. Vengeance is not emphasized in sentencing, and closure for the victim or his family is allowed to the extent that the rights of the criminal to fair treatment are not undermined. It is recognized that two wrongs do not make a right, i.e., “an eye for an eye” justice is inappropriate. It may be pointed out that the provision of the death penalty in federal law and also the law in many states in the U.S. is a violation of the recognition that two wrongs do not make a right, but this is not true. Support for the death penalty in the U.S. legal system is based on the belief that the death penalty in jurisprudence has a deterrence effect and saves more lives than it takes. This belief is flawed, but the point is that the underlying reasoning behind support for the death penalty in U.S. jurisprudence does not violate its rejection of “an eye for an eye” justice. Therefore, it should be clear that “an eye for an eye” justice is primitive justice, and in case you are not convinced that it has no place in a civilized society, read about an example of Islamic “justice” here. You may argue that a more benign application is justified, but why have this provision in the first place? It is another matter that a number of people in the West will emphasize vengeance and closure and not have problems with “an eye for an eye” justice in a number of scenarios, but this will not be enshrined in Western law as long as we are not numerically overwhelmed by Muslims, Negroes or equivalent. 54
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 10:06 PM | # Kubilai, I will address the minor points raised by you first.
I agree that children and adults should not be having sex with each other. However, you employ a legal definition of consent. Reality is different. Some girls start menstruating at age 7 or 8 and by the time they are 12 or 13, they are easily the biological equivalent of girls in their mid-to-late teens; precocious development also applies to some boys. Now, I don’t think you will have much of a problem accepting that a girl in her late teens would want to have sex with someone of a similar age or an older adult and is capable of consenting to sex. An underage child that is the biological equivalent of someone in his late teens would be prompted by his physiology to desire sexual contact with an adult and is capable of consent just like a chronologically and biologically typical person in his late teens is, though the child will not necessarily be capable of informed consent. Rind and colleagues do not conflate consent (compliance or approval especially of what is done or proposed by another) with informed consent (which accounts for the law) and they do not argue that a child is necessarily capable of informed consent.
Well, Rind and colleagues have not said this to cover their ass; their analysis has shown this and they are simply reporting what they found. Besides, their data is hardly damaging. Even if most people accept their analysis, the majority will continue to consider sexual activity between adults and children, even if consensual, to be unacceptable because they find the very act disgusting, irrespective of whether it harms or not. For instance, I find buggery disgusting primarily because of what the act involves, not because of any harm associated with it; my disgust is a non-chosen, non-rationalized gut feeling on my part. Therefore, even if you take away fear that adult-child sex is very harmful and imagine a hypothetical scenario where it is guaranteed that no harm will come from adult-child sex, it is unlikely that more than a small minority of humans will find it acceptable.
You don’t have to worry about pro-pedophilia forces influencing the peer-review process; most academics do not condemn pedophilic behaviors less hysterically than their denial of racial reality—they actually attack pedophilic behaviors more hysterically.
I surely do not want my children to be sexually interacting with adults even if no harm were guaranteed, and this is due to a non-rationalized gut-sense of disgust at the act. However, by not letting my emotions run amok, I am not letting my non-rationalized gut-sense of disgust lead me to believe that the act must necessarily be harmful. 55
Posted by J Richards on September 26, 2005, 10:09 PM | # Kubilai,
Many man-boy sex acts are molestations in a statutory sense only, and it is unlikely that a lot of the boys in such cases would be heterosexual to start with. Also, in 1998, another major literature review showed that 88% of adolescent boys that had been molested by adult women actually recalled the experience as positive, which should not be surprising given that most boys are heterosexual and it is not uncommon for adolescent boys to desire sex with adult women [Journal of the American Medical Association. 1998;280(21):1855-62]. Analogously, if a number of boys that have been molested by men in a statutory sense only don’t recall the molestation in negative terms and can’t be said to have suffered from long-term mental harm, then such facts should not be difficult to accept, although finding the behavior socially acceptable is a different matter.
Huh? Let us say that you have a sample of people and you classify them into 4 groups: A) adverse childhood family environment + childhood molestation, B) adverse childhood family environment but no childhood molestation, C) childhood molestation but no adverse childhood family environment, and D) neither adverse childhood family environment nor childhood molestation. Then you assess the incidence of mental problems in these 4 groups and find the following rank order: A slightly greater than B, which is a lot greater than C, which is slightly greater than D. What do you conclude? Obviously, childhood molestation has some negative effects but adverse family environment not related to childhood molestation has much greater negative effects, which is what many studies have found, and the average trend over these studies is what has been reported by Rind and colleagues. Without this study design, it would be easy but incorrect to blame the mental problems of individuals in group A on childhood molestation. Regarding your quoting a passage by Spiegel regarding non-representative sampling by Rind and colleagues, consider the following. Didn’t you read that Rind and colleagues’ prior meta-analysis of national probability samples, i.e., random and population-based samples, also revealed little long-term negative correlates of childhood molestation? They were able to show that the prevalence, extent/severity and nature of molestation; the effect sizes of the association between molestation and mental problems; self-reported effects and reactions; and sex differences in self-reported effects and reactions in their college samples were similar to that in the national probability samples. They cited literature providing evidence against the notion that the college samples were too young for the symptoms to show up. They distinguished between willful contacts vs. non-willful contacts. They showed that the effect sizes based on unpublished studies and that based on published studies were similar and that the great majority of the unpublished studies consisted of doctoral dissertations. I could go on, but since you only point out the quote by Spiegel alleging that non-representative sampling has led to the low effect sizes, it is readily seen that Spiegel’s contention is unfounded. As to your comment on adolescents commiting suicide as a result of being molested and hence not being available to answer surveys concerning molestation, a very small proportion of adolescents commit suicide, and even if one were to assume that a large proportion of them have committed suicide as a result of molestation, these individuals will constitute only a miniscule proportion of those that have been molested and hence not alter the results of Rind and colleagues. Besides, a number of surveys investigating the prevalence of molestation have been anonymous surveys and why should one believe that many molested individuals are not acknowledging molestation in these surveys? 56
Posted by Kubilai on September 26, 2005, 11:30 PM | # JR my friend, thank you for the time and effort you put into this. I honestly appreciate it. As I said from the start, as a logical, civil, emotionless, educated man, I can agree with all that you state above because it can and does make sense. Though, there’s that big “though” again 57
Posted by Amman on September 27, 2005, 01:56 AM | # In all fairness, I would honestly have to agree with JR’s assessment. From my understanding of history, this sort of “pedophilia” has actually been common at certain points in time—the Greeks practiced this sort of man-boy love, as did the Renaissance Italians (This is actually pretty common knowledge if you know where to look—there are multitudes of books written on Greek and otherwise generally ancient homosexuality, pick any one of them up and they should mention this). That said, though, let’s keep in mind that any discussion of whether Mr. Sinacore “should” be raped by a large black man in prison is essentially irrelevant. It’s not as if any of us decide where he’s going to be incarcerated. Perhaps he’ll get lucky and be sent to a relatively black-free or at least segregated prison, and will thus be spared any anxiety about dropping the soap. On the other hand, he may get sent to a prison chock-full of black people, and in that case, it’s pretty much inevitable he’ll get reamed no matter what happens. It’s all due to luck as far as I can tell, and as such, debating what his “just desserts” ought to be seems pretty fruitless when it’s just plain luck that determines what happens to him. P.S: J Richards, after reviewing the study by Rind et. al, I have to wonder…if child molestation is as harmless as they make it out to be, what’s the point of criminalizing it to the extent that we do? If the effects of pedophilia really are that negligible, why not just fine and medicate child molesters rather than incarcerate them? I’m obviously playing Devil’s Advocate here (my stance on child molesters is probably even harsher than Geoff’s, in all honesty) but I’m just saying, this is the conclusion Rind’s line of reasoning and your own would seem to lead to. 58
Posted by Amman on September 27, 2005, 02:11 AM | # One more thing (I forgot to add this, sorry for the double post) Let’s also keep in mind that rape isn’t the only bad thing that occurs in prison. If Mr. Sincore doesn’t get sodomized by a large black man, he could just as well be beat up, mutiliated, humiliated, etc. by a large black man anyways. Or a Hispanic man. Or even another depraved White man! So JR, while pointing out that condoning prison rape is “barbaric” and “uncivilized” is all well and good, by the same token, we should condemn a lot of the other stuff that might happen to Sinacore (like beatings, etc.) that we have yet to discuss. 59
Posted by J Richards on September 27, 2005, 08:01 AM | # No problem, Kubilai…it is time to stop this discussion between the two of us. You are right that the important point is that criminals should be treated in a humane manner. 60
Posted by J Richards on September 27, 2005, 08:07 AM | # Amman, I have already mentioned that I am opposed to child molesters being beaten up, too. I believe that incarceration is good enough as far as punishment goes. The question that you have asked as a Devil’s advocate is an intriguing one and is related to why many people react in a strongly negative manner at the notion that adult-child sexual activity is often not harmful—as far as they are concerned, if this were true, then they would be deprived of a proper justification for criminalizing all pedophilic activity. Note that Rind and colleagues and even NAMBLA for that matter would never argue for decriminalization of all sexual activities between adults and children; they will surely acknowledge predatory and exploitative forms of pedophilic sexual activity, and will not want such behaviors decriminalized, but for most people, even adult-child sex that occurs in a relationship-type context is disgusting. Even a well-educated writer such as Mary Eberstadt, writing in The Weekly Standard, has argued that if sexual abuse of minors (a term she uses to refer to any form of sexual activity between adults and children) is not wrong, then nothing is wrong. This argument is emotional and it is clear that her objections stem from disgust, irrespective of whether any harm is associated with the activity. The likes of Eberstadt can take comfort in the fact of outright dismissal of the conclusions of the meta-analysis by Rind and colleagues, i.e., continued belief in guaranteed child harm resulting from pedophilic activity, thereby being justified—as far as they are concerned—in criminalizing all pedophilic behavior. On the other hand, people who acknowledge that pedophilic activity is often not harmful but still find pedophilic activity disgusting find it more difficult to reason for the continued criminalization of all forms of pedophilic behavior. However, these individuals can still defend the criminalization of all pedophilic behaviors by arguing that children cannot consent. The greatest reasoning problem is for people such as myself who find pedophilic activity disgusting and would prefer to minimize it maximally—something that would obviously require criminalization of all pedophilic activity—but at the same time acknowledge that pedophilic activity is often not harmful and also that children are sometimes able to consent. How could people such as myself address this dilemma? I wish I knew the optimal solution to this dilemma, but here is my reasoning. The problem that I face is that my desire to minimize the incidence of pedophilic activity requires the criminalization of all pedophilic activity, yet whereas I can easily invoke harm to criminalize predatory pedophilia, I can come up with few reasons other than disgust to criminalize consensual adult-child sex. What right do I have to force others to behave so as to not disgust me? The way I see it, to the extent that pedophilic behaviors are reduced as a result of the criminalization of pedophilia, children are not harmed; the only harmed people are the sex-deprived pedophiles and the harm here consists of frustration resulting from unfulfilled desires. Now, the mentally ill are bound to suffer somewhat due to their affliction, and it is not justified for society to bend over backwards to make the mentally ill as comfortable as possible, losing more in the process than what the mentally ill gain. I just hope that science advances quickly to better help mentally ill individuals such as pedophiles. In the event that one comes across children desirous of sexual activity with an adult and capable of consenting to sex , many such children will have the maturity to keep their relationship with an adult a secret from others, especially boys involved with men, given the stigma associated with homosexuality. Therefore, consensual adult-child sexual relationships can occur and persist for quite a while in spite of all pedophilic acts being criminalized, i.e., the situation is not very bleak for pedophiles desirous of consensual sex with children. But, what happens if an adult-child pair involved in consensual sexual activity is outed? Not arresting the adult in this case could lead to predatory pedophiles presenting themselves as regular pedophiles, i.e., arrests are justified in such cases, and one can surely avoid hysterical sentencing such as 25 years in prison for genital fondling and allow for judge’s discretion in determining the length of the incarceration, based on nature of offense and psychiatric examination. This would not satisfy pedophiles fully, but afflicted people such as pedophiles should not expect to live as comfortable a life as the non-afflicted. Chances are that a pedophile will be able to easily critique my reasoning above, and if you know of a better solution to my dilemma, especially one that is less likely to be criticizable by a pedophile, then let me know. 61
Posted by GlablePax on May 23, 2012, 08:23 PM | # Next entry: Ezra Pound Recitation: Rolling The R’s Previous entry: Alien Nation |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. alvin sunny commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/24/12, 03:45 AM. (go) (view) PMP Preparation commented in entry 'Starvation to keep the masses on a leash' on 05/24/12, 03:15 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/24/12, 03:05 AM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:31 AM. (go) (view) HoroSmutS commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/24/12, 02:03 AM. (go) (view) zhrcwuwmkq commented in entry 'The end of Mel Gibson's career?' on 05/23/12, 11:46 PM. (go) (view) SEO Services commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 05/23/12, 11:11 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:08 PM. (go) (view) xiaolily commented in entry 'Maltese Incident' on 05/23/12, 10:12 PM. (go) (view) Cockouche commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 09:40 PM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 09:13 PM. (go) (view) assundaGymn commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/23/12, 08:41 PM. (go) (view) GlablePax commented in entry 'University official sentenced for child porn, blackmail' on 05/23/12, 08:23 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 PM. (go) (view) cuiseur automatique seb commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 07:43 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'Indian beauty' on 05/23/12, 12:52 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 12:45 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/23/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:43 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 11:32 AM. (go) (view) Mellaba Pechios commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:55 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 03:51 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:26 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:23 PM. (go) (view) 7 Year BA commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 09:19 PM. (go) (view) DARYL commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 08:57 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 08:31 PM. (go) (view) Church of Jed commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 07:40 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 05:56 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 11:37 AM. (go) (view) AnalogMan commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 11:29 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:42 AM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
)
, I do not want to accept it and there is enough in the form of criticism against this paper that I’ve rifled through over the last 24 hours or so that allows me the comfort to reject its findings and sleep well at night in the process. It’s not that I can’t see what you are saying, because I can. I am “OK” with an emotional reaction to this topic despite possible evidence to the contrary. I’m not like this on all topics including race, JUST this one. So, let’s leave it at that and agree on the topic of humane treatment of prisoners, namely being allowed the human dignity of not to be raped in prison. Are we cool with that, JR?
Posted by James Bowery on September 24, 2005, 10:12 PM | #
Minutes of the kind of meeting where the gay pedophile blackmailing equal opportunity commissar did the rest of his dirty work for the state religion of Holocaustianity:
EO Committee
March 20, 2002
Mr. Sinacore began his presentation with background information on the Diversity Facts in Brief report. He stated that the Diversity Facts in Brief report was formally called the Affirmative Action Facts In Brief report and that the report was created by Vice President Ingram, on behalf of the Equal Opportunity Committee with the primary purpose of advising the committee on the growth of the university. He went on to say that this the Diversity Facts in Brief report is normally given in January based on census data from November 1 of the previous year.
He continued saying that the Diversity Facts in Brief report has some very interesting new data added this year such as the National Enrollment Trends, GMU’s Census comparisons and GMU’s Enrollment Statistics in Context. Also added this year was the section on GMU’s athletic, a requirement of Title IX.
Mr. Sinacore pointed out a chart on Race-Ethnic Distribution for Fall 2001, showing the 2000 US Census data for GMU. He said that 85% of GMU’s total enrollment originated from Northern Virginia and 15% are from out of state and that Northern Virginia included: Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax (Fairfax is doubled counted for the N. VA), Fauquier, Loudon and Prince William. He said that Fairfax is pulled out separately only because a large percentage of GMU student’s are residents of Fairfax County. (See Exhibit A)
Mr. Sinacore stated that the Equity Office and Vice President Karen Rosenblum’s University Life Office commissioned a diversity study comparing George Mason University to its peers. The results of this study showed that GMU is clearly one of the two top diverse institutions in the state of Virginia. He went saying that GMU’s student population overall is larger now with a 6.3% increase in total headcount. It is an extremely diverse institution reflective of the entire Northern Virginia community.
(See Exhibit B)
Vice President Ingram asked Mr. Sinacore if data continues to show that every third student on campus is a student of color? Mr. Sinacore said yes.
Visitor Gray asked Mr. Sinacore if GMU could anticipate on the projected growth plan for 2007 regarding any differences in enrollment amongst the minority and the majority groups. Mr. Sinacore responded saying that the Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans are both the fasting growing populations in the Northern Virginia region. He added that GMU should also see a study increase in enrollment for African Americans and for Whites.
Visitor Gray then asked Mr. Sinacore what type of projected growth is expecting among the Asian and Hispanics. Mr. Sinacore replied saying that it is difficult to predict that type of growth and the extent of the growth, but immigration will be a key factor. If the growth rate in Northern Virginia continues as it has in the past ten years, we should see a dramatic spike in the number of Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans.
Mr. Sinacore mentioned recently viewing a feature on National Public Radio. The program focused on minorities and some alternatives to the concept of minority. He said that at least thirty schools in the country have gone to a new concept called “Aahana.” He said “Aahana” is actually an acronym that combines African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans and other groups that prefer to use this word rather than using the word minority.
Mr. Sinacore directed the committee’s attention to the chart on the ethnic breakout of the intercollegiate student population and the intercollegiate personnel and gender statistics. He stated that George Mason University is one of the few colleges within the United States that is in compliance with Title IX and actually reflects the ethnic breakouts in divisions of the student populations. (See Exhibit C, C-1, C-2, C-3)
The Committee briefly discussed the trends of the population growth in minorities and suggested in the future the Equal Opportunity Committee take a closer look at the efforts to attract Non-residential International students and how GMU compares to its peers in regards to athletic participation.
IV. Adjournment
Chairman Johnson thanked Mr. Sinacore and adjourned the meeting at 10:02 a.m.