The ILGA, formed in 1978, are a group which advocates equal rights for LGBT people. They do not, however, support anti-discriminatory measures in general, nor do they support true free speech. This is a result of their loss of consultative status on the UN Economic and Social Council, a loss which was allegedly due to NAMbLA’s membership within the association. The UN’s decision was, in turn, caused by the US threatening to withdraw UN funding if paedophiles [1] were represented in consultations. While I personally don’t support NAMbLA, the actions of the ILGA appear to be a shameful attempt at supporting political correctness over its founding ethics.

Following the removal of NAMbLA’s membership, the ILGA began a hypocritical campaign against alternate sexuality, supporting only the popular and accepted sexual minorities, while rejecting any controversial sexual minorities which were deemed dangerous to support. This is, of course, against the very ideologies which formed the founding principles of the ILGA; a group which was formed to support oppressed sexual minorities.

The ILGA deny having ever supported paedophiles, which is not true. In fact, when groups such as the ILGA deny having ever supported paedophiles, they are being utterly dishonest. Gay rights activists have fought hand-in-hand with paedophile activists in the past, the most notable of those alliances being the LGBT presence of Ian Dunn in the founding of PIE, an alliance which gay rights activists are desperately trying to erase from the minds of the public.

Caving in to political pressure, the ILGA and other similar groups now “support” discrimination against paedophiles, despite their principles favouring the defence of oppressed sexual minorities. This is an example of what happens in societies which “promote liberty” for certain groups. The UN - a multi-governmental organisation - does indeed promise to support supossedly oppressed minorities, but only if that minority has support from the voting public of member countries. Unfortunately, this attitude of “positive liberty” further increases the gulf between the accepted minorities and the unaccepted minorities. When these accepted minorities are handed both protective legislation and encouraged to ditch their unpopular allies, a situation is created wherein the unaccepted minorities are vastly unequal to others. This is, of course, contrary to the official aims of such legislation.

Now, in order to investigate all possibilities for this unacceptable level of hatred, one must also consider the possibility that many LGBT people genuinely do hate paedophiles. This hatred is highly hypocritical when one considers that, at their roots, both paedophilia and homosexuality are equally harmless attractions which should not be subjected to moral analysis. Sadly, it is not uncommon for those who have been subjected to bullying and bigotry to become bigots and bullies themselves. This appears to be what is happening with some members of the LGBT community.

I personally feel that people - on a purely instinctive level - harbour a similar feeling of (unacceptable) disgust towards both same-gender attraction and minor-attraction. Social conditioning has led to the relative acceptance of homosexuals, however minor-attraction is subject to a negative form of social conditioning which does nothing except encourage prejudism.

One of the ironies of this situation is that - although little research has been conducted in the area (for reasons of political correctness) - it is likely that homosexuality and paedophilia are linked. It is estimated that around 11% of the population of the developed, adult-attracted world is homosexual. The prevalence of same-gender attraction within the paedophile community is much greater.

Many people use sex offender data to estimate the genders preferred by child molesters. While this data proves a same-gender attraction rate of around 33% in child molesters, this data is not representative of the attractions present in paedophiles, as most child molesters are situational offenders rather than paedophiles [2]. A situational offender who molests children is likely to abuse a child of his preferred gender in adults, which artificially raises the level of opposite-gender attraction attributed to paedophiles. Clearly, when so many non-paedophiles are included in the figures - when only ~11% of them are homosexual - the percentage of paedophiles with same-gender attraction will appear to be smaller than it really is. It is likely that more than 33% of paedophiles are attracted to children of the same gender

So, when you consider that such a large number of paedophiles have same-gender attraction, it becomes apparent that there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia. This link is denied, not just because many homosexuals dislike paedophiles, but because of legislation which protects accepted minorities yet ignores the minorities which have not yet been accepted.

“Positive Liberty,” the oxymoronic term which describes the legislation promoting inequality disguised as anti-discrimination laws, must be fought against, in order to support true equality for all minorities.

[1] -  http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=119
[2] -  http://anu.nfshost.com/?p=79