Emanuele Fusi was born in Barga (Lucca) in 1978. Graduated in law, he began the profession of lawyer at the Court of Lucca, specializing in criminal law and tax law. He is the author of several novels and essays, for Passage to the Wood he published the essay "White guilt, racism against whites at the time of multiethnic society" , and for the same publishing house he has recently published the essay "The left of the orcs" , in which he reconstructs, starting from the 1950s, the attempt to clear pedophilia.
UMBERTO CAMILLO IACOVIELLO: In your book you talk about the attempt to clear pedophilia, it may seem absurd to the general public, but there is a part of the academic world that has been trying to break this taboo for decades. Who are the pioneers of the "normalization of pedophilia"?
EMANUELE FUSI: The issue is complex. Let's say that everything starts historically from the sexual revolution of the 50s and 60s in the United States of America. An important figure is certainly Alfred Kinsey (1894-1956), initially assistant professor of zoology at the University of Indiana. In 1938 he was invited to coordinate a course on marriage called "Marriage and Family" by a women's student association that promoted the proposal to include this course at the University of Indiana. From here begins the professor's interest in the study of sexual relations and begins a collection of stories and experiences from his own students. Kinsey thus begins a search that leads him to inspect about 18,000 cases. He was the first to experiment on infants and children, as documented in the book, and he believed – with the psychologist Jhon Money (1921-2006), the so-called "gender" theorist – that the sexualization of children and the whole society would lead the same to be more peaceful and tolerant. To do this, the taboos of the past had to be broken.
In the academic field, also in the United States, there have been exponents such as Professor John De Cecco (1925-2017), professor of psychology at San Francisco State University, chief editor of the Journal of Homosexuality from 1975 to 2009, and also editorial member of the journal Dutch pro-pedophilia Paidika . In 1977 he drafted a bill on the sexual rights of children called "A Child's Sexual Bill of Rights," according to which children should have sexual and reproductive rights, be able to fully explore their sexuality and be free to choose relationships. loving and sexual, including parents, siblings and responsible adults.
UCI: These ideas were accepted by various exponents belonging to the sexual liberation movements, can you give us some examples?
EF: Shulamith Firestone (1945-2012), Canadian naturalized American, exponent of "lesbian feminism" of the seventies and early eighties, in 1970 he published the text "The dialectic of the sexes" , in which he argues that women are subjected to men for biological and structural reasons of society. According to Firestone, it is not enough to free oneself from "male privilege" but it is also necessary to completely eliminate the distinction between the sexes. He also argued that incest and sex with children were barriers that prevented the true emancipation of women from men and that in order to overthrow the patriarchy one had to go through the breaking of those legal and moral restrictions: in this way, freed sexuality in a total way, the male would have lost his power over the woman and in particular over reproduction, and the woman would have been the only one to decide in this sense, putting an end to the concept of patriarchal family.
In Italy, who explicitly referred to pedophilia as a "liberating practice" was Mario Mieli (1952-1983), a well-known exponent of the LGBT world, who committed suicide in 1983, whose theses are set out in the book "Elements of homosexual criticism" of 1977, published by Einaudi . The passage on pederasty is known:
We revolutionary queers know how to see in the child not so much Oedipus, or the future Oedipus, but the potentially free human being . We, yes, we can love children. We can desire them erotically by responding to their desire for Eros, we can grasp with face and open arms the intoxicating sensuality that they profound, we can make love with them. This is why pederasty is so harshly condemned: it addresses loving messages to the child that society, on the other hand, through the family, traumatizes, educates, denies , lowering the oedipal grid onto his eroticism. The repressive heterosexual society forces the child into the latency period; but the latent period is nothing but the deadly introduction to life imprisonment of a latent "life". Pederasty, on the other hand, "is an arrow of lust shot towards the fetus" (Francesco Ascoli).
There is an element that unites these people: they all belong, absolutely everyone, to the cultural world of the left, of progressivism and communism.
UCI: This point is important, what did these exponents take from Marxism?
EF: From Marxism they have taken in particular the dialectic of the clash between two entities: which however this time does not pass through the mere class struggle between proletarians and holders of the means of production, but between organized sexual minorities, as a category of the oppressed, against the heterosexual male and patriarchal society, which would be the oppressors to be overcome.
In fact, in the context of the Anglosphere, more than Marxism tout court , we speak of cultural Marxism, that is, of neo-Marxism reinterpreted in the light of the authors of the Frankfurt School, who do not see in the worker and in the working class the engine of history – as it was settling and integrating itself in the Borgese society – but in the oppressed and discriminated categories, the spring that would have built the "Great Refusal" to the authoritarian society and of the father.
It should be noted that the "pedophile lobby" was born in the turbulent 60s and 70s, when the foundations of traditional Western society based on Christian values, the business economy and private property, the heterosexual family and figure of the father as head of the family. Moreover, these authors believed that capitalism could be demolished precisely by eliminating the difference between genders from an early age, as it is thanks to it that capitalism – with its mechanisms of exploitation – regenerated, structured and perpetuated itself, giving children an identity from birth which would later be – according to them – functional to capitalist practice and its mechanisms of oppression.
Hence Shulamith Firestone's idea that women should have taken possession of the means of biological reproduction and not just economic production, in order to take power away from the father, that is – from their point of view – from the oppressor.
Finally, I would also say "messianism", that is, thanks to the total sexual liberation of the child, we would have reached a tolerant, peaceful society without oppression and violence, based on pleasure and love, since the differences between the genders and roles assigned by capitalism from birth.
UCI: Staying on the subject, Marx and Engels in the Communist Party Manifesto wrote that "the dominant ideas of an era were at all times only the ideas of the ruling class" : if the sexualization of children is promoted by school programs (you talk about the Croatian case in the book) to Netflix , does it mean that the dominant ideology with its apparatuses is moving to accelerate this process?
EF: Marx's limit is economism, that is, reducing the historical narrative to a perennial conflict between economic classes, so we must be careful to interpret everything in a materialist and class dialectic key. However, it can certainly be said that today the great financial capital, multinational and stateless, has an interest in a world without roots and identities, of all kinds: ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and even sexual. So certainly the final goal – that is to create a homogeneous mass of billions of individuals with no differences to be dominated by consumerism – also includes the sexualization of children, since in this way limits, roles, hierarchies are abolished and gets out of the way. also the idea of religion (as Dostoevsky said in "The Demons" , "if God does not exist, everything is allowed"). After all, we live in the historical phase of “liquid capitalism”, what Jacques Attali – French philosopher, banker, technocrat – defines as “Californian”, devoid of identity, global and digital. All this abolishes the limitation of all kinds, and therefore also in fact the cultural taboos linked to sexuality. It's no mystery that TikTok itself is a platform that notoriously contributes to early sexualization.
UCI: In your book you dedicate a chapter to Forteto and Bibbiano, why are these two cases important?
EF: Because they represent two typical cases of social and cultural engineering typical of leftist thought, according to which the children are not of the parents but of the community. Il Forteto insinuates itself in the wake of the thought of '68 and of Cattocomunismo, and which is based on the need to build a new pure and better society, demolishing the previous bourgeois one, founded on injustice, and proposes a new model: that of " functional family ”, ie a family that is not based on blood ties but on presumed affections disconnected from reality. In truth, it was then proved with the judicial inquiries and two regional commissions of inquiry that this too was in turn a "fiction" that was only used to pretend that there were families inside, so that the Juvenile Court sent the boys in the structure, when the sexes were strictly separated and homosexuality encouraged and encouraged by the founders.
Bibbiano's phenomenon is based instead on the idea that children do not belong to parents but to the state and institutions, contradicting the cardinal principle of "subsidiarity", and the state can do with it what it wants, if it considers the parents not up to par of the educational task. But who decides which is the right and best educational task? The left of course, from their point of view. And so there have been cases where the children have been taken away from their parents as they are considered "homophobic" and therefore not good to educate them to good, that is, to progressive thinking; and therefore this education (in this case LGBT and homosexist) must be dealt with by the State even if the parents are against this ideology. This represents a very serious precedent, because one day the left could make laws (which have already been invoked by leftists on Twitter ) that provide for the removal of children from parents who "do not respect the Constitution", understood – from the LGBT and progressive – in the sense of "they do not respect leftist thinking", which would then mean taking the children away from those considered "fascists", right-wingers, conservative traditional Catholics, etc.
This has already happened in socialist countries, we must not believe that it is a bizarre and utopian idea, we are faced with two cases of perfect social engineering based on Marxist and progressive thought, and which leads to the necessary consequence that the family is an institution that can be abolished (as in Cambodia under Pol Pot) or transformed into something unrecognizable, while keeping its formal label.
UCI: Could the Overton window be applied to clear pedophilia as well?
EF: Absolutely yes. I talk about it in depth in the book. As is well known, the Overton window is a model of representation of the possibilities of changes in public opinion, describing how ideas, totally rejected when they appear, can then be fully accepted by society, eventually becoming law. According to Overton, any idea, even the most incredible, has a window of opportunity to develop in society. In this window the idea can be widely discussed, and one can openly attempt to change the law in its favor. The appearance of this idea, in what we could call the " Overton window ", allows the passage from the stage of the " unthinkable " to that of a public debate, before its adoption by the mass consciousness and its insertion into the law.
This is not pure and simple brainwashing, but more subtle, effective and coherent techniques; it is a question of taking the debate to the heart of society, to ensure that the common citizen appropriates a certain idea and makes it his own. At first it is sometimes sufficient for a public or political figure to promote it in a caricatural and extreme way, and then for the rest of the public and political class to deny it with great enthusiasm. Here, the idea was born, and the dance of the crafty can begin. The subject is launched, and it can be discussed for the good of all and clear the field of misunderstandings. According to this theory, a window is the range of ideas that can be accepted by society at a given moment and that are openly manifested by politicians without the latter passing for extremists. Ideas evolve according to the following stages:
– inconceivable (unacceptable, prohibited)
-radical (prohibited, but with reservations)
-acceptable (public opinion is changing)
– useful (reasonable, rational)
-popular (socially acceptable)
-legalization (in state policy)
Many other contemporary ideas seemed absolutely inconceivable only a few decades ago and have since become acceptable by law and in the eyes of society: abortion, mass immigration, "soft" drugs to be liberalized, euthanasia, polyamory. To get to the concrete, for example, in October 2014, the progressive newspaper New York Times published a very clear editorial: “Pedophilia: a disorder, not a crime” .
There was what in the journalistic world is called " New York Times Effect" , the thematic echo on the rest of the media: here is the Huffington Post : "I am a pedophile, but I am not a monster" , is the title of an article in the 2015. Eyelet: “In an online letter the confession of an American designer. 'We don't all do harm' ” . After reading all these things, the good democratic citizen can have no doubts: better pedophile than murderer.
Dr. Klaus Michael Beier, a German physician, psychotherapist and sexologist, gave an interview to the Times of India in March 2017. " Pedophilia is a reality and healthy societies must learn to accept it, " says the doctor. According to Beier, sexual perversion towards children is to be considered a "destiny" and not a choice. For this, therefore, we should accept it.
Doctor Klaus Beier, who inspired Mirjam Heine for her Ted Talk in which she declared that "pedophilia is a natural sexual orientation", in addition to being director of the Charite sexology department, also directs a controversial prevention program for pedophiles always inside the Berlin university hospital. The initiative is called " Kein Tater Werden ", which translated from German means "Do not offend" . The aim of the course is to teach pedophiles how to control their sexual urges towards children. The program, launched 13 years ago, involves potential sex offenders and also those who have committed sex offenses but managed to get away with German justice. "Pedophilia is not curable," Beier explained to the British newspaper. "But it can be treatable . " According to the doctor, therefore, a pedophile can learn to control his impulses. Indeed, the project is based on the principle that sexual attraction towards children is indeed a medical problem but, as Beier said, “it is not a crime” as long as it is not abused.
As you can see, slowly we begin to discuss the issue as a "possibility" even if still viewed in a negative way. But over time, slowly, we will move on to the next phase, namely acceptability, once the phase of possibility has taken root. Moreover, recently, the general public has already been accustomed with the film "Cutes" , on Netflix , to sensual, erotic and winking movements, of 10-year-old girls, and Netflix has not been subjected to censorship or trials, if not some disappointment on the part of the Catholic world (to tell the truth, not even everything, for example Avvenire justified the film): everything passed as if it were a possible thing. As you can see, the law of the inclined plane also works in this case.
The post The attempt to clear pedophilia. Interview with Emanuele Fusi appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/il-tentativo-di-sdoganare-la-pedofilia-intervista-a-emanuele-fusi/ on Wed, 28 Oct 2020 03:30:00 +0000.