Peter Fritz Walter

Love or Morality?
Social Policy for the 21st Century
A production by Peter Fritz Walter. Published in 2010. Banned by Createspace/Amazon.
The Collected Works of Peter Fritz Walter • December 22, 2015

CONTENTS
Author’s Note

6

Introduction

8

Chapter One

18

Introduction

18

The Cultural Confusion

23

The Cultural Fear of Erotic Novelty

27

Chapter Two

37

Introduction

38

The Silent Taboo

41

The Myth of Pedophile Predator Sexuality

54

Chapter Three

57

Introduction

58

What is Child Protection?

61

Consumer Protection?

68

From Protecting Children to Serving Children

71

The Collected Works of Peter Fritz Walter

Love or Morality? / 2

Chapter Four
Introduction

Chapter Five

74
74

83

Introduction

83

The Goddess Within

87

Emotional Child Abuse

90

Mind-Body Dilemma

97

Chapter Six

101

Introduction

101

Ancient Patriarchy

112

Christianity

139

Victorian Era

152

Modern Times

159

Conclusion

174

Chapter Seven

185

Introduction

185

Child-Adult Sex vs. Child-Child Sex

188

Possible Etiologies of Child Rape

202

Pedoemotions are Universal

203

Aesthetic and Poetic Childlove

205

Affectionate vs. Sadistic Childlove

217

Does Pedophilia Equal Child Rape?

223

Free Choice Relations for Children?

224

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 3

Lover vs. Offender

227

Chapter Eight

231

Introduction

231

What are Sexual Paraphilias?

234

Is Childlove ‘Sicko’ Behavior?

242

Childlove vs. Perversion

246

Chapter Nine

256

Introduction

256

Childlove and Normalcy

266

When Law Punishes Life

272

Statutory Rape

278

Child Molestation

282

Law Reform

285

Love Reform

293

Chapter Ten

296

The Legal Split in Child Protection

296

Overcoming the Split

309

Chapter Eleven

326

Violence Begins Inside

327

Love and Morality

330

The Value of Permissiveness

341

Pleasure Defeats Violence

350

Breaking the Vicious Circle

365

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 4

The Tactile Imperative

372

The Birth of Functional Thinking

378

The Importance of Sensuality

385

Social Policy Considerations

390

Quest for a Distinction

398

For the Child’s Best?

401

The Turndown of International Adoption

405

Child Play vs. Morality

412

The Love Continuum

421

Chapter Twelve

434

Author’s Note

434

The Agenda

435

01/12 — Harmless Wrongdoing

435

02/12 — The Possible Human

435

03/12 — Fostering Public Sanity

435

04/12 — Respecting Natural Intimacy

435

05/12 — Serving Children

435

06/12 — More Public Education

435

07/12 — Free Education

436

08/12 — Politically Neutral Science

436

09/12 — Humanism and Realism

436

10/12 — Promoting Pleasure-Seeking Behaviors

436

11/12 — Male Affection as a Peace Conductor

436

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 5

12/12 — Fostering Permissive Education

436

The 12 Points

437

Proposal 1/12

451

02/12 — The Possible Human

453

Proposal 2/12

460

03/12 — Fostering Public Sanity

462

Proposal 3/12

469

04/12 — Respecting Natural Intimacy

474

Proposal 4/12

479

05/12 — Serving Children

481

Proposal 5/12

486

06/12 — More Public Education

493

Proposal 6/12

499

07/12 — Free Education

501

Proposal 7/12

503

08/12 — Politically Neutral Science

505

Proposal 8/12

513

09/12 — Humanism and Realism

516

10/12 — Promoting Pleasure-Seeking Behaviors

524

Proposal 10/12

559

11/12 — Male Affection as a Peace Conductor

564

Proposal 11/12

577

12/12 — Fostering Permissive Education

581

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 6

Proposal 12/12

596

Bibliography

600

AUTHOR’S NOTE
This book was published with Createspace / Amazon
back in 2010, yet shortly after it was for sale on Amazon.com
it was banned without reasons given. All my emails to support were not responded to. In the instructions given, I was
said that if I attempted to republish the book, my Createspace account would be closed.
How could they justify their decision, given that it was
bluntly unconstitutional? Only by a possible claim that I had
stepped outside of the laws. Fact is that my intention with
this book was to respect the present laws, and provide solutions for a future society; hence the ban of the book could
only be the result of a very superficial perusal of it; given that
the original was almost 800 pages, such perusal was probably entirely lacking, and a decision was forged that violated
not only my civil rights as the author but also the US Constitution. And while I do not give a judgment here about
Createspace/Amazon, the empire, the multinational, and
their managers, I believe this action has given us a very good
self-judgment of this conglomerate of enterprises. It has

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 7

shown its political couleur, it’s values, and ultimately, its fascism. I might add, in this context, that Wikileaks was first
hosted on Amazon servers, until Amazon shut the door when
they began to have legal problems.
Does that mean the present book was considered by
Amazon managers as ‘political’ just as Wikileaks is political?
It might be. I refrain from judgment. My intention is indeed
political, but not in the sense this word is commonly used
today, and certainly not in the sense of Wikileaks’ operational
procedures that do violate certain laws and regulations of
the world of diplomacy, while my book doesn’t.
My intention is political in the sense of the old Roman notion of the ‘res publica,’ that is, in the sense that I am writing
about matters that concern us all, that have public relevance,
and my task is to elucidate problems in our society and how
they can possibly be solved by future policy makers. Needless to add that this is a legitimate concern and has not deserved the ban of a book which is a barbarous and inhuman
measure in any given society, and besides, a total irony in a
country that considers itself as the greatest living democracy
on earth!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 8

INTRODUCTION
The Tao of Love
There is no good that is always or only good, no single
virtue appropriate to every situation. Lao tzu tells us that
it is only when we lose contact with out innate intuitive
intelligence that we resort to ‘goodness’ and ‘righteousness’ as the ethical guideposts of our lives. It is only when
real love is lost that we resort to ‘filial piety’ or ‘family values’. It is in this spirit that we can understand St. Thomas
Aquinas’ dictum, ‘Love God and do as you please.’ Love
is superior to any ethical code.
—Laurence G. Bold in The Tao of Abundance (1999)
The classical Taoists take a much more positive view of
human nature. For the Taoist, all depraved or perverse
manifestations of human behavior result from rejecting
our deepest nature, not from following it. It is by denying
the unity of all life and committing to the attachment of
the ego that we go astray.
—Laurence G. Bold in The Tao of Abundance (1999)
Insofar as love expresses itself, it is not expressing itself in
terms of the socially approved manners of life. That’s why
it is all so secret. Love has nothing to do with social order.
—Joseph Campbell in The Power of Myth (1988)

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 9

Krishnamurti said we can never define what love is but
well what love is not. Is pleasure love? Is love something we
can quantify and receive in well-defined portions? Is love
something we can store and accumulate in the warehouse of
our mind, or in our heart? Is love a thing we can run after,
chase, conquer, and possess?
Can we pursue love as a deliberate activity?
Is love something that can be damaged or hurt, or is it
rather a quality? Is love perhaps a quality of relationships,
and as such, something related to something else?
I know it is confusing to ask such questions, and yet they
open doors. I do not pretend to know answers to all of these
questions, and in case I know them, I do not pretend that
these answers are valid for others as well, let alone that they
are eternal. I rather think that it’s the questions that are important, and not so much the answers, as answers to all essential questions in life are in most cases temporary and
volatile.
When I look at relationships, I can see there are loving
ones and ones where love is painfully lacking, and I instantly
understand that when love is lacking in relationships, they
tend to be formal, cold and ‘calculated,’ and hurt is only a
step away. I can also see that in relationships ruled by power,
and where people play power games, love is absent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 10

This seems to point us to the truth that where power is,
love cannot be. But power in which sense? What kind of
power am I talking about? Is it soul power or social power?
I believe that soul power is well compatible with love, and
that the power that only is destructive, and that defeats love,
is worldly power, social power, which is power born by the
ego.
I think when we direct our focus toward loving relationships instead of reflecting about love as such, we are getting
closer to the truth, for love is something that bears fruit only
in relating. When the sage says ‘I love the world,’ he means
‘When I relate to the world, I feel love.’
You may never have reflected about love yet when a child
comes to you, smiling at you, stretching out his or her hand
toward you in full trust, you may be permeated with one
thought: ‘Relating to this child, I feel love.’ And you may, or
not, conclude ‘I love children,’ while the latter statement
bears something volatile and abstract. One may ask you
back ‘Do you mean you really love all children?’ Or does it
mean you love certain children, or children who relate to
you?’
And you may think that at times, when you saw a very
naughty and unruly child who drove their parents crazy in a
hotel, or in a restaurant or department store, you thought

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 11

you did not love that child. And as this is so, and for all of us,
the statement ‘I love children’ may not be taken for granted
as it were as total truth, but as a generalization. Hence, if we
want to avoid generalizations because they always bear an
element of untruth in them, we can honestly only talk about
love as far as a relationship is concerned that is mutually felt
as loving.
We all experience love and have experienced love when
we were children; some of us have experienced lack of love,
because their relationships with parents, relatives and educators were not felt as loving; hence, their main behavior trait
and attitude is not loving, but rather cynical and revengeful.
When we observe this by studying various kinds of people,
we quickly realize that those who experience loving relationships early in life become ‘loving’ people, and those who
have been deprived of love early in life lead conflictual lives
or even end up with long prison fines.
As a young law student, interested in the psychological
reasons for violent crime, I came to realize that as a general
rule, people tend to give to the world what they themselves
have received when they were children; when they received
love they give love, when they received hate and violence,
they give hate and violence. As, contrary to many psychiatrists, I do not believe that life cycles are lifelong conditions, I
have been thinking for many years how an accidented life

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 12

cycle can possibly be rerouted and thus become constructive
again. I studied criminology and visited people in prisons,
and what I saw shocked me; it shocked me not only because
of the humiliating conditions these men were subjected to,
which could be called the outside reality, but how these
people, after I got to know some of them more closely, were
torn up inside. Their inner reality, I felt, was locked; they were
bathed in guilt and shame, and caught in denial; most of
them as children could not accept one or both of their parents because of the caretaker’s abusive behavior.
Generally speaking, none of the inmates I met who were
in for violent crimes had experienced loving relationships
when they were children; they could not build a positive selfimage and identity. What then happens is that the person
comes up with projections, which means that a large part of
their inner drama is projected upon ‘the world’ or ‘society.’
The projections, as I found later, are in turn the effect of
repression, the constant denial to recognize and embrace an
inner conflict or psychological complex.
This, then, in turn and over time leads to building a characterological and muscular armor around the inner shell, the
heart and the soul, which effectively shields from feeling inside, and feeling with, thereby reducing compassion and
empathy to a minimum.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 13

Once the negative and projective worldview is built, it is
reinforced through experience, for we attract in outside reality what we bear inside, in our thoughts and feelings. The
negative experiences that occur, and occur necessarily once
the inner setup is distorted through denial, fear and shame,
again reinforce the person’s negative setup, thereby triggering a reinforcement of the original negative proposition
about life.
Such statements can be reduced to one single base affirmation they all share.
—There is no love!
Once you are on the ‘There is no love’ track, the way back
to a normal and harmonious way of relating is rather difficult;
it is difficult because willpower to effect the opening of the
closed door is not enough; thus some work on the deeper
levels of consciousness is required, which in most cases asks
for assistance and empathic care from the side of a counselor. For example, it is of little help to give such a person an
auto-hypnosis manual and tape, for working on their inner
mind because their negative self-talk and their shame-based
identity will invariably lead to a defensive reaction of the kind
‘What should I do with all this gimmick? There is no love in
this world. They are probably out to manipulate me or it’s altogether useless.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 14

Any kind of work to be engaged at this point needs empathic support from an expert who knows to untie the inner
knot. It’s really like a knot, an entanglement situation, both
inside and in outer reality. Relationships, when the loving response has been thwarted early in life, tend to be strained
and ‘calculated;’ they tend to be either ‘icy’ or are outright
codependent (fusional), which is a condition not conducive
for love to blossom.
The silent question I start out with is ‘What was first, love
or abuse’? I ask the question not as a matter of personal
fancy but because today, after a glance at the content of our
international media, you really gain the impression that what
controls the public debate is abuse, not love.
And yet, it seems to me that love was first, as love is the
natural condition. In a society that has forgotten about love,
it is not astonishing to see scientists and researchers focused
on abuse.
From a simple perspective of common sense, one should
think that logically, what first should be elucidated is love,
not its accidented variant. It’s very similar with Western medicine that equally is focused only upon the pathological, instead of finding out, first of all, what health is about.
As in the times of religious perversion, crusades and
witch hunts, today again, at the start of the 21st century, cer-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 15

tain forms of love have been declared anathema. This may
not surprise when you consider the general level of fragmentation in our society; where life has lost its wholeness, where
love is schizophrenically split into acceptable behavior and
unacceptable behavior, people tend to create fictitious concepts in a virtual reality of fake-values.
It seems to me that only poets and lovers are able to see
through the thick layers of hypocrite life denial that is currently the invisible paradigm of the majority of humanity—at
least in the part of the world that has incorporated postmodern international consumer culture as its new credo and
lifestyle.
In a climate of bewilderment where erotic love is today
again equated with abduction and abuse, there is only one
step to end up in hysteria—individually and collectively.
Western society has done that step, and thoroughly! It has
ended up not only in hysteria, but in public paranoia.
Today we should do a retrospection and ask how this was
possible, after Freud? And how it’s possible that after the
turn into the 21st Millennium we have ended up in the
Middle-Ages?
Timewave Zero, it is true, shows us cyclic patterns in human evolution—and it indeed shows that the present times
are most closely related to the early Middle-Ages. However,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 16

a timelined view of human history hides the spiraled growth
patterns that characterize all evolution.
When we progress, this is not a linear movement, but a
spiraled one because the spiral is the only form in nature that
ideally combines the line with the circle. And when we advance, we not only relocate farther but also higher. While the
line leaves its root, the circle stays with it, and the spiral,
while advancing, carries its root along. When that happens,
we are again within that pattern, but at a higher level of it. In
modern systems theory, this is expressed in the formula ‘all
growth is nonlinear.’
Applying this insight to humanity’s psychological evolution, we see that right now we are evolving from the Pisces
Age to the Aquarius Age. During this transition, we not only
assimilate more of the qualities associated with Aquarius, but
we also go through a catharsis regarding the Pisces qualities
that have hurt us collectively, such as ruthless group pressure,
dogmatism, absolutism, fanaticism and a sectarian, limited,
shell-based worldview. This means that we are now more instrumental for dealing with the pattern effectively, and perhaps for dissolving it completely.
What kind of pattern is it? Astrologically it is the Pisces
archetype, as opposed to the Aquarius archetype. It is a pattern of energies that puts the collective, the group and the
majority’s rules, opinions and feelings higher than the indi-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 17

vidual’s. It values the group before it values the individuals
who compose the group. It considers standard solutions before it considers intelligent solutions. It typically fears the
marginal and original and blesses uniformity and herd thinking. Its educational paradigm is one of mass indoctrination
and mass alphabetization. It educates by disempowering the
child, and by using threat and authority-based hierarchy, and
strong competition. It basically positions the human as opposed to nature or as ‘master over nature’ and, as a result, is
rather hostile toward the child’s expressing their natural emotions, feelings and desires.
This paradigm is the reigning educational paradigm of
the great monotheistic religions and it often serves for justifying ritual abuse and even the torture of children as a disciplinary measure and in the name of some religious authority,
savior, leader, ideology or dictator.
Now, what we face, especially in controversial matters of
public discussion is a resistance that operates in the masses’
collective unconscious because of their fear to progress into
the unknown.
This unknown is not so unknown after all. It’s the Aquarius
paradigm. The Aquarius Age will definitely be one of more
individuality, more democracy, and more choice at every
level of life. The Aquarian energy which is the energy of the
planet Uranus, as opposed to the Neptunian energy that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 18

reigns Pisces, will help us face and confront rather then repress our hitherto unconscious desires and render them conscious so that we can deal with them on a more rational basis. We will then be able to see love as an encompassing
erotic love (erós) of all-that-is, and abuse as a form of psychological distortion that is created by repression, and the
denial of love, or certain forms of love, and that is regularly
acted out in a violent manner.
To see this will render us sensitive to the fact that nonviolent and consenting forms of love are not abuse.

CHAPTER ONE
Toward a Functional Understanding of Love
Introduction
In the present chapter we shall realize that love is quite a
difficult and for the least atypical research object; in fact it
can be rightly doubted with Michel Odent if love can be scientifically scrutinized without being violated in its cosmic and
all-encompassing nature.
—See Michel Odent, The Scientification of Love (1999).

Because of this caution, I have abstained from any of the
modern methods applied to sexological research topology,
the whole modern tool box of ‘phallometric’ sex research
that is after all an entirely mechanistic business, and that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 19

therefore bears little truth outside of its own little universe of
‘Newtonian’ assumptions and projections. Despite the fact
that historically, love was looked at through the eyes of wonder and magic, fairy tale, novel, autobiography and the
whole folk lore of romanticism—with all the distortions that
such an anecdotic and unsystematical regard inevitably
brings about—this does not prevent us from going a step
ahead, and research love based on the insight that love actually cannot be different from life itself, which implies that
systems theory, with its functional regard, should be applied
to it, as it is applied to research on living systems.
—See, for example, Fritjof Capra, The Web of Life (1997), The Hidden Connections (2002), and The Systems View of Life (2014).

In the fore-field of modern systems research, Wilhelm
Reich (1897-1957), as one of the first Western researchers on
love and sexual behavior, had a truly systemic regard, that
saw the Gestalt of the loving behavior, before he saw the details of the pattern. After now thirty years of research on love
and human emotions, I came to create a pattern-based research topology that sees relationships where the old
mechanistic view saw ‘sexual acts;’ from this view, it appears
strikingly obvious that sexual behavior is a variant of social
behavior, a form of nonverbal communication between humans that is based upon the ‘truth of the body’ rather than
the often to be found untruth of verbal communication.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 20

I have retraced in this chapter the cultural confusion between natural sensuality and conditioned ‘black-booted’
sexuality as a ‘rape pattern,’ while the original ‘love pattern’
was never thought of and conceptualized in the first place, in
our culture. I have revealed through my research on tribal
cultures the Eight Dynamic Patterns of Living, which show
that most tribal and native cultures have well a functional
love pattern in place, a love paradigm, which explains the
world and human relations primarily as motivated by love
and other positive expectations, and not, as in our culture, as
a network of entangled negative motivations that is characterized by expecting humans to sexually violate other humans, if not kept in check by drastic and coercive laws and a
police machinery to enforce them.
—The Eight Dynamic Patterns of Living are 1) Autonomy, 2) Ecstasy,
3) Energy, 4) Language, 5) Love, 6) Pleasure, 7) Self-Regulation, and
8) Touch.

However, it has to be seen that ‘a society that needs zillions of police is on shaky ground,’ to quote career consultant Laurence G. Boldt.
— Laurence G. Boldt, The Tao of Abundance (1999).

Of course, psychologically, when humans foster this negative outlook on life and human beings, it is not surprising
that they see children highly endangered when in possible
naked closeness to anybody who is not father or mother. It is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 21

this fear-based worldview that brings about much of the irrational and myth-engendering stuff around the topic of adultchild sexual relations, and much of the explosive climate
around it, in the public discussion.
I can only say, sorry folks, but this is not my problem, and
it’s not my fault either, so if this society wants to go on in its
eternal blasphemy and regard the human being as a sinful,
defective creation, this may interest the clergy, but doesn’t
concern a modern researcher and social policy maker.
There is no paradigm and no natural process that could
prove in any way that human beings are by nature sexual
predators, if they are not kept from bringing shame and dishonor to their sexual mates. Much to the contrary, it was
shown that in all sexually liberal cultures, people engage in
mutually pleasurable sexual unions, both within and outside
of marriage. Hence, the one-sided, egoistic and coercive behavior of males ‘jumping females’ is typical for repressive cultures, for cultures that are highly moralistic on paper, but very
little moral in real life!
The culprit in all of this, obviously, is fear, and this fear has
many layers. It goes from the general fear of life that is part
of degenerative neurosis, so typical for end-phase cultures
such as ours, to the specific fear of erotic novelty, which is
linked to the fear of freedom so typical for authoritarian and
authority-craving hierarchies. Our entire corporate culture,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 22

not only our religious dogma, is based upon this fear of the
son murdering the father, and the Vassal taking the position
of the Lord.
Fear of erotic novelty is marked throughout, while without
this fear, our culture could have rejuvenated itself from its
origins, and we wouldn’t be in a destructive death cycle, for
not only our culture but the entire human race, through the
accumulation of weapons that represent the eternal phallus
that is the centerpoint of the cultural fear of ‘sex as rape’ as
the ghost in the kitchen of our clean techno-culture.
The self-fulfilling nature of the whole of the abuse culture
cannot be overlooked; it needs abuse to happen and has established corporate empires to do exactly what it most
wishes, that is, more abuse to happen with every coming
year, because more abuse means more revenues for all involved in the circus. I go as far as saying that this scenario is
more pornographic than pornography because it sees life
itself as pornography; it’s a form of mental pornography to
see eroticism as something related to the devilish satisfaction of explosive rape urges with small sphincters that are
torn apart. If we want it or not, this is the single monolithic
group fantasy behind all of the smear of the public ‘pedophilia’ debate.
It goes without saying that when we do research, we have
to abstain from even looking at such group fantasies that are

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 23

bred by fear and denial, namely as a projection of the cultural shadow on the social scene. Functional and honest research is and must remain untainted by the specks that religious denial and political correctness create since millennia in
the human aura.
The Cultural Confusion
A society that is confused about its value system tends to
come up with arbitrary assumptions as they today pervade
the entire public discussion about abuse, especially in the
puritanical Anglo-Saxon world with its long tradition of moralistic life denial, emotional and sexual repression, touch
anxiety and physical, sexual, domestic and structural violence.
As long as one is part of the wheel, turning with the crazy
machinery of a paranoid society, one cannot really grasp the
psychological implications of what Krishnamurti called Freedom from the Known. It is impossible to perceive truth when
one has been brainwashed for years or even decades, obediently consuming the lukewarm soup of standard media
gossip with its half-truths, its hypocrisy and its false securities. It is absolutely impossible if one is not motivated by
some kind of Kantian imperative that says a definite no to all
this at a certain point in time, followed by a clear decision to
remain, at least for a few years, if not for life, untelevisioned,
unchurched and unnewspapered.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 24

It took me about thirty years to get away from ingesting
this dangerous soup and begin perceiving what it means to
be myself! If I had not taken this essential diet, I could not
have written this book, let alone publish it and stand for it in
a highly aggressive, incomprehensive, manipulative and violent society that has lost its humanity long ago.
What credit can we grant a society that goes out to kill, in
drug wars, wars for ‘worldwide democracy’ and witchhunts of
various kinds, that maintains intelligence services that engage in abuses worse than all it projects onto its scapegoat
groups, and that lets more than half of its scientists work for
the military?
What can we expect from a society that calls itself enlightened, that has enacted an admittedly revolutionary Constitution, but goes around the world to publicly emasculate
fascist and terrorist regimes, practicing, against the protection of this very Constitution, exactly, and worse, what those
regimes do?
Should it not be a good moment to wake up from the
thousand-and-first nightmare of public and pretendedly scientific cover-up and turn to your inner voice that knows the
truth, if only you got enough civil disobedience to listen to
it? I believe it is so difficult for most of us because of our past
that favors male supremacy, monotheism and what Joseph
Campbell called ‘Murder of the Goddess.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 25

To secure the paradigm of parental control that is the exact pendant to an all-pervasive punitive and jealous male
Gee-Oh-Dee, a set of values is inflicted upon the community
that publicly and legally denies children’s rights and power to
decide for their own bodies and their own pleasures as far as
love is concerned—while icecream is allowed: icecream and
plastic toys, industrially produced for the child that is not allowed to accept their body as a pleasure organ—that it of
course originally is—are among the most powerful conditioning devices of modern society. They ensure that the human
being is transformed into a consumerist robot that is needed
for the functioning of a robot society.
An abuse-centered culture needs abuse to happen. It will
turn events in such a way that what it silently and openly predicts and projects will eventually be part of tangible reality. I
believe that a large part of all abuse happening in families
around the world is the simple result of self-fulfilling prophecies and a generally negative outlook upon life—and the lack
of creativity that results from such a stiffening point of departure. Instead, people tend to invoke the ‘good old times’
which represents the most stupid argument ever brought
forth in human history. This kind of statements are psychological chewing-gum; they keep people fixated upon the
past, rendering them unable to live in the present and thus
unable to solve present problems. It is the strategy of the
fascist worldview that always operates on an irrational level

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 26

while manipulating the masses into accepting fake-solutions
that sound grandiose but in reality represent old errors in a
new costume, or no solutions at all.
Thus, after this short look over the fence, you may realize
that society, or the main and obvious part of it, will not help
you heal your own distorted emotional setup, and will not be
of help for you to become, for example, a ‘good enough’
parent in the sense Bruno Bettelheim understood it. And if
this society, that seems to hide much more than it reveals
and admits, is so outright judgmental that it tears down even
those who have the best intentions, then you will stop looking for solutions there. Then perhaps you will turn inside and
look to become resourceful by yourself and develop a set of
tools that will help you healing your inner split.
Or you may turn to somebody who has done it before
you, such as myself. And believe me, I am fully aware of the
daring approach of the present book. It’s a subject that is not
‘nice’ which is why most people, for obvious reasons, don’t
like to tackle it, and why it was downed from publishing by
Amazon, in the first place.
Abuse is and always has been among the best-kept secrets, as it’s the shadow part of the family lore in most of our
well-groomed and highly protected modern world.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 27

The Cultural Fear of Erotic Novelty
Abuse, if we want it or not, is part of our fantasy world,
our collective unconscious, our mythologies, our dreams,
and our fairy tales.
We are not an innocent race. The 1960s view of American
child psychology that believed an infant was born as a tabula
rasa is since long superseded by a more holistic and spiritual
view of human intentionality, life cycles, personal growth and
reincarnation.
To put it in a handy formula, we come here with an
agenda, not as pure souls. There are no pure souls, as we are
all subjected to karma as cause-and-effect, independently of
our intentions. There are no pure souls and there are no pure
children. This is not the result of my research, but was my
very starting point of it. I was not pure as a child, I was not
innocent—never. And I bet, you neither. And I guess that
those who smear their lukewarm credo of inborn innocence
in our daily news haven’t been either. (Only that they make
money with affirming the contrary!). But they definitely suffer
from childhood amnesia; as they were not free and sane as
children, and as they themselves have been abused just like
you and me; however, they have repressed those memories.
Had they lived sane childhoods, they would remember all, all
and everything, and the slightest details, and not just their
‘official’ childhood. And they would know that they have

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 28

been sexual as children, and intuitively knowledgeable, and
not pure-and-ignorant as our fascist child protection paradigm decrees them to be.
This is exactly how abuse is perpetuated from one generation to the next: the causes and events become repressed
and forgotten, and a belief system is created that serves to
keep hidden what is hidden.
Consumer fascism reinforces this mechanism through
keeping abuse as hidden as possible, because abuse itself
serves a purpose. It serves the purpose of disempowering a
large portion of the population, and keeping them in a state
of fear, procrastination and humiliation, for such kind of people are ideal consumers. They need a lot of toys to play with
in order to compensate for their ongoing depressions, their
recurring feelings of unworthiness, their culturally bred
shame and their hot-and-sweaty guilt!
Now, you see that healing the scars of abuse means for
you not only developing emotional and sexual sanity and
feelings of wellbeing and power, but also liberation from
manipulation.
As we were manipulated in an abusive family, we are manipulated in an abusive society. And ours definitely is abusive, it’s manipulative, it’s false, abject, violent, hypocrite and
ignorant about the truths of life. All the good it preaches

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 29

through well-paid religious and commercial advocates, it
tears in the dirt by doing exactly the contrary of what it
preaches. It tells us that murdering is abject, and then murders the murderer. So it does exactly the same wrong that it
so vehemently condemns.
If our society was a parent, its children would all since
long been in the madhouse and on the cemetery. But fortunately we are not identical with society; what we call society,
in fact, is but the main herd of the meta group. We of course
belong to the meta group, which is humanity, but we do not
forcibly belong to society, because we can stray from the
pack.
As an abused child who was highly conscious of the reasons of abuse, I knew that society had nothing to tell me,
nothing to teach me, nothing to do with me, that I was immune against its rampant falseness, hubristic arrogance and
abysmal ignorance. And fortunately, two years before the
baccalaureate, I could quit the religion class and say goodbye to the fat little perverse teacher who liked to pinch our
cheeks out, and change over to philosophy, where we got a
highly intelligent and serious instructor and were reading
Plato, Hegel, Kant, Spinoza, and even Erich Fromm.
From that time, I began to coin my own reality. And I began to live my own life, including my own sex life. In fact,
from age ten, when I entered the boarding school, until I was

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 30

eighteen, and left it, I lived and enjoyed a wonderful erotic
love relation with a peer boy that compensated for much of
the frustration and pain I had experienced as a small child in
the abusive home.
Thus it was not because of reading Wilhelm Reich quite
early in life, but because I had experienced the truth of his
research on orgiastic discharge that I became devoted to
helping others develop their full emotional and sexual potential.
In the boarding, they called me ‘sex professor’ as I was
lecturing the other boys at night what I had learnt and found
out about the hidden connections between happiness, sexual satisfaction, emotional truth and success in life. Hence,
what I am teaching today has matured over about fifty years
until it saw its day in publishing.
And as convinced as I was as a boy that my early peer sex
experience would only bring good, and in no way create a
tendency for homosexuality, I was my whole life basically
heterosexual, while the age of my partners varies greatly. But
interestingly so, I have no interest for men and boys, while
there was a phase in my life, in my thirties, where I was exploring boylove as a lifestyle. But that was transitory, and
nothing I would identify with. And this, together with the extended research I have done on boylove has convinced me
that boylove is meant to be transitory, as it was indeed for

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 31

the Greek and Roman lover, and that those who remain fixated upon it are not aware that they are caught in a narcissistic hangup, and instead of healing their own wound, try to
unconsciously heal it in the boys they love and identify with,
thereby projecting the early wounding of their younger self
on the boys they love and care for.
This is of course not a bad thing to happen, as it’s actually
conducive for healing; it is even beneficial for the boys who
somehow become the little psychiatrists of their big friends.
That is why I am saying that despite the fact that boylove
somehow is the result of a psychological twist, it’s a very useful thing to happen in the world at large. It’s socially useful.
It’s conductive to peace, to more intelligence in social exchanges, and it helps many boys to cope with their sometimes painful transition into adulthood.
To conclude, I wish to summarize my research findings on
boylove with the simple statement that while this form of
love may seem outlandish to certain people, it’s a fact that if
man-boy relations were recognized and coded socially in our
society, much good and a strong healing current would be
the result. Unfortunately, at present, our collective consciousness is far from being nonjudgmental enough for accepting this truth.
There are manifest reasons why Western society has this
strong hangup with boylove and homosexuality, while in Asia

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 32

all this is really of minor importance. The Asian lover may not
be very discriminative about the age of the girls he loves, but
that he loves girls and women, there is hardly a doubt. The
great majority of Asian men are definitely heterosexual, while
most Western men engage in what I call fake heterosexuality,
and are under the spell of what psychoanalysis calls anality,
which means something like an unconscious homosexual
overlay. I simply call this overlay sadism.
Western society, with it strong punitive superego, clearly
suffers from a sadistic overlay that can be observed in both
private and professional relations, and even in the ways governments relate to their citizens.
Apart from this cross-cultural observation that was meant
to be a side remark, the centerpoint of my theory is that human sexuality is naturally not a predator sexuality in the
sense of an animal-like, predetermined rigid and instinctual
automatism that Western sexology has made out of it.
And it’s not the conditioned character setup either that is
assumed by the generation of psychologists who grew with a
misunderstood Marxism in the back of their heads, and that
wants each of us to be and remain ‘the victim of childhood.’
No, we are not the victims of our childhoods, we are not
predetermined, and we are not automatons. This is the first
thing. And the second is that sexuality is first of all not a stick

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 33

put in a hole, but an energy phenomenon; it not a matter of
accomplishing identifications either, as psychoanalysis
wrongly believes. And as it’s energy, it’s moving, flowing,
shapeshifting and transforming itself constantly, subject to
change and renewal. However, when sexuality becomes fixated, it almost always turns to be pathological.
This book is a clear antithesis to all those mechanistic
theories of instinctual predetermination, and to all those
people who affirm ‘I am born a homosexual,’ or ‘I am born a
pedophile,’ assuming they could not do anything about their
sexual preferences, summoning society to change and eventually recognize their ‘sexual nature’ and integrate them.
To begin with, neither homosexuality nor pedophilia are
sexual orientations, but simply are strayed vital energy
streams that are not integrated in the whole of the personality because of the lacking social code and our rampant and
dysfunctional moralism as a cultural group addiction.
Both forms of marginal sexual behavior result from distortions of psychosexual growth, while they are not for that reason perverse or pathological forms of sexual behavior.
Most in this field is still today highly controversial. What is
important to see here is that these forms of sexual behavior
become pathological and perverted only through their repression. To help you understand this, I have inserted a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 34

whole chapter about how emotional and sexual energies
depend on each other and react upon each other, and what
happens to the human love setup when these energies are
repressed.
The next point to see in this context is how some people
may actually create a fake identity from their credo to be a
sexual paraphiliac.
I studied this uncanny phenomenon that other research
on sexual paraphilias seem to have overlooked and found
that this fake identity results in these subjects having a reductionist regard upon themselves that, in turn, pretty much
interferes with their inner mind’s attempt to building true,
complex and complete identity. Thus, they are stuck in selfprojection, and precisely for this reason attract projection
from the side of others, and become a despised scapegoat
group, labeled with a generic term, Pedophiles, a phenomenon we all know from the our everyday media soup.
I have written this book because I became aware years
ago that nobody can build true and lasting identity as well as
soul power, and become highly effective in their profession
as long as they are caught in a mythic worldview, with a
dominant inner child, an adolescent mindset, or generally,
with that I came to call the ‘Peter Pan Worldview.’ Even in
film, photography, the world of musea and theater, and in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 35

show business, a firm and solid sense of reality is required if
one wants to find one’s niche there.
I have given free email-based consultancy for more than a
decade to what turned out to be pedophile males, and
found most of them simply do not want to see their hangup
with the puer archetype, which is why, in turn, they cannot
grasp why they, as a group, tragically failed to being recognized socially. It’s because they live, write, discuss, argue and
come over from a shame-based identity that is not their real
identity, not their soul identity, but the tragic dreaming of a
wounded inner child in need to be healed and integrated.
Sexual belonging is not a social category; hence, when it
is taken as a hanger for personal identity we enter an unmapped territory. We are not identified by our sexual longings, as these longings are eternally flowing, transitory, and
subject to constant change.
If one remains fixated and locked for life in a certain sexual behavior pattern, well, that’s a form of neurosis, not an
inherent part of that particular sexual behavior. Many pedophiles are neurotic, as many homosexuals and lesbians are,
and the percentage of neurotics in these communities may
be higher than among heterosexuals for various reasons that
are not related to that sexual behavior per se, but have to do
with higher levels of guilt, shame, stress and social pressure

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 36

that is the price for being too different in a highly labeling
society.
The bad thing with neurosis is that it gets you stuck, not
only in your professional life, your relationships, and your
general prosperity, but also and specifically your sexual orientation. It’s not because they are too different but because
they are neurotic that people take their sexual orientation for
granted and eternal, even to a point to become activists of
their particular sexual hangup.
And this then gets coined into something like a paradigm
when a whole bunch of psychologists and psychiatrists, ignorant as they are about the real nature of human sexuality continue publishing about what they believe is the absolute
character of sexuality once resulting as a final product of the
so-called Oedipus Complex or at last after leaving adolescence. Myths.
Suffices to say at this point that in our emotional and sexual lives, all is subject to change, and that there is absolutely
no reason why we should not be able to change our emotional and sexual addictions, just as we can stop our addictions to alcohol or cigarettes. In my view, and after more than
twenty years of research on the matter, there is not a doubt
that we can change sexual behavior. The real question is if
we want to change it.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 37

If in culture A your sexual behavior is considered abject,
criminal and perverse, and in culture B it’s tolerated, why
would you not want to change your culture rather than
changing your sexuality?
Changing your culture costs you a flight ticket and some
money for the movers, while changing your sexuality costs
you years of therapy or self-therapy, and a lot of frustration
on the way. While I affirm it’s possible, I am not one of those
with simplistic views. I know it’s not easy and it requires from
you a lot of determination and a certain stoicism to achieve
it. And the other thing is that we hardly find reasons for drastic change if we do not have a problem with it, if our behavior is not pathological or outright perverse, in the sense of
being violent, oppressive and harmful to others.
I know that pedophile attraction can be lived in ways that
does no harm to the child partner, but I am aware that most
people are lacking out on information on such a controversial topic, which is one reason of many why the public discussion of sexual paraphilias tends to be heated and widely irrational.

CHAPTER TWO
On the True Nature of Human Sexuality

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 38

Introduction
In this present chapter we are going to inquire what the
true nature of human sexuality is, to see that it has very little
to do with what official rhetoric claims to be true; more precisely, we are going to see that neither human sexuality in
general, nor pedophile sexuality, in particular, is per se of a
predator nature.
To begin with, I will make it clear in this chapter that I do
not deny the existence of sexual predators, both in the field
of general sexual behavior, and in the particular field of pedophile sexual behavior. But those cases, as I am going to
demonstrate, are pathologies, not the regular case. The main
pathology that brings about rape desires—which are what is
at the basis of sexual predatorhood—is neurosis, a stuckness
of the emotional flow that is brought about through fear, denial and large-scale moralism.
We have to see that the predator myth is something
much more fundamental to postmodern industrial culture,
and not only to be found in the discussion of abuse, and pedophile sexuality. It’s to be found in our daily TV channels,
almost everywhere, it’s on children’s wear, it’s on fashion wear,
it pervades the toy and video game industries, it’s a great
part of cinema, with Steven Spielberg movies on top of the
list that exploit this group fantasy.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 39

Now, psychologically speaking, what is it that this myth
originates in? Is it a breed of Darwinism? If yes, why is Darwinism so popular, while it’s scientifically outdated?
I argue that it’s a makeup myth born by the corporate
world that is, psychologically speaking, a projection of the
general aggressiveness of a society which could best be described with the slogan ‘eat others, or you are eaten by others’.
As a next step, I am arguing that the pedophile predator
myth is a psychological projection of the fact that, what I call
the silent taboo, sexuality is generally understood in our
Western society as a ‘black-booted’ violent acting out of
sexual lust, in a rape-like manner, which is seen by the culture
as ‘normal male aggressiveness,’ but which in all nonWestern cultures is considered as a pathological level of aggressiveness that is bordering criminal psychopathological
behavior.
Hence, the cultural distortion that is at the basis of the
very discussion of sexuality in our culture has as good as
nothing to do with pedophilia; it’s a projection of the original
heterosexual scheme that is taken as the ‘normality standard,’ and which is a paradigm where sexual sadism is as
much part of the ‘game’ as going out for gambling once in a
while is.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 40

And when we look back in history, we see that the modern image of the ‘phallic dummy’ originates from the old
model of the patriarchal male hunter, the outdoor guy, the
cowboy, who considers the female as a child bearer and kisspuppet that has to be conquered, and possessed. Hence,
the typical sex position that signals to be ‘always on top,’
and the institution of marriage as ‘legalized rape.’
The sex laws, as I have shown in other publications,
clearly show that this analysis is true, for they punish and
demonize behavior with draconian punishments that otherwise, within a valid marriage, would be considered as ‘normal’ and socially adequate. The very institution of ‘statutory
rape’ shows the utter perversity of this whole system that
dates from the times of the Church’s Inquisition and has
nothing ever to do with modern lawmaking.
When such a biased and violent sex paradigm looks at
pedophilia as a variant of sexual behavior, then we may not
wonder about the abstruse projections it creates and propagates by system-conform outlets as ‘scientific insights about
sexual perversion’.
The truth is that this mainstream sexual paradigm is by
itself justifying rape and abuse with the pretended ‘sexual
nature of the male predator,’ that is perhaps a cultural perversion, but has nothing ever to do with the true nature of
sexuality in human beings.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 41

I am going to quote Wilhelm Reich often in this chapter
for his insights into the functional nature of human sexuality,
and its regulatory and health-preserving function are marking
the sexological research standard until today; and with the
smear politics about pedophilia since about the mid-1980s,
there is anyway hardly any better research to expect in our
present time, and the near future. In addition, it has to be
seen that the myth of the pedophile predator has a political
function in that it serves as a projection myth for discarding
out a minority that serves as the scapegoat, as this was formerly done with the Jews, and ethnic minorities.
In a time where political corruption and a general decadence regarding our value system is on the rise about everywhere in the world, it is not a surprise for the political observer that new scapegoats are forged that serve for nurturing the wars and civil wars of the future.
The Silent Taboo
I call the true nature of human sexuality a silent taboo because all appears to be sane and safe here in the sense that
our society today joyfully boasts with being rational-minded
and open for scientific research and ‘clinical’ observation of
human sexual behavior.
I question this assumption with the simple observation
that if our society was matter-of-fact and knowledgeable

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 42

about the true nature of human sexuality, it would never have
come up with the predator myth in the first place. This myth
really pervades our mass media to a point it trickles out of
every major magazine almost every fortnight, to be endlessly
and neurotically repeated as a new form of mass hypnotism
that is based upon a pitiful ignorance of the real workings of
human emotions and their sexual expression.
Let us ask the pertinent questions here and try to give
honest answers instead of ideological answers, answers
based upon the facts of nature, not the myths of nature that
are the relict of the notorious patriarchal ignorance of all the
basic life functions.
Is human sexuality of a predator nature? Let me first assert that I do know sexual predators, the real ones, men who
conform with the profile of the sexual occasion-catcher, who
use boys and girls and females of all ages as pleasure cuties,
more or less regardless of their consent, shunning with a grin
any kind of societal, cultural, legal and moral rules and prohibitions. To say, I am not denying the existing of sexual
predators, but I am saying that this form of human sexual
behavior is the result of emotional stuckness, not the natural
way human sexuality unfolding and manifesting in human social interactions.
By the same token, looking at pedophilia, I am saying
that the predator pedophile that is so often nowadays a fa-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 43

vorite and sensational item in our media, is a pathological
variant, while the majority of pedophiles are not sexual
predators.
The negative image the media present on these matters
is true in so far as, from a case-study point of view, and without generalizing the findings, predator pedophiles in some
cases really create havoc in the lives of those they use for
their ruthless and unhampered ego-satisfaction, thereby creating hurt and destruction also in their own lives as a result of
the bad karmic response they trigger.
What I am saying is that these men are pathological cases
and not natural lovers, nor natural childlovers, while the official rhetoric uses them as dummies for upholding and backing up the myth of all pedophile sexuality being of a coercive, violent, and predator nature.
These men, reported almost daily in mainstream journalism as ‘international pedophiles’ who prefer destinations like
Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia or Cambodia as their
erotic playground, are not, to repeat it, representatives of the
psychoemotional particularity called pedophilia. These men
are somehow targeting a mythic object for abreaction that
could be called ‘the doll of all ages.’ For these men, not only
girls, but also small boys, because of their softness and their
female characteristics, are attractive as sexual playmates for

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 44

a ‘sex vacation.’ But this does by no means imply that these
men were homosexuals. In most cases they are not.
With this group, the macho-type of man is the most
common to be found. In my observation, these men are often sworn against society for various reasons; some of them
were themselves hurt and abused in childhood. As a result,
they built a revenge pattern, and may once in a while act out
against children as poison containers for their accumulated
hate.
The revenge pattern psychologically is a psychic defense
mechanism that veils the original wounding these men have
suffered. They are most often scarce and harsh in their communications, rather mute and strong-willed, and they display
many obsessional patterns in their overall behavior; in fact,
they are not seldom paranoid. More often, I found that they
are narcissistic in the sense to experience difficulty for ‘vulnerable’ communications that bear a chance for their true
self to emerge.
The interesting fact is that the official image of the patriarchal male hunter type is exactly conforming with this kind
of pathological sex robot who is actually an emotional torso
and sexual Frankenstein. It’s after all the mainstream image
of the ‘good old male’ who, to be true, is depicted as a
predator animal in all respects, not just in his sexual communications. And the ‘modern’ American male, as the prototype

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 45

of the body-built, doped huge phallic dummy in our emerging postmodern international consumer culture is but a vintage and more subtly spiced broth of the traditional mold.
From there to the skinhead lust-murderer is but a step.
After this clarification, my answer to the initial question is
that human sexuality originally is surely not of a predator nature. And it’s a sign of simple cultural perversion when a public morality, as it is the case today, signs up for declaring perversity to be the rule, and nature to be the ‘serpent seducer’
of humanity into sin.
We are facing the same dilemma here as during the
Middle-Ages, the same mental and emotional darkness, the
same misconceptions about ‘nature.’ To say sexuality is an
urgent desire for uprooting another into a chaotic experience of piercing a yielding corpse with a stick is about as intelligent as saying that a baby is the inevitable outcome of
mutually consented rape, or that the earth was created
through a violent eruption called the ‘big bang’ as a cosmic
rape of ‘matter’ by the divine phallus. While all these myths
ghost in humanity’s collective unconscious, as part of our
world religions’ erotic phantasmagory, they are what they
are, myths, not reality. They are as much myths as Stalin’s vision of a world united by violent coercion and political rape
in the Soviet empire.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 46

We are still on the side of myths and mythology, still in
the realm of political paranoia when considering such slogans, and far from nature’s wisdom. Nature is smooth, yielding and intelligent in coordinating desire, not harsh, brute,
coercive and disruptive. As early as in 1949, Wilhelm Reich
wrote in his book Ether, God and Devil:
—The unarmored organism does not know an impulse to rape and
murder little girls, or to get pleasure through violence. It is therefore
indifferent toward all moral rules that try to repress such impulses. It
cannot comprehend that one has intercourse with another only because there is an opportunity for it, for example being in one and
the same room with a person of the other sex. The armored character, by contrast, cannot envision an orderly life without strict moralistic rules against rape and lust murder. (Wilhelm Reich, Äther, Gott
und Teufel (1983), 76, Translation mine).

Our society is turning life upside-down when affirming
that man is a violent animal and needs to experience rape or
child rape as a matter of ‘natural urges;’ no, natural sexuality
is not violent, but consenting, not an urge to be acted out
aggressively and to the detriment of the mate, whatever the
age of that mate.
So, why have we got sex laws? It’s because we have
strayed from the natural path long ago, as a society, not just

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 47

certain individuals labeled pedophiles, predators, or otherwise.
In one of his latest books, Children of the Future (1950),
Wilhelm Reich who long before Masters & Johnson researched on the human pleasure function, condenses many
of his fundamental insights in the natural unbent and unarmored human nature. From this base paradigm of emotional
sanity and sexual health, then, Reich formulated a sound
catalog of ideas about how to set a future educational system that would insure that children’s emotions and sexuality
are not thwarted into denial, violence, perversion and sadism.
—We are no more than transmission belts from an evil past to an
eventually better future. We shall not be the ones to build this future. We have no right to tell our children how to build their future,
since we have proved unfit to build our own present. (…) We cannot
possibly preach cultural adaptation for our children when this very
same culture has been disintegrating under our feet for more than
thirty-five years. Should our children adapt to this age of war, mass
killing, tyranny, and moral deterioration? (Wilhelm Reich, Children of
the Future, On the Prevention of Sexual Pathology (1950/1983), 6).

In my whole life I rarely encountered such honest a
statement on the state of the world and what we be done
about it—facing the unfulfilled needs of our children.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 48

When Reich wrote this, in the 1950s, the world was not
yet as catastrophic, and ecologically devastated as it is by
now, and the whole of the Western world was not as negative toward children’s erotic interests than this is the case today. Hence, the actuality of Reich’s book is even greater today.
Our pathologies, and here especially our sexual pathologies have not seen an end in these fifty years of ongoing
madness, and our legislators have not done one single move
in the right direction to end the sexual misery of the youth—
in the contrary, all has only worsened.
Reich’s suggestions for avoiding sexual pathologies essentially claim parental and educational non-interference in
children’s emotional and sexual life.
Fortunately today this view is shared by progressive child
psychologists, psychoanalysts, and social workers, and yet it
is not for this reason a mainstream view, and has not gained
access to our government agencies that go on to mold children after certain standards, certain values, certain ideologies, certain religions, certain racial or otherwise partial
views, certain fashions and traditions.
The view that children should be left to grow in basic
freedom is today in 2015 as marginal as it was in the 1950s.
Reich explains that there are essentially two fundamental

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 49

wrongdoings in our child-rearing practices that contribute to
thwart and distort the originally sane psychosomatic setup of
the child. Here they are in his own words:
—(1) The natural bioenergetic principle in the newborn baby is systematically smothered and ruined by the armored parent and educator, who in turn are supported in their ignorance by powerful social institutions which thrive on the armoring of the human animal.
(2) A simple but tenacious misinterpretation of nature governs all
education and cultural philosophy. It is the idea that nature and culture and incompatible. In accordance with this cultural ideology,
psychoanalysts have failed to distinguish between primary natural
and secondary perverse, cruel drives, and they are continuously killing nature in the newborn while they try to extinguish the brutish
little animal. They are completely ignorant of the fact that it is exactly this killing of the natural principle which creates the secondary
perverse and cruel nature, human nature so called, and that these
artificial cultural creations / in turn make compulsive moralism and
brutal laws necessary. (Id., 17-18)

Reich vehemently contradicted the mechanistic approach
of most Western physicians and pediatricians, which was one
of the reasons he did not gain social acceptance throughout
his life. He writes:
—If no severe damage has already been inflicted on it in the womb,
the newborn infant brings with it all the richness of natural plasticity
and development. This infant is not, as so many erroneously believe, an empty sack or a chemical machine into which everybody
and anybody can pour his or her special ideas of what a human be-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 50

ing ought to be. It brings with it an enormously productive and
adaptive energy system which, out of its own resources, will make
contact with its environment and begin to shape that environment
according to its needs. (Id., 20)

It is obvious for those informed about the way of living
and the child-rearing practices of native cultures that natural
sexual pleasure is soft and yielding, manifesting as hot and
melting energy which streams through the organism, vitalizing all tissues, organs and fibers, rendering the skin smooth,
the hair abundant and shining, the eyes pristine and vibrant
and thoughts clear and focused. It is also obvious that sexual
communication is essentially healthy and fosters natural
growth and rejuvenation in people of all ages. Reich writes:
—Satisfying intercourse is also important for the body as a whole,
because the vigorous circulation of blood through all the tissues
promotes metabolic activity. This explains the fresh, robust appearance of the person who is sexually satisfied, compared with the usually pale, pasty appearance of the abstinent person. (Id., 178)

Most importantly, for assessing the nature of undistorted
sexuality, we have to inquire into the sexual habits of natives
who lead peaceful lives and foster monogamous marriage,
maintain stable and nurturant relations with their young, and
abstain from sexual mutilations, violent initiation rites, torture, and ritual pederasty. Reich found in accordance with
reputed anthropologists Bronislaw Malinowski and Margaret
Mead that those natives lead peaceful lives who respect and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 51

intuitively foster emotional flow and all the other natural life
functions in which sexuality is integrated as a growth and rejuvenation factor. Wilhelm Reich observes:
—Among those primitive peoples who lead satisfactory, unimpaired
sexual lives, there is no sexual crime, nor sexual perversion, no sexual brutality between man and woman; rape is unthinkable because
it is unnecessary in their society. Their sexual activity flows in normal,
well-ordered channels which would fill any cleric with indignation
and fear, because the pale, ascetic youth and the gossiping, childbeating woman do / not exist in these primitive societies. They love
the human body and take pleasure in their sexuality. They do not
understand why young men and women should not enjoy their
sexuality. But when their lives are invaded by the ascetic, hypocritical morass and by the Church, which bring them ‘culture’ along with
exploitation, alcohol, and syphilis, they begin to suffer the same
wretchedness as ourselves. They begin to lead ‘moral’ lives, i.e., to
suppress their sexuality, and from then on they decline more and
more into a state of sexual distress, which is the result of sexual
suppression. At the same time, they become sexually dangerous;
murders of spouses, sexual diseases, and crimes all start to appear.
(Id., 192-193)

The present mainstream value system reflects a real reversal of natural functions when taking into account these
bioenergetic facts, which in the meantime have been corroborated by the sex research of Masters & Johnson, the
Kinsey Report, the work of Alexander Lowen as well as by
psychoanalysis and child psychology.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 52

— See Alayne Yates, Sex Without Shame: Encouraging the Child’s
Healthy Sexual Development (1978), Stevi Jackson, Childhood and
Sexuality (1982) and Mary Fortune, Sexual Violence (1994).

It is exactly the repression of natural sexual gratification
that leads to crime, and not, as it is believed by most of our
governments, sexual freedom and permissive education.
Wilhelm Reich states this fact, referring to Malinowski’s
field research as evidence to the bioenergetic truth of sexual
nonviolence being the rule, and civilization’s exorbitant sexual crime rate as a result of straying away form natural sexual
self-regulation.
The etiology of homosexuality finds its clear explanation
here; however, the fact that homosexuality is a sexual dysfunction is of course not a reason to be prejudiced about it
or to socially stigmatize it:
—It is a fact that only the person who is incapable of gratification,
the person whose sexual life is impeded and disturbed and who is
contaminated by moral inhibitions, becomes sexually dangerous,
while the sexually gratified and healthy person, no matter how many
and what relationships he has, poses no risk to social coexistence.
(Id., 193)
According to the findings of Malinowski, an English ethnologist,
homosexuality starts to appear among primitive peoples at the
same rate that missionaries import Christian morality into these
people’s natural sex lives and separate the sexes from each other.
This is also confirmed by the fact, which we observe over and over

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 53

again, that wherever normal sexual relations between men and
women or girls and boys are prohibited or hampered (e.g. in boarding schools, in the army or navy, etc.), homosexuality develops in
proportion to the degree of sexual suppression. (Id., 101)
It would be totally wrong, however, to conclude from these facts
that homosexuals should be despised or made the object of antihomosexual campaigns. (Id.)

The dualistic concept of love came over to us from Aristotle; the Church’s moral codex took it over. But this love
concept is schizoid in that it splits the wholeness and unity of
love off in dysfunctional ‘sex’ concepts that are not only
meaningless but when taken as guide posts for behavior
lead to social and individual schizophrenia. Reich comments:
—The splitting of sexuality into debased sensuality and transfigured
love, which generates entire systems of philosophy on the problem
of ‘sexuality’ and ‘eroticism’ is nothing more than an expression of
the dominant position of the man and, in addition, a consequence
of the efforts of distinguished hypocrites to set themselves apart
from the masses by adopting a special morality. (Id., 204)

The often-voiced call for more sexual responsibility, as we
know it for example from the feminism agenda, is a tautology because naturally, and as long as we let nature regulate
our sex lives, we are sexually responsible, and this responsibility begins to be severely eroded exactly with allowing
moralistic pseudo-responsibility to set in. Reich writes:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 54

—Sexual responsibility is automatically present in a healthy, satisfying sexual life. (Id., 208)

The Myth of Pedophile Predator Sexuality
After this clarification on the nature of undistorted sexuality, which is the human expression of the pleasure function,
let us now look at unrepressed and undistorted pedophile
sexuality. In what does pedophile sexuality differ from the
mainstream sexual behavior pattern?
To answer this question I must first clarify what, if ever,
can be taken as the majoritarian rule of sexual attraction and
conduct; it seems that when nature is not bent, we ‘grow up’
psychosexually in the sense that as children we are erotically
attracted to children of about equal and slightly different
age, when we grow into adolescence, we choose adolescent
and adult partners, while some adolescents prefer children,
and when we grow adult, we again change our sexual appetite in desiring, at least most of the time, adult sexual mates.
As you see, I drafted this statement rather carefully, for
there are so many exceptions to the rule that the rule itself is
difficult to define. In fact, as early as in the 1920s, sexologists
such as Richard Krafft-Ebing, Wilhelm Stekel or Havelock Ellis
affirmed as a general tenor of their research that in human
sexual behavior a normalcy standard is difficult to make out
as the variety of human sexual conduct tends to be greater
than its uniformity. Current society, while it has come to be

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 55

convinced that homosexuality does no harm per se, still remains widely—and wildly—hostile toward pedophilia. The
monolithic myth that was built over the last years and decades against adult-child erotic relations can handily be
coined the myth of ‘Pedophile Predator Sexuality.’
It is argued by circles of society that are in one way or the
other involved with the worldwide mega-business of child
protection, and also by many psychologists, that all pedophile sexuality was per se of a predator nature, the adult
typically acting out an aggressive urge for sexual satisfaction
by bullying the child into coercive and painful forms of oral,
anal and vaginal intercourse, virtually mutilating the child’s
spiritual integrity on all levels, physically, mentally and emotionally.
There is a whole web of myths woven in this media fabric,
and those myths serve propagandistic purposes. To sort out
the mess, I have to go step by step, carefully putting things
straight that are distorted, and facts apart that are entangled
in a mythic cinematographic picture of gigantic dimensions
from which emerges the youth-focused lover as the proverbial sexual monster and predator animal.
What I am talking about when I say ‘mainstream’ sexual
conduct is but a rule of thumb. Now, when the mainstream
sexual conduct is that people are erotically interested more
or less in mates of about same or slightly different age, with

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 56

pedophile attraction, the only difference really is that here
significantly younger partners are preferred. There is no
other difference. As with all undistorted sexual attraction and
mating, pedophile emotional attraction and sexuality is tender, harmless, loving, caring and nurturant, and as generally
with sexuality, when it is repressed, it begins to exhibit violent and harmful traits.
The predator myth cheats about these facts, signing the
mythic pedophile up as a scapegoat for acts that are for the
most part perpetrated by heterosexual predators, and also
for the minority of pedophile predators whose existence I do
not deny, but who are, like heterosexual predators, sexual
‘pathologies’ because they have repressed their original
longings, which is why they became sexual sadists.
Pedophile sadism is certainly an undesirable and socially
harmful vintage of sexual pathology. The sad outcome of
such violent urges make the headlines of our daily morning
and evening papers. However, what the media do not tell is
that these cases are but a tiny percentage of general violent
crime, and an even tinier percentage of the total pedophilia
related criminality.
All research on adult-child sexual attraction corroborated
my early intuition that pedophile erotic attraction and behavior is as nonviolent and tender as mainstream sexual behav-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 57

ior, provided it is left unregulated and thus functions in a selfregulated manner.
Our international media distort these facts more or less
deliberately because ‘fighting perversity’ is today used as a
major Trojan horse for populating the neofascist agenda of
total control and tight regulation of the citizen.
That most people are hardly if ever aware of this fact is
deplorable enough, was it not just another piece of evidence
for the distortion the consumerist worldview brings up with
its general hostility to all sexuality; in fact, sexual citizens are
bad consumers.
This is a simple psychological and economic fact that was
mentioned in the works not only of Karl Marx and Friedrich
Engels, but that was even more broadly elucidated in the 6volume masterpiece The History of Sexuality, by the French
philosopher Michel Foucault.
—See Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality Volume 1: The Will
to Knowledge (1976/1998), Volume 2: The Use of Pleasure (1984/
1998), Volume 3: The Care of Self (1984/1998). The theme was
elaborated even more in detail by other French philosophers,
among them Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. See L’Anti-Oedipe:
Capitalisme et Schizophrénie (1973).

CHAPTER THREE
The Demonization of Adult-Child Erotic Love

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 58

Introduction
In the present chapter, I am going to elucidate some of
the main reasons for the present cultural demonization of
adult-child erotic love.
We are going to see why the modern paradigm of child
protection doesn’t ensure valid protection of the child
against various forms of violence, educational, sexual or
other, both within and outside of the family. Actually our daily
news report that children in our culture are highly vulnerable
to being hurt, and highly unsafe, and that the worst of the
worst can happen to them virtually every day.
Missing children, abducted children, raped children, children as assault receivers in divorce trials, not to talk about
children raped to their blood in all our wars and civil wars
around the world, all this shows with blatant evidence that
children are not protected through our modern child protection, while in former epochs of humanity, children enjoyed a
much more effective protection—while one would never
have talked about it in that paradigmatic manner that is today’s media tone. And myself living since twenty years in
South-East Asia, I have seen here in Asia children being
much more protected, while much more exposed to potential dangers, on their daily way to school, walking, or biking
alone, sometimes miles to and from school. And yet, an abduction or a child rape would be a resounding sensation that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 59

happens less than once a year in all the countries I have lived
in, which are Thailand, Indonesia, and Cambodia.
While children are early initiated in the work process, and
not relegated to ‘eternal play’ as in Western countries, children in Asia enjoy a higher sphere of personal freedom and
yet are not to that point assaulted and humiliated as it is the
case in all and every Western society! This is, frankly, a shame
for a culture that arrogates itself to be the most childcentered and child-protective in the world!
It has to be seen that child protection came up, not as a
coincidence, with the Industrial Revolution, during the second half of the 17th century, and was a byproduct of the industrial exploitation of the child, and later, the discovery and
recognition of children as prime consumers. Hence, the true
reason for the present demonization of adult-child sexual relations is a cultural fear that is actively fueled by the corporate world in its eternal collusion with governments around
the world. The fear is that the child as a consumer may disappear one day because of consciousness development and
social realization of children’s emotional and erotic freedom.
That would possibly be the end of consumer culture in its
present form.
This is thus a legitimate fear, and from this perspective, all
the strangeness in the present child protective paradigm can
be understood—while I am probably the first researcher after

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 60

French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari to
have discovered and unveiled these hidden connections in
my books.
Next, I am going to elucidate in this chapter what the expression ‘sex offender’ known from criminal justice actually
means.
I is quite obvious, I think, that this expression denotes
something like ‘sexual heresy,’ just as it was in the times
when the Church ordained what was permitted as wholesome intercourse and what was ‘intercourse with the devil.’
For example, under the Church’s doctrine, even within a
couple in a valid marriage, anal copulation was judged as a
‘devilish’ form of intercourse. By the way, this archaic view is
still valid today in Islam, and can be found explicated in the
Koran. A similar prohibition may well exist also in Judaism.
I also show in this chapter that the one-sided focus upon
the victim, while denoting the abuser as a criminal, without
giving thought to the root relationship that was established
prior to the abuse, is not conducive to elucidating the truth
in relationships that at one point turn south through one
party abusing the power he or she has over the other party.
This is so because from a scientific point of view, we need
to know the whole of the story, not just the part that led to
the decay, and even the destruction of the relation, or the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 61

fact it ended up in court. The present abuse paradigm renders it extremely unlikely that researchers even bother to
know the whole truth, because partial truth, which is called
‘scientific bias’ is virtually planned into this paradigm. And
with that, sorry, I cannot live as a lawyer and researcher; this
is something that has to be attacked, in my view, until the
Supreme Court renders a decision about it, and such a decision could trigger a change in the whole of the oppressive
and unconstitutional system that the abuse culture has established in our originally democratic culture that considers
human intimacy as protected by constitutional guarantees!
What is Child Protection?
The child protection movement is a social, political and
economic union of politically conservative and spiritually orthodox circles of modern society that have achieved to receive high government and industry funding for running national and international campaigns for the so-called protection of children. Some authors also speak, in this context, of
the ‘child protection industry’ since the financial power and
sociopolitical influence of this movement is growing fast.
While it does not shy away from interfering in other countries’ internal matters by thus violating Article 2(4) UN Charter (Non-Interference Clause), it has so far not contributed to
lower the enormous child-related crime rate in modern society; this fact contributes to the suspicion that child protec-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 62

tion is rather an ideology, or a new worldwide business that
plays on the irrational registers of the human mind, rather
than on factual knowledge.
Modern educators like Maria Montessori came up with
the idea to tailor the child’s living environment according to
the child’s age and size, thus segregating adults and children
into worlds apart. Regarding the child’s natural need of a variety of contacts to grow into a sociable and kind person, it is
argued by child protectors that such contacts may endanger
the child’s health, physical safety or emotional balance.
However, statistics of child-related crime show that in
countries that are lesser safe and technologically advanced,
the number of child rape assault, violent murder, lust murder
or kidnapping of children is minimal compared to the statistics for these crimes in Western industrial nations. Western
crime experts, justifying the Western child protection paradigm, tend to argue that these statistics could not be relied
upon since the most part of child abuse went unreported in
those cultures.
So far so good. Let us look then how it developed in our
own culture because here, we have more reliable data. The
first idea to protect children came up at about the middle of
the 17th century. Before that time, the idea of children enjoying a special status or being another vintage of humans who
need special care was unknown.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 63

Hence, when we talk about child protection, we talk
about a modern paradigm, a concept that was mainly developed in the 20th century, while the idea was present already
in early Christianity.
As Susanne Cho demonstrated in her doctoral thesis, the
idea of child protection seems to be unthinkable before
about the second half of the 17th century.
— Kindheit und Sexualität im Wandel der Kulturgeschichte: Eine
Studie zur Bedeutung der kindlichen Sexualität unter besonderer
Berücksichtigung des 17. und 20. Jahrhunderts, Zürich, 1983 (Doctoral thesis).

This is so because it was at that moment in human history
that, for the first time, it was defined what a child is; in fact,
before the onset of the Industrial Revolution, children were
not considered as a separate race that obeys to different
laws. It does not surprise in fact that it was exactly with the
starting point of consumerist thinking that the idea came up
that children had to be regulated and held tight. The underlying promise was that children represented a tremendously
important consumer base. Hence, the idea of protection,
which finds its parallel in slave holding, which was on the rise
from exactly the same point in history. Slaves, too, had to be
protected – mainly from running away!
When you consider this fundamental shift in perspective
regarding children, that is after all a modern-day phenome-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 64

non, you may grasp the idea that all child protection in reality
is a form of customer care, and a means to grow obedient
consumers.
The direct consequence of this reality are our age of consent laws, which are based exactly upon that fictional definition of the consumer robot ‘child.’ Without a person being
considered a child, age of consent laws do not apply. Child is
thus a legal criterion. This is of tremendous importance for
the understanding of how our child protection laws work.
So I need to dig a little deeper and find out what a ‘child’
is under the definition of the law. And when I look through
existing age of consent laws I may be surprised to find one
single criterion: the age of the child. No mention of maturity,
no mention of knowledge about life or former experience,
no mention of IQ, no mention of the will of the child. All this
is considered irrelevant by modern child protection laws. A
child is a person below the age of consent. The age of consent is so and so many years. And how many years it is, actually depends on time and place, and on the cultural setting.
Thus, we can conclude at this point that the ultimate purpose of our age of consent laws is to protect a certain agegroup of people from experiencing sex or body pleasure.
The rationale of age of consent laws, and ultimately of
child protection, may not be clear. It has to be elucidated.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 65

The answers we get from our lawmakers and from our childprotection experts are clear-cut. Sex is something for adults,
we hear. Sex is damaging the child, we hear. Children are
sexually innocent, we hear, and have to be protected from
abuse. This is the official rhetoric.
I wonder if we are not all innocent about driving cars until
we get our driver’s license? I once dated a student girl who
was sexually innocent at age twenty-one. Does that mean
that at age twenty-one, she was still a child? According to
the laws of consent, she was an adult. Yet she was a virgin
and said she had suffered from the fact that all through her
childhood her mother had forbidden her to touch herself.
Her mother in fact had regularly followed her up to the toilet
to make sure that she was ‘not touching herself.’
This girl was an incarnation of guilt and shame, and she
said she felt attracted only to old men, to men who physically
looked like her father. Upon my inquiry why she did not find
men of her age attractive, she replied that she found young
men ‘brutal and insensitive’.
This young woman may be an exception or she may have
suffered from a particularly harsh and life-denying education,
but cases like hers let us question the rationale of morality. It
is often argued in conservative circles of society that children
should by no means be sexually awakened as this would impair their sense of morality. Now, then, let us inquire into this

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 66

argument. First of all, which morality is meant? Is it the morality of good behavior, of decency, of moral conduct, of respecting others?
Does that mean so far that the child has to abstain from
sex so as to learn to respect other people, so as to keep a
good conduct and learn a decent behavior? Indeed, it is argued in conservative circles that children had to pass a certain time for learning, and not just for enjoying life, and that
too much of body pleasure and enjoyment was detrimental
to their sense of morality; that children had to encounter
hardship and learn to deprive themselves of certain things
that they could enjoy later on in life.
Does that mean the child must abstain from sex for the
common good, for the sake of morality? Or for their own
good? If the first is true, we are not talking about child protection, but about morality protection, or the protection of
that strange thing that in legal textbooks is called ‘public
morals.’ If the second is true, we are dealing with a paradigm
of child protection that applies restrictions to the child’s life
for the best of the child.
The present book will elucidate what the current state of
the law is in matters of child protection and how age of consent laws have grown historically, what their rationale is, and
how, or not, they serve the child’s welfare. I will also comment on some of the rather folkloristic and irrational aspects

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 67

of the present public child abuse debate and the character
structure of people who stress child protection with particular emphasis, exhibiting an almost obsessed focus on the
protective stance in education. This is to say that in such an
intensely controversial debate, to abstain from any judgment
and pretending to deliver an ‘objective’ assessment of the
topics at stake would be an illusory and perhaps dishonest
endeavor. I want to see the person who can react coldbloodedly to such a hot matter. Children’s fate does trigger
deep emotions, and for good reason.
Yet, not only because I am a trained lawyer and therefore
perhaps more detached when looking at things that shock
most people, I would like to invite the reader to try hard to
steer in between the extreme positions of the child protectors, on one hand, and the self-declared pedophiles, on the
other. Probably on neither of these sides, truth resides, because the positions are extreme by themselves. And they
have probably become even more extreme over the last few
years because of an evident lack of dialogue, let alone goodwilled and constructive interaction, between these groups of
people. This is why I would like to expose in this book some
of the absurdities that are to be found in the rhetoric of both
the child protectors and the declared and organized pedophiles on the matter of loving children.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 68

And what about listening to the children themselves? I
have done so and my inquiry led to some fundamental insights that are not brought forth by both the child protectors
and the organized pedophiles. In addition I would like to
come up with some perhaps original ideas about how children could be protected in a way that leaves their emotional
integrity as untouched as possible.
I call this idea the principle of non-intervention and it’s
not a new idea, but a recurrent argument in the writings of
alternative child psychologists such as the late French child
therapist Françoise Dolto or the American child psychologist
Alayne Yates. Besides, some women rights activists such as
Stevi Jackson have taken a strong stance on freeing the
child’s sex life from an overhead of paternalistic control and
regulation.
Consumer Protection?
The media, especially television and cinema play a major
role in forging behavior by spreading the consumer value
system worldwide, a value system that by suppressing and
criminalizing the most tender forms of sexual interaction between generations breeds violence, hatred and hyperaggressiveness mixed with sentimentality and an attitude
twisted toward suspicion, mistrust, defensiveness and insolence. The behavior of not only a large majority of Western
children, but more or less a majoritarian part of all children in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 69

technologically advanced societies shows, as a result of emotional, tactile and sexual deprivation in childhood, the following patterns:
—Lack of kindness and lack of empathy with others
—Lack of autonomy, self-determination and responsibility
—Clinging behavior (symbiotic attachments)
—Strong egotism and difficult attitude;
—Frequent anxiety, insomnia or nightmares;
—Strong materialistic focus, dependence on labels;
—Standardized behavior patterns and role models;
—School violence such as racketing smaller ones, etc.;
—Laziness, lack of attention, sometimes analphabetism;
—Depressions, tendency toward drugs, sexual dysfunctions.

There are no quick fixes to heal these pathologies and, if
there are, they cure symptoms, but not the disease at its origin. The disease is a cultural, psychological and ideological
pattern; it’s a puritanical mindset that punishes pleasure and
belittles violence, that roots out any spontaneous and creative behavior in favor of behavior characterized by the imitation of idealized model leaders, materialism and focus upon
possession, a trend for proselytism, sadism and educational
violence against children, the justification of slavery, civil war
and structural violence, a revenge-oriented criminal justice
and violent prison system, religion characterized by a jealous, vindictive and violent god, strong prohibition of pre-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 70

marital sex, the dominance of patriarchal values, and generally a higher esteem for males and an open or hidden discrimination of females and female children.
Modern citizens tend to believe our democratic Western
nations were among all countries the most liberal and free
societies, blaming the Taliban and other tiny extremist minorities for acting-out the shadow that they deny to admit.
Or they even project their undesired split-selves on a whole
religion such as Islam or ‘Islamic Fundamentalism’ while in
American history, Christian Fundamentalism truly was leading
all over the place, and for centuries without end, without any
effective control of its outright fascist, persecutory, irrational,
undemocratic and anti-constitutional attitude.
With regard to children, their rhetoric is suspiciously similar to the way the former apartheid regime in South-Africa
talked about the black slaves and their social status.
All children’s rights for a free, uninhibited and nonmanipulated emotional and sexual life during childhood and
youth are countered with arguments that deny to children
basic human rights such as:
—The ability to determine themselves;
—The ability to make responsible choices;
—The ability to identify what could possibly harm them;
—The ability to develop autonomy;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 71

—The ability to make friends;
—The ability to assert oneself;
—The ability to consent to sexual relations.

From Protecting Children to Serving Children
Some more interesting parallel comes up when we look
at another of those false realities, the notion of a ‘protectorate’ in international law. In this term we encounter protection
thinking, and here, too, it has been in human diplomatic history a pretext for colonial occupation of a foreign territory, in
violation of Art. 2 (4) UN Charter, and thus against international law. This term equally reveals that pretexting to protect another is often, even in the law of nations, a rape-like
act targeting at violating the other and depriving them of
autonomy and self-determination.
Democracy has so far not given us a real advantage because it has not changed the power structures. It has only
given another frame of reference but we still have the totalitarian regime of the most stupid instead of a natural regime
of the most intelligent.
I believe that true democracy can exist everywhere, no
matter what regime a culture or nation subscribes to, as long
as it has a cultural and spiritual foundation that respect human values and human life. Once we free ourselves from
black-and-white judgments that divide the world in East and
West, high and low, male and female, good and bad, and so

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 72

on, we can gain a new and fresh regard on educating our
children that acknowledges that, all over the world, education needs wisdom and patience. However, it is not given to
everyone to be wistful and patient, which is the reason why,
in Antiquity, teaching was in the resort of philosophers and
men of high personal culture, virtue and integrity.
The problem of child safety is complex in our culture because our nation is relatively rich, relatively secure, relative
comfortable, and relatively democratic, and yet, strangely
enough, practices are lesser secure, lesser comfortable, and
lesser democratic for its own children! To put the problem of
children being potentially unsafe in most Western nations on
the back of strangers, criminals, predators or a scapegoat
group called Pedophiles does apparently not bring viable
solutions, except longer prison miles, as the reality of erotic
attraction toward children is much more complex than this
simplistic scheme suggests.
Fact is that postmodern consumer culture is lesser safe
for children than most native and tribal societies and developing countries.
We can also highlight the problem from another angle.
When people need a captain, they are unable to steer themselves. When they need child protectors, they are unable to
protect their children, as mothers and fathers, as teachers
and caretakers. And if we inquire why this is so, we get some

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 73

keys regarding the nature of childhood in our Western cultures. In my opinion, the reasons are:
—a genuine disinterest of many Westerners in children;
—a lack of care adults suffered in their childhood;
—transfer of tutelary power from the family to the state;
—lack of knowledge about what children really need;
—hypocrite attitude regarding the facts of life;
—lack of caring touch between older and younger people;
—lack of trust through disruption of the extended family;
—lack of freedom for alternative forms of togetherness;
—aggressiveness/egotism valued higher than tenderness/care;
—defensive emotional behavior because of lacking trust;
—neglect of children’s emotional needs;
and so on.

This list is not exhaustive. It shows only the peak of the
iceberg. If there is one area in modern society that is really
neglected, it is education. The problem is that education is
not human anymore and it does not seem to be destined for
humans, but for robots. This is so because it has been rendered commercial, just as everything else in consumer culture, which means it has been standardized.
The problem is that humans are not material goods,
which is why education is per se something volatile that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 74

needs intelligence, intuition, and virtue to be done in a way
that really brings out the best of each and every child.
Child protection veils this fact in that it creates huge profits from the child as a victim, the child as a helpless dependent creature and not the child as a self-reliant entity or the
child as a person-in-growth. That is exactly why child protection needs the child to remain a victim and be victimized and
abused, so as to realize its business expectations.
And, quid est demonstrandum, that is exactly why the
child abuse industry will never want to heal abuse, but in the
contrary foster all and everything that contributes to more
abuse in society and the world at large. Seeing this means to
see that child protection really is a fake cause.

CHAPTER FOUR
The Commercial Exploitation of Abuse
Introduction
In the present chapter, I am going to discuss the commercial exploitation of abuse, the huge dimension abuse has
within a culture that makes money from it, and thereby perpetuates it. I go as far as saying that abuse has been institutionalized in our society by institutionalizing the proverbial
victim, the career woman who is totally signed up for bringing her abuse story to public attention and who receives ac-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 75

claim for having opened her Pandora box for everybody to
enjoy the sordid details.
One may wonder as even under the oppressive rule of
the Church, a woman who would confess to have been
raped, which was in orthodox Christianity a sin just as raping
was, would do so in front of a priest who would keep the
story confidential. Today, the dirty clothes are all washed in
public, and one may wonder why a victim might want to expose herself to public concern? Does it bring relief to do so?
Or does it generate business, perhaps? I suppose it doesn’t
really bring relief, but it does bring money, because public
attention is money in a culture where everything public is a
potential sales item.
I will try to elucidate what are the apparent versus the
hidden reasons why abuse victims go public, and even engage in careers that are motivated by their story, and for
‘bettering the world,’ and ‘taking revenge with all and every
male’ through abuse activism, which is just another form of
war. This is what is called ‘rooting out evil with evil.’ As many
of those activists are signed up with churches, I wonder how
serious they take their Bible, for rooting out evil with evil is
clearly said in the Bible as the wrong way to go, for it escalates violence and doesn’t bring any long-term good. In fact,
what it does bring, long-term and when it goes on with the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 76

speed that has been set in our days, we can predict civil war
like conditions in our society within a few years from now.
Unfortunately, as already Joseph Campbell complained
when asking ‘in Christendom, where is the Christian?’ there
are the strangest contradictions to be found in our culture
when it goes to validate our religious belonging, and to incarnate it in real life. Usually, what happens is that people do
exactly the contrary of what they are preaching; this can be
shown with exemplary evidence in the abuse business, where
the culture, in collusion with psychiatrists, push the victim to
‘get tough’ and develop their aggressiveness, as this is considered as the way out of depression and trauma. A strange
doctrine. It says that when you have been hurt, go to hurt
others, so you will be healed. Behold, all spiritual teaching
around the world says exactly the contrary! When I hurt others as a revenge kind of action, I make for bad karma, because I get into a negative spiral that will at the end destroy
me.
But I go farther than that. I am honestly asking if the hero
culture has ever truly validated women and children?
Truly, I gained the impression over the last twenty years
that it hasn’t, except when they engender profits, then yes,
but only as far and as long they remain ‘profitable’ to the
economy. As long as abused women and children denunciate their abusers, thereby generating more income for eve-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 77

rybody involved in the abuse industry, they are validated and
listened to. But if a ‘better one’ comes up one day, a person
who has an even dirtier, even perverser, even sordider abuse
story to offer, they are forgotten, for they were never validated as what they are, as being simple humans. They were
validated as assets in a profit-creating business! And it was
not their hurt and their suffering that was the reason they
were listened to, but the fact that they played the game and
allowed the mob to get their ludicrous entertainment, and
the corporate world their profits.
I also show in this chapter that the abuse industry is not
different in scope and strategy from the medical business,
which has about as little to do with healing sickness as a cow
with playing piano. The role of medical business is to create
profits in offering people pharmaceuticals that are as expensive as they are ineffective, and that are in most cases even
harmful, and in some cases even more harmful than the
original disease.
Further, I will be discussing the group fantasy of the hidden swine, the fact that, within the abuse culture, males are
supposed to abuse, as a matter of being males, at least once
in a while, which is why precautions are being taken. Laws all
over the Anglo-Saxon world now forbid male educators to
accompany children to the toilet, or to the bedroom, except
they do that in presence of a female educator. As a lawyer, I

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 78

believe these laws are unconstitutional in that they discriminate males for completely volatile and unverifiable reasons!
Thus, they could be attacked in front of the Supreme Court
of the United States; chances are that they would be invalidated. But so far nobody even went as far as noticing the incredible smear politics behind such kind of laws, which cannot be explained by the simplistic formula of ‘feminism.’
Matters are much more complex, and in a paranoid culture
it’s anyway hard to make out the rational pathways of cause
and effect, because, typically, they are blurred and are overlaid by fear patterns that create their own abstruse effects.
This shows that within the hero culture, the male is expected
to abuse, as the machismo definition of the male includes his
role as an abuser just as it defines his role as a breadwinner;
the roles of caretaker, homely and affectionate partner, and
reliable long-term companion are missing in this definition.
They are absent in the cultural model of the American male,
while they are well contained in the cultural expectation of
the male in other cultures that originate from patriarchy, such
as European cultures, and most non-Western cultures, including Islamic cultures.
When American media today blame Islam for suppressing
the female and thereby bringing about abusive households
abounding of domestic violence and child abuse, then that
media culture should sweep their own house first, and I
guess they would be busy for an entire century or more, and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 79

would have no time left to spy out what men and women in
other cultures do in bed, at home or in the brothel, and with
their children, or other children they love.
I have clarified that these group fantasies or myths have
little to do with actual psychological reality, as exactly those
men who are supposed to be potential abusers, the childloving men—who are considered as child men— those who
feel attracted to children, and work in day care and education, are those who are better connected with their feelings,
and show a more integrated psychosomatic pattern.
Hence, they are not likely to become abusers, while the
type that defines the culture, the machismo hero, is the almost perfect incarnation of the abuser, if not the notorious
rapist, as he is more or less totally disconnected from his
emotional life, from his softness, his tender warm feelings
because he needs to suppress all what is yin in him, so as to
become a totally ruthless persecutor, a person whose yang
pattern is hypertrophied. The media, the movies, all show
this and repeat this all and every day, in a way that it has become a kind of mass hypnosis in America.
Last not least, I discuss the group fantasy of the street
monster, the pedophile predator ‘around the corner,’ who is
the quintessential ghost in the house within hero culture.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 80

I first discuss the difference between moralism and genuine morality. To repeat it shortly, genuine morality is spontaneous, not a matter of cultural dressage and coercion, and it
is voluntary, springing from the insight that morality is a regulatory function within social togetherness, within the group,
where humans interact with humans.
Genuine morality is typically a part of a true culture, and
hero culture being characterized by its total absence of
genuine morality, and thus not far from being a chaotic barbarian horde, is simply no culture. It’s a no-culture.
Now, in this cultural vacuum, in this vacuum of genuine
morality, in this lack of real values, moralism comes in, the
hypocrite sentimental fake morality that is smeared through
all the churches, through all the schools and universities,
through all the media, all the social interactions, on any possible level. Typical for moralism is its double-tongued nature,
and the fact that it does the contrary of what it preaches.
By the way, this is not something modern culture has created; it was in the Bible associated with the pharisaics, the
people who had the power to manage and update the scriptures, and who were really the first power holders of that society. Jesus of Nazareth attacked them, while already at age
12, he had been studying the scriptures with them, and
through that experience and having had social intercourse
with these people for several years, he knew they were vi-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 81

pers, as he called them. In any possible society, there are
these kind of vipers, but no society since Judaism has to my
knowledge institutionalized pharisaics to that point on all
levels of society, as did the United States in America, and
within the abuse culture.
To defend their shaky integrity, then, these people go on
to fuel a group fantasy that becomes something like a national obsession: the myth of the street monster, the lurking
pedophile who catches and consumes children on their way
to school, and back from school.
As it’s shown in the media, it’s really a postmodern version of the old child-eating monster that we know from our
sagas and fairy tales. Only, I may be allowed to ask, what has
this cinematographic scenario to do with real childlove, and
real childlovers? I leave it over to the reader to answer this
question, for I am not here to do propagandism for pedophilia! What I am here to do is to simply unveil the myths and
point to distorted views that may lead to long-term fascism
in our society if they are not unveiled and rooted out by turning back to reason, and sanity!
The next point I discuss in this chapter is the strange interplay between deprivation and depravation, in our society.
Children in our society, as research amply demonstrates, are
generally deprived of physical affection, not only as infants,
but also later, as adolescents. The culture doesn’t really pro-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 82

vide much affective food for children, as parents are busy
with money-making, and caretakers are ‘not allowed to
touch.’ So children go for the most part untouched, which
means, psychologically, they incur deep suffering and trauma
on the subconscious level.
If ever love can be communicated to children, it’s by
touch, and, with small children, only by touch. Even adolescents may react indifferently to repeated affirmations by parents or caretakers that they are ‘loved;’ namely, if they are
not touched, and touched positively, affectionately (not for
punishment or for one-sided sexual gratification), they do
not believe they are loved, thereby producing symptoms of
psychopathology that can range from a neurosis to schizophrenia.
The mirror of deprivation is depravation, the prohibition,
overt or hidden, for children to seek out touch on their own,
or being touched, that is, making their own sensual and sexual experiences, with peers and adults other than their parents. This very prohibition for children to live their sensual
and sexual urges, under the risk of being punished and registered as ‘sex offenders,’ is in itself child abuse, it’s institutionalized child abuse in in my view, and that is why I call it a
depravation, for it’s truly immoral to do that. It’s against any
genuine morality to interfere in children’s intimate lives, in
regulating their friendships and love relations; it’s abject to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 83

do that—and yet it has become the cultural norm in postmodern industrial societies.
What I am saying is that without the myth of the street
monster, as a cover-up myth, the present blindfolding educational system with its inhuman repression of emotions
wouldn’t work.
Last not least I show in this chapter that rationality, when
it’s put up as an isolated quest, as an educational paradigm,
as a political paradigm or as a media strategy, is bringing distorted results, not truth. Human beings are not only rational,
because they are more than rational!
Any true wisdom must understand human irrationality,
otherwise a holistic view cannot be obtained.

CHAPTER FIVE
The Patriarchal Love Bias
Introduction
In the present chapter, I am going to discuss the patriarchal love bias that can be characterized by the overemphasis
of yang to the detriment of yin. Historically, and mythologically speaking, it came about by what Joseph Campbell
termed ‘Murder of the Goddess’ and what Riane Eisler called
‘the truncation of civilization.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 84

— See Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth (1988), pp. 215-216,
and Riane Eisler, The Chalice and the Blade (1995).

I found this bias not only in those patriarchies that our
own culture is based upon, that is, Sumerian, Babylonian,
Persian and old Egyptian cultures, which came upon us
through the heritage of the Greeks and Romans who, in turn,
had adopted most of their rules, laws and lifestyle from those
North-African roots, but I have found it also in the ancient
Chinese and Japanese cultures. I have found it even in the I
Ching, and that was a surprise for me, as the I Ching was and
is famed to be the book of ‘changes,’ that doesn’t judge and
evaluate movements, but just describes their changes on a
probability scale, through monitoring the eternal cyclic
change of yin and yang. For it can be easily seen in the I
Ching that it favors yang over yin, that it considers a predominance of yang, while saying it’s well a misbalance, luckier and lesser damaging than a predominance of yin. I doubt
that this bias was brought into the I Ching by the old sages
who first drafted it, more than five thousand years ago, at a
time when Taoism in China was still considering the female
principle as primordial, which it is, after all, also biologically
corroborated.
Joseph Campbell argues that, while the Goddess was
killed, and while ‘[the mythic and social system] of the gods
overlies and occludes that of the goddess,’ he asserts that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 85

nonetheless, the old principle, matriarchy, and the goddess,
were ‘effective as a counterplayer’ in the unconscious of civilization as a whole. That would mean that even the toughest
modern persecutor hero is unconsciously driven not only by
the solar principle (justice, revenge, eye-for-eye) but also by
the lunar principle (compassion, forgiveness, equity), and
thus there is a chance that the present hero paradigm will
one day swap into its opposite, for our psychic energies are
always changing and transmuting themselves, and what was
solar or yang becomes lunar or yin, and vice versa.
On the level of the collective unconscious, this implies
that a future more balanced and peaceful culture is in its
roots already present, as its ingredients are already contained in our collective psyche.
This is so much the more a probability as we have already
lived through thesis and antithesis, and thus are ready for
synthesis. We are presently still living in the antithesis kind of
movement, but it’s just a question of time when synthesis will
eventually appear.
I also tackle in this chapter a problem that I consider as a
key issue in postmodern society: the widespread emotional
abuse of children.
I do not theorize here, and actually when I wrote the first
draft of this paragraph, back in 1985, there was nothing pub-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 86

lished yet on emotional abuse. It was through a 16-year old
American girl, daughter of a university professor, that I was
informed about this problem and was almost taken into a
vow to dedicate a publication to the issue.
I have come up with many publications, but not right
away. I myself needed many years to face the emotional
abuse I myself was subjected to in my childhood and had to
go through an extended psychotherapy and spiritual retreat
to steer clear in my own life. Only then was I mature enough
to begin researching and eventually publishing about the
topic.
Last not least, I show in this chapter that our huge present
discussion of psychosomatic medicine, which attempts to
resolve our culture’s stringent mind-body dilemma is actually
based upon wrong premises. It is not consumer culture that
created the split between To Have, and To Be, that Erich
Fromm lucidly described in his books; it was consumer culture that exploited this split that already existed before.
The split itself is the result of the moralistic division between erós and agapé that goes back to ancient Greece.
This first split paradigm regarding human love was
brought about through idealism, the teachings of both Plato
and Aristotle that were positing an artificial concept of nonsensual love, called agapé or platonic love as residing over

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 87

nature, while they saw erós still imbedded in nature. But as
they regarded nature as inferior to culture, they created a
concept that could be called a ‘cultural concept of love,’ and
this concept was called agapé.
Later, Christianity, took this concept over from Aristotle
and it became the Christian love ideal to this day. But what
did this ideal do? It killed love. It dissected real and earthbound love into a devilish part, called ‘sensuous love’ or ‘instinctual love’ and a heavenly part, called ‘platonic love’ or
‘selfless love,’ thereby killing love in its wholeness, leaving us
a fragmented concept of love that is good for about nothing
but driving people into madhouses, triggering wars and civil
wars, and fostering lynch justice.
The Goddess Within
It is elucidating to observe the complex interaction of the
individual with the group in Judeo-Christian culture. It cannot
be mere chance that the present Western societies are the
most repressive regarding emotions and erotic intelligence.
Joseph Campbell explains that the Goddess was killed in
the violent hunter societies that preceded Judeo-Christian
culture. This murder of the Goddess is explicated in the Bible; it is not a myth but a historical and psychological fact.
The murder of the Goddess was an early castration of the
female part of our libido and the value that is associated with

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 88

the yin force or energy in us. It seems that this castration has
taken place also in other cultures such as the Confucian culture.
The I Ching oracle book, despite its subtle truth that the
yin-yang alternation of energies is beneficial and that the two
energies are mutually supportive and complementary, is not
as subtle, but rather outspoken and openly judgmental as to
the beneficial or harmful effects of yin. It honestly estranges
me that in the I Ching the yin energy is generally the bad
force while yang is considered the good one.
I study the oracle book for now twenty years, but I have
not found an explanation for the obvious predilection of the
wisdom book for yang to the detriment of yin.
I could well imagine that the hexagrams where this is expressed were falsified by Confucian scholars, as we know that
the Book of Changes is much older than Confucianism, and
originally did not contain that Puritan touch and the sexist
bias it got from Confucian sources.
Confucianism and Aristotelianism have in common to
have erected male hubris into a historical and philosophical
paradigm that survived until these days and that is at the basis of the actual misbalance of our psychological and social
setup and the oppression of the female and female wisdom.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 89

It is also at the root of our present moralistic setup of social
values.
It is a rigid, intellectual, and mechanistic paradigm of
fixed values that tries to control life instead of yielding to the
steady flow of positive and negative, creative and destructive
forces that compose and perpetuate life. It is a paradigm
that tries to comprehend life through thought, not through
intuition. The opposite paradigm has respected and valued
the Goddess Within has been forwarded by Heraclitus in the
West and by Lao-tzu in the East. This paradigm is based
upon the integration of opposing values or forces and not
upon their antagonism. It does not divide creation into good
versus bad, but starts from a general acceptance of all-thatis. It is the paradigm that naturally accepts the female as
equal to the male since it values the yin and yang energies as
complementary forces that reinforce and rejuvenate each
other.
It is obvious that both the Aristotelian and Confucian life
philosophies breed antagonism and violence, whereas the
intelligent philosophies of Heraclites in the West, and Laotzu in the East purport a flexible form of peace that rolls and
flows with life instead of obstructing vital energies through
rigid either-or, good-or-bad judgments that hinder any comprehension of the intrinsic quality of life’s dynamic manifestation.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 90

Love manifests through energy; energy is consciousness,
and every attempt to imprison it in intellectual, mental and
moralistic frameworks of rigid antagonistic values will only
destroy it.
Much of the current biased and incomprehensive abuse
discussion comes from this mindset of male hubris that is in
last resort a cultural hubris, a racial hubris and a paradigmatic
hubris. This is why, through truly understanding human love,
we can come to understand why this present society is sick in
its very roots, alienated from its true life force which is the
moving, loving and creating energy of the universe, the cosmic breath, ether, ch’i or prana.
Emotional Child Abuse
The more important problem in the context of abuse is
not sexual abuse, but emotional child abuse, since it is devastating yet hardly ever discussed or researched.
And in the public abuse discussion, it is completely left
out. Significantly so, in my rather large bibliography, there is
only one single publication to be found on the topic. This is
so because I really found only one single book on the matter,
which is after all scandalous in view of the importance of the
problem.
I was myself only vaguely aware of it when, during my law
and music studies in the United States, I was made aware of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 91

it by a sixteen-year old girl, the daughter of a university professor. Despite her young age, she looked like a grown
woman. However she was treated, by the whole family, like a
baby.
Her Chinese mother was a rigid, neurotic and moralistic
dread of the worst sort that stiffened every conversation
through her hostile regard and lifeless cynical remarks.
One day mother decided that daughter had to take piano lessons with me. No question was asked if she liked to.
Her younger brother was playing violin while being outspoken against it. I tried.
The girl came and we spent a few lessons talking about
her family. She did not do any exercises and refused to cut
her fingernails. She could not play one single measure. I
gave up because I found the whole deal dishonest and the
girl’s strong negativity affected me.
Once she cried and I desperately consoled her, learning
that she had wanted to go to a rock concert in town and her
father had refused his permission with the argument that the
obscene texts of the songs could hurt her. I stopped the lessons.
The evening before my departure to Europe, I was invited
to their house for dinner. After the dinner, I went to say farewell to the girl, and she immediately came to the door, took

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 92

me by the hand, and pulled me into a dressing area in the
back of her room. Then she began talking vividly and with an
intensity I had never before seen in her:
—I must talk to you! I wanted to tell you so much, since a
long time, but I never dared to …
—What is it?
—It’s about my father. I know you are writing a study on
child abuse and incest, right?
—Yes.
—Well, I want to tell you that your research is really important, but I wish to direct your attention to another form of
child abuse that is perhaps not yet known. It’s emotional
child abuse. Do you get what I am talking about?
—I’m not sure …
—You have seen how I am treated by him. I am his baby,
his sweetheart, his eternal pacifier, but I am not a person in
my own right for my parents. I feel that I have no rights at all,
and first of all, no right to love anybody other than them, I
mean him. Do you see that?
—Yes, the rock concert …
—For example. That’s only one of many little details.
—What can I do for you?

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 93

—You have done already much for me. I am thinking not
only of myself when I request something from you …
—What?
—To write a study about emotional child abuse. Sexual
abuse is one thing and I think there is already much research
about it. But emotional abuse is much more subtle and I
think it is perhaps still more damaging because everybody
finds it okay and I have nobody on my side, absolutely nobody.
—I see.
We were going to sit on her bed for a moment, and she
cried.
—I will miss you so much, I can’t tell you.
—I’ll miss you too, and I promise you I’ll do that research
and write a study about it.
—If you do that, it’s the best you can ever do for me, and
so many others in my situation!
Traditionally, in our society, children, and especially female children, were the possessions of the father, and not
persons in their own right. From this point of departure, it
was rather the rule than the exception that female children
were emotionally manipulated into pleasing puppets, and
the part they took to live their own life was reduced to a ri-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 94

diculous façade of puppet-play, a set of ‘childish behavior’
that no adult was ever taking serious.
The girl child was thus ultimately driven into being a nonsensical creature, a being without any truly significant
movements, thoughts or ideas. Thus devoid of anything
original, the girl could be used as a poison container (Lloyd
DeMause).
It then becomes logical that these children-toys-for-theirparents deprived of anything truly of their own were to be
emotionally crippled since their own appetites would clearly
interfere with the parent’s exclusive right to appropriate
them, to incorporate them pseudo-cannibalistically, to strip
them for inspection, to violate them for punishment and to
kill them as the ultimate ratio once they were declared to be
‘useless eaters’ (Lloyd DeMause).
The right of the male parent to kill his offspring still exists
in many Asian and Islamic cultures and it was established at
the outset of Judeo-Christian culture as the scriptures tell us
through many stories about fathers who killed their sons or
daughters.
Emotional abuse is a residue of the pseudo-cannibalistic
child incorporation that psychoanalysis has identified as a
form of oral fixation, a hang-up in parents’ own lives.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 95

What these parents actually are searching for is an illusionary amount of emotional security that manifests neurotically by the desire to ‘keep their child save from the harshness of life,’ from imagined dangers, perverse strangers and
all that hairy folk that children actually need to have around if
they are to grow into a healthy awareness of reality.
Emotional abuse is real abuse in that the child is overpowered by the energy of the parent in a way that their own
energy is smashed or invalidated. This is in emotional child
abuse even more evident, in my view, than in sexual abuse
because in emotional abuse children have to remain totally
and deadly passive, subjected to a prison-like existence in
the hands of neurotic and often compulsive parents that lead
lifeless existences. Along with being shut off from the reality
of life, these children are emotionally exploited by their parents in that they have no emotional life of their own, but represent live mirrors for their parents’ emotions.
Every time they express an emotion of their own, they risk
to be treated as traitors of the bond that the parents
threaten to cut if the child does not stand to their duty as an
obedient projection recipient. That is why, in conflictual situations, those parents can and do actually become threatening
and violent.
In family conversations, these children typically have to
remain silent. If they voice an opinion, they are bluntly ig-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 96

nored or vehemently contradicted, or else accused with fostering aberrant opinions. In extreme cases, they are told to
shut up, to ‘wash their mouth’ or to leave the room.
This happens even when they have reached adolescence
and with many it continues far into adulthood, reason why
later bonds with parents are often violently cut off.
It happens in such families that elder parents are put in
institutions where they don’t stop complaining about the
‘lacking care’ of their children, while nurses or psychologists
who have seen the interaction they maintain with their children tend to sympathize with the children rather than the
parents.
Traditionally patriarchal societies tend to justify emotional
abuse with the argument the child had to render gratitude to
their parents and be docile and obedient. This meant, in
good English, that the child has to be a good and patient
listener to their parents’ sorrows and concerns, while putting
their own concerns behind to a point to forget about them.
This means also they have to put the parents’ emotional
needs first, forgetting as much as possible their own emotional needs.
The most flagrant extinction of children’s own personality,
individuality and originality is typically declared of secondary
importance in front of the omnipotent and all-pervasive pa-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 97

rental love and care that children have to respect and choke
like an unwanted, bitter medicine for their own good. Those
who need to be cured, however, are not the children, but
definitely the parents.
Mind-Body Dilemma
Most of us have forgotten that our bodies were the first
and certainly the most natural source of pleasure. Alienated
from our bodies, we compensate for the lost paradise of Being through Having, possessing, and consuming, to paraphrase Erich Fromm. Our mind-body dilemma starts in early
childhood.
The progress of civilization has a high price. We pay for it
with our bodies that we gradually destroy. For a body that is
not connected to a soul is a dead body.
The process of alienation that leads to the gradual decay
of the body is an integral part of the conditioning for consumer society. It begins as early as in childhood.
Without the early conditioning toward toys as a body
pleasure ersatz, people would not accept the later ersatz satisfactions they receive for the sacrifice of their primary body
pleasure.
Sigmund Freud thought that we develop creativity
through the sublimation of our primary sexual desire.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 98

Culture, he believed, is the product of a transformation of
original libido into a creative energy that serves cultural purposes.
But is this thesis true? I think that it is true and not true at
the same time. It is true insofar as the prohibition and transformation of instincts leads in fact to an ersatz for the culture
that would have been created through living our original instincts. And it is not true in the sense that sublimation leads
to only an ersatz culture and not a true and original culture.
That is why I came to believe that our culture is not a culture, but a non-culture, because it is an ersatz culture.
Ancient cultures, for example the Minoan Civilization did
not grow upon the sublimation of sexual pleasure but upon
its fulfillment. It seems that high human civilization can grow
on the basis not of sublimation but of real satisfaction of
sexual desires of all kinds. Minoan culture truly has been superior to our modern culture, more developed, more knowledgeable and, last not least, more peaceful and harmonious.
The rape and destruction of Minoan and other high cultures
of Antiquity through invading patriarchal tribes was one of
the turning points in human history, turning points namely for
culture to turn into pig culture.
It was from this time and parallel events in other cultures
that humanity took the turn into pseudo-culture; it was from

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 99

this time that the artificial and hypocrite, the stupid and doctrinaire, the false and arrogant, together with violence, war
and destruction began to dominate the natural and naturally
intelligent original cultures that preceded them.
Riane Eisler, in her book The Chalice and the Blade
(1995), spoke about the ‘truncation of civilization.’
All leading religions absolved and baptized this turn of
truly civilized humanity into the false, hypocrite, perverse,
manipulative and undemocratic Barbarian Primal Horde that
represents present-day mainstream culture. Religions have
deliberately played the role of a catalyzer in the conditioning
of man for war and destruction, although they globally pay
lip service to the contrary.
For years, I have studied the culture and lifestyle of tribal
peoples. I was amazed about their wistful ways to realize
human potential, and at their unique way of helping children
learn about themselves, and acquire self-knowledge from
their most tender years.
It is significant that tribal cultures that put the human
body and body sensitivity in the foreground of cultural, artistic and social life do not preach love. They love.
And they do not need to heal love because they practice
love. Their religion is not the integrity of pseudo-moralistic
values, but the integrity of love. Religion, in tribal cultures, is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 100

not a power factor and does not exert power over individuals.
They practice the true religio, giving guidance to people
in search of truth about coming and going, transcendence of
suffering, care for the sick and needy, for those who acted
against the law, and the dying.
I admire the North American Natives for the preservation
of the original and pure religion that was once universal for
all human beings and that originated in Hawaii, as Huna religion, practiced by the Kahunas, the natives of that island.
As a summary, I would like to expand our focus to realize
that abuse is not just an individual matter, but a cultural and
societal problem, and even something like a cultural disease.
And when this is the case, the healing of the individual
affliction is not as easy as it may look at first sight, because
ontogenetic and phylogenetic processes are interwoven and
entangled in a rather complex way, as modern systems research has shown.
But the main problem in the etiology of abuse, and the
nasty fact that it perpetuates over generations is the infamous ideology of victimization.
This very slogan is a cultural and collective belief, and it’s
so powerful as a belief in that it reinforces and perpetuates

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 101

the belief of individuals in myths like spiritual predestination,
genetic predisposition, or the above-mentioned belief of
‘once a victim, always a victim.’
When cultural beliefs reinforce personal beliefs, most
people will resist change and remain stuck in their rigid assumptions about life.

CHAPTER SIX
The Truncated Account of Adult-Child Erotic Attraction
Introduction
The basic research for this survey was done back in 1985
during my time as an international law assistant with Professor Louis B. Sohn at UGA Law School, Athens, Georgia,
United States. While working on a human rights project for
the United Nations, I saw to my surprise that the University of
Georgia’s Main Library was providing an excellent collection
of scientific literature about the topics of child physical and
sexual abuse, as well as incest and domestic violence.
It was there and then that I began a research the legal,
psychological, historical and social aspects of adult-child
sexual interaction that was going to keep me busy for many
years to come. Absorbing one research report after the
other, I began to outline and draft the present review that
now, after so many years, is published en première, as it was

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 102

refused for publication by a number of European and American publishers.
Let me note that I started out from a nonjudgmental perspective and without any bias, so as to provide the reader
with not only the dry material behind this research, but also
with comparisons, evaluations and conclusions that are the
result of a serious effort for objectiveness, despite the high
emotional, negative or politically disturbing impact of the
subject.
Alice Miller, an eminent expert in psychology-based
peace research, emphasizes in her books the high political
impact of child abuse and violence. She even speaks of ‘political consequences’ of her research.
From autobiographical source material, it can be derived
that this courageous psychoanalyst and prolific author not
always got the acclaim for her tedious work that she has deserved. In Germany, for example, her lectures on the psychological reasons for the childhood tragedies of Adolf Hitler
and Jürgen Bartsch have barely been appreciated.
But I will reference in this chapter also another eminent
specialist on the matter, Lloyd DeMause, founder of Psychohistory. His research monograph entitled ‘The History of
Childhood’ is a book that is saddening to read: the evidence
that DeMause has collected over more than twenty years on

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 103

morality, cruelty and resulting violence against children is revolting. I found it so revolting that all in me turned upside
down when I began to see what tortures humanity was and is
able to inflict upon children, and this over hundreds if not
thousand of years, in many cultures all around the world.
According to DeMause, childhood under patriarchy was
invariably a victim-like existence involving the passive suffering of emotional and sexual manipulation, physical and sexual abuse, torture inflicted in the name of morality and the
child’s own best, and besides, child rape, child abduction
and child killing.
In the long years of my own research on the matter I tried
to take a more positive stance, doubting deep down in my
heart that this sad picture of human evolution could be true.
Yet I really did not find sources to the contrary, as much as I
was looking for them. I did not find, for example, really tangible positive evidence of consensual child-adult sex that,
from our today’s perspective, we could in some way consider
as non-abusive.
I mused in particular that if there is a History of Childhood
to be made out that is different from the dim picture painted
by Ariès and DeMause. In my view, it should be possible to
prove the existence of something like a History of Childlove
that could be seen, from our modern psychological perspec-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 104

tive, as a form of non-conventional sharing of body pleasure,
fun and excitement.
As the material that Lloyd DeMause used for his study is
pretty much the same I used for my study, what we are talking about here is in fact the evaluation of that historical material in the first place, and not any possibly missing pieces—
because it does not matter if Lloyd DeMause today goes out
to search for new material, or if I go out to do so, or any
other researcher: the chances that we find more substantially
different material demonstrating free, healthy, nonviolent
and consenting sexual relations between adults and children
over the last five thousand years of human patriarchy are extremely limited. And this has pretty little to do with the quite
different mindset of the researchers, but with the reality of
patriarchy. And honestly, how can we seriously expect things
being different in a cultural, social and political paradigm
that disregards nature, the female and the earth and instead
tries to elevate at a super-human level an artificial, weak and
schizoid concept of pseudo-masculinity that is backed up by
a violent, jealous and paranoid god image as the ultimate
judgmental police force for love and living? The genocides
that Hitler and other dictators committed against Jewish
people and other social or ethnic groups or individuals have
their ultimate motivational source here, in this concept of a
moralistic god-like terminator force that is a constant feature
in patriarchy since the Code of Hammurabi.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 105

Without the preparation of holocausts the Church’s Inquisition perpetrated in medieval Europe, and without the thorough conditioning of German parents to apply cruelty in
educating their children, an Adolf Hitler would not have
been possible in the 20th century! It is as simple as that, but
you will never find that stated in any history book nor in any
manual about political science. Why? Because it’s anathema
to admit the ultimate truth about the basic lies that patriarchy has spread to maintain its totally schizoid life paradigm
that, ultimately, has murdered love and made life on earth an
endless suffering.
When Buddha stated that life on earth is ultimately suffering, he forgot that he was talking about a social condition,
not a human condition, that he was talking about a result and
not a cause, about manipulated humanity and not original
and natural humanity.
Some years ago, I was member of a publishing forum
conducted by Lloyd DeMause, who is, as I mentioned already, considered as a foremost researcher on child abuse.
And to repeat it, DeMause and myself used exactly the same
materials for conducting our research, for there is not so
much about it after all, for reasons I elucidated earlier on. So
DeMause came to his conclusions and I came to my conclusions. Why did we not get to the same conclusions? That’s an
interesting question, indeed. Well, this is what we have to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 106

admit as the subjective factor built into science, the observer
perspective. You can’t evaluate research results without having a look at the observer, the researcher himself.
Now, the interesting thing is that I was discarded out from
that publishing forum after some members found my research ‘disgusting.’ I find this very interesting because they
were not a bunch of churchgoing fundamentalists, but people who consider themselves as scientists. Psychohistory is a
science, not a belief system, but those who are signed up for
it, strangely behave like religious fundamentalists.
Having seen that I have evaluated the same materials that
were at the disposition of Lloyd DeMause, for writing his
book History of Childhood (1974), and seeing that I came to
different conclusions on the basis of the same research, they
found it all ‘disgusting.’
Well, the very expression ‘disgusting’ is not something
that one would expect from the mouth of a scientist. Of
course, the facts that underly DeMause’s and my own research are disgusting, of course it’s disgusting to read in
R.E.L. Master’s book about the rape of little girls by monkeys,
during the Roman games. It was for me. But for that reason,
my research, and myself, are not going to be disgusting,
okay? See the difference?

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 107

This is exactly the subtle difference that pervades the
whole field, and the propaganda about adult-child sexual
relations, it’s this tiny difference about truth, namely, that distinguishes the researcher from the propagandist and smearpolitician who comes to any kind of conclusions because
they want to cash governmental funding for their research.
I do not think that DeMause was funded, by the way, I
even think he is a quite honest man, and that he seriously believes what he writes. I am convinced he is an integer person,
so I do not doubt his scientific credibility. What I doubt is his
logic. I think that ‘morality’ is a very relative concept, changing over time and also in different cultures, and even in different regions in one single society, very much evidenced by
the situation in the United States.
Morality is not the reason why adult-child sexual relations
are forbidden. This may seem a novelty insight to many a
reader of my books, but I am firm and stout standing behind
my research in so far. I couldn’t see arguments that stand trial
for adult-child sexual relations being a question of morality,
in the contrary. I can find more arguments for adult-child love
relations being embraced by genuine morality, and at the
same time I can find arguments for demonstrating that the
current paradigm that demonizes pedophile love is absolutely immoral.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 108

My difficult task here was to hold back with my own sense
of morality and present the topic as objectively as possible; if
I succeeded with the task, I do not know, but the reader may
be assured that this was my primary motivation, not to take a
propagandistic stance pro pedophilia.
I close this introductory note in the firm conviction that
the account of positive, nonviolent, sensual, healthy and enriching adult-child sexual encounters over the course of human history still has to be written, as what we have in terms
of written sources can only be evaluated as ‘truncated,’ not
the real story, not the entire picture but a tiny part of it.
I find it personally rather a sign of naiveté or of personal
obsession that researchers like Alice Miller or Lloyd DeMause, while I honor their personal dedication, are so
closed-minded to admitting that what we have under our
eyes cannot be the full story. It just cannot be, for the world
is not black-and-white but million shades of grey. I will never
sign up with these people’s doctrinaire worldview that shows,
if ever, that they personally do not know what a sanely regulated love life is about, simply because they themselves have
never experienced it.
From what quantum physics shows, we know that we
must take serious the fact that there is no research without
observer bias being part of the game of science. When I indulge in a strictly negative worldview, I cannot even ap-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 109

proximate, let alone understand the multi-vectorial abundance of life, and its ever-changing nature, which makes for
the endless variety of human existence.
To love children doesn’t mean we have to keep them
wrapped in a protective cocoon, which is what these researchers seem to advocate. To put it in shorter terms, child
protection is a no-solution.
— The end of the liberal era and the beginning of a restorative period has begun already at the end of the 1970s in Britain; it can be
said to have been launched with the so-called Child Protection Act,
see: Hansard, The Protection of Children Bill (House of Commons
Debates), Hansard, 10 February, 1978; Hansard, The Protection of
Children Bill (House of Lords Debates), Hansard, 5 May and 18 May,
1978; see also: Zeegers, M., Punishable Love and Dangerous protection, Proces (Arnhem), July-August 1978, pp. 167-71.

Contrary to the rhetoric of these researchers and others
from the circles of the child protection movement, I argue
that if loving children erotically had been socially coded and
integrated in a sane educational paradigm, the atrocious violence against children that was and is the order of the day
under patriarchy could not have come about in the first
place. In other words, patriarchy, with such a fundamental
change of its base setup, that is on the basis of educational
permissiveness, would have been substantially modified.
That means in turn that we would not face the abysmal state
of violence in the world as we face it today. We would live in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 110

a more peaceful world, if this consciousness work had been
done over the course of the last decades and centuries. To
put it in a slogan, pedophilia in the sense of a conscious and
integrated erotic attraction toward children is a violencereducing factor in our society.
To see the truth of this statement is not possible as long
as one is under the spell of child protection, which is a typical
fake paradigm. To bring about positive changes in our culture for children is not done with protecting them, thereby
reducing their freedom, but with giving them more freedom,
not by controlling them more, but by controlling them less.
Child protection is a modern vintage of the authoritarian
worldview that thinks not neuronally but hierarchically, assuming the higher instance is ‘always right’ and the lower instance ‘always wrong,’ thereby creating the all-powerful father figure as the right-and-righteous instance, while we all
know that most violence in the world is exactly the result of
this kind of worldview and life paradigm.
Another important point is that children’s rights never
were formulated in an intention to empower children, a fact
that can be seen exemplarily with the UN Declaration of 1959
that is concerned more with protecting children than with
formulating principles that lead to respecting children’s individual will and intention. Richard Farson, in his book Birthrights: A Bill of Rights for Children, observes that Principle 6

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 111

of the Declaration states that ‘The child, for the full and harmonious development of his personality, needs love and understanding. He shall, wherever possible, grow up in the care
and under the responsibility of his parents.’
Apart from such statements being legal and psychological chewing gum, as they say nothing substantial, Principle 7
describes the child as a passive creature that obeys the rules
and regulations of their parents: ‘The best interests of the
child shall be the guiding principle of those responsible for
his education and guidance; that responsibility lies in the first
place with his parents.’
The best interest of the child is not identical with the will
of the child. What this declaration does is to actually perpetuate the old paradigm with the all-dominant father who
acts ‘always in the best of the child,’ which is precisely what
patriarchy says, also when that all-powerful father kills or mutilates the child. It will always be done ‘in the best of the
child.’
Before the 17th century, Farson reminds us, children were
not thought of as innocent. Only then did innocence become the idea of childhood. It was at that time that children
were no longer given indecent books to read and life began
to be hidden from them.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 112

Previously, adults in the presence of children had talked
openly about sex and every other ‘adult’ matter. There was
considerable sexual precocity. Louis XIV was in his wife’s bed
at age fourteen. Girls often married at thirteen. (And one
must bear in mind that puberty occurred later than now.) It
was common for an adult to play with a child’s genitals. But
in the 17th century children began to be seen as requiring
protection and were discarded from the private lives of
adults.
—In medieval times children were unimportant but enjoyed, even
coddled; from the seventeenth century on, children needed to be
reformed. Today’s parents and children still carry the burdens of that
major historical change. (Richard Farson, Birthrights: A Bill of Rights
for Children (1994), p. 20)

It appears thus that the child protection paradigm is a
comfortable new disguise for old fascist dogmatism and puritanical opinions of the ultra right wing of society that try to
undermine the constitutional guarantee of the family’s
autonomy, for replacing the authority of parents by a superauthority in the role of a Manichean state or government. It’s
certainly not in the best of the child when taken as a future
social paradigm!
Ancient Patriarchy
The Sumerian Tablets

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 113

As a matter of fact, the Talmud and the Bible report rules
and customs regarding child marriage and sexual relations
with children.
— The Talmud is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs and history. The Talmud has two components: the Mishnah, which is the first written compendium of Judaism’s Oral Law; and the Gemara, a discussion of the Mishnah and
related Tannaitic writings that often ventures onto other subjects
and expounds broadly on the Tanakh. The terms Talmud and Gemara are often used interchangeably. The Gemara is the basis for all
codes of rabbinic law and is much quoted in other rabbinic literature. The whole Talmud is traditionally also referred to as Shas, a
Hebrew abbreviation of shishah sedarim, the ‘six orders’ of the
Mishnah.

A well-known mythological epic displayed on cuneiform
tablets counts the story of the god Enlil who saw the goddess Ninlil, a little girl, bathing in a stream, and desired her.
— Enlil was the name of a chief deity in Sumerian religion. Enlil was
the god of wind, or the sky between earth and heaven. One story
has him originate as the exhausted breath of An (God of the heavens) and Ki (goddess of the Earth) after sexual union. When Enlil
was a young god, he was banished from Dilmun, home of the gods,
to Kur, the underworld for raping a young girl named Ninlil. Ninlil
followed him to the underworld where she bore his first child, the
moon god Sin. After fathering three more underworld deities, Enlil
was allowed to return to Dilmun.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 114

— In Sumerian mythology, Ninlil, first called Sud, in Assyrian called
Mullitu, is the consort goddess of Enlil. She is the daughter of
Nammu and An. She lived in Dilmun with her family. Raped and ravaged by her (now-present) husband Enlil, she conceived a boy,
Nanna, the future moon god. As punishment Enlil was dispatched
to the underworld kingdom of Ereshkigal, where Ninlil joined him,
there giving birth to their son Nergal, god of death. After her death,
she became the goddess of the air, like Enlil.

The girl, however, was unwilling:
—The Lord speaks to her of intercourse. She is unwilling.
Enlil speaks to her of intercourse. She is unwilling.

The girl-goddess explained her refusal:
—My vagina is too little. It knows not how to copulate.
My lips are too small. They know not how to kiss.

On another tablet, an indication of a child-woman’s age is
given by a Sumerian refusing child marriage:
—I will not marry a wife who is only
Three years old as a donkey does.

Florence Rush, in her book The Best Kept Secret (1980)
cites these tablets as ‘examples’ that in her view throw ‘some
light’ on a fact which was later, in her view, well established in
the Talmud and the Bible: the marriage with female children
that, at least in some tribes, was followed by a full sexual relationship with the child.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 115

— Florence Rush, The Best Kept Secret: Sexual Abuse of Children (1980), pp. 16-17.

It may seem unusual, to say the least, to cite an ancient
myth that formed part of a religious saga, as an ‘example’ of
sexual abuse for that particular period and culture. I must put
a question mark here, while I concede that the book is otherwise well-researched and documented. I have never seen
in my life that mythology was taken as an example of social
reality in a specific country or culture. Should we then take
the story of Cain and Abel in the Bible as an ‘example’ for a
custom that says Jewish brothers generally murder one another?
Child Marriage
Rush continues to state that the Talmud permitted sexual
intercourse with a female child of the age of ‘three years and
one day.’ Since children were considered as the possession
of their father, the father’s permission was required for the
marriage. Without this permission, sex with the child was an
offense against the father as the child was considered his
property.
— The crime could be compensated by payment to the father or by
marrying the girl if so desired by the father (Id., 21). See also Dean/
Bruyn-Kops, The Crime and the Consequences of Rape (1982), 19,
who take reference to the Code of Hammurabi in ancient Babylon
(about 1750 B.C.) stating that ‘[r]ape was a crime, to be sure, but not

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 116

against the woman: only against the woman’s father or husband,
since it was his property that had been damaged.’

Intercourse with a child younger than three years and one
day had no legal consequences. (Id., 17)
If the girl had the Talmudic age and the father consented
to the marriage, the act of intercourse legally consummated
the marriage. In Rush’s view, this indicates that the Talmudic
age of consent of three years and one day is not, as other
researchers believe, a myth, but represented, at that time
and in that particular culture, a legally significant fact for marriage and intercourse with female children.
— Id. Even today, in some remote areas in Asia, children of nine or
ten years of age marry and have children at age thirteen or fourteen. Little girls are married to adult men if those men and the father agree for a sum of money to be paid by the future husband of
the girl. The girl is barely asked about her own feelings; she’s an
object in a deal between males.

Apart from the fact that even with a sense of humor an
open-minded modern researcher may doubt that at any time
in human history, adult men were choosing three-year old
girls for marriage, Rush misses out on citing scientific sources
for her view that contradicts the majority of the researchers
who say that this prescription was to be understood as a religious myth, not as a law of the country at that time.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 117

Whatever to say about Florence Rush’s conclusions as a
self-declared feminist activist, what strikes here is the relativity of morality at different times and in different cultures that
can also be seen in the fact that in Talmudic times, men were
criminally punished for homosexuality, but not for sex with
children, provided they were female. This was so because it
was magically believed that the seed or semen was containing the life force directly and not only in form of a matrix as
we believe it today. (Id., 20)
The Relativity of Morality
In fact, ‘spilling one’s seed on the ground’ was considered
a criminal act for a man wasting his semen.
— It is called the ‘Crime of Onan’ in the Bible, which coined the expression onanieren in German language, which means ‘to masturbate.’

The Biblical order to be fruitful and multiply was primarily
addressed to men. While present Occidental societies consider the child’s sexual virginity as the highest value to be legally protected, this was barely the case in ancient times.
While sex with children was illegal in a very limited range of
cases, male homosexuality was a capital crime. (Id.)
The consequences of male superiority over females and
sexual dominance are drastically formulated by Florence
Rush:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 118

—So, as long as a man placed his penis in a vaginal canal, pointed
his sperm in the right direction and did not indulge in any spermal
extravagances, intercourse with a child or barred woman was permitted. (Id.)

As a result, ‘a male who rejected women also rejected his
obligation to marry, multiply and perpetuate the patriarchal
family … had to be stopped.’ (Id., 27)
Florence Rush considers this old belief as the true reason
for our society’s mistrust of male intergenerational tenderness and sexuality, and the stigma on homosexuality inherent
in Western civilization, especially where this stigma comes
from fundamentalist Christian or Islamic circles, or religious
organizations. Indeed, her argument is difficult to refute and
bears convincing power.
Generally, it is puzzling to see to what extent Occidental
societies have adopted, together with their Christian, oldtestamentary tradition, these ancient moral standards. Criminal laws against homosexuality were and are mostly directed
against male homosexuality, with as an exception to this rule
only the former legislation of Austria and the Netherlands.
Lesbianism, by contrast, was much more easily tolerated.
It is on the same line that many people still find it disgusting
to see or to imagine two adult males dancing, caressing or
kissing each other, whereas the same behavior among

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 119

women would not even attract their attention or at most provoke a smile or a funny or obscene remark.
To repeat it, while our present modern societies consider
the child’s sexual virginity as the highest value to be legally
protected, this was not at all the case in ancient times. Besides the unlimited possibility of consensual sex between
children and adults, even violent sexual assaults, such as the
rape of boys under the age of nine years and of girls under
the age of three years and one day by male adults was no
crime. (Id., 28) Instead, male homosexuality was a capital
crime. This shows the relativity of social and moral standards
in a given society. In fact, it is the economic and political
setup of a given culture that makes for the rules. Not what
churches say is really pertinent, but what the social economy
says.
— See, for example, Wilhelm Reich, The Invasion of Compulsory
Sex-Morality (1971) and Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality,
Vol. I : The Will to Knowledge (1976/1998).

The Roman Games
From the foregoing follows that sex with female children
wasn’t unusual within the Hebrew culture. Regarding the ancient Roman culture, it is quite common knowledge today
that, in addition, boylove was practiced, although in the literature the focus is more on the violent and exploitative
forms of pederasty. Even the custom of public child assault

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 120

and rape is reported. R.E.L. Masters (1962) described some
of these practices that to today’s readers must appear horrifying.
After all, it was Caesar himself who initiated the idea of
‘bread and games’ for the masses and he was strangely successful with this macabre strategy of mass manipulation.
What pleases the masses more than what is atrociously violent, grotesque, hideous, vulgar, obscene and inhuman?
Later, the Church has taken up Caesar’s tactics and done
the same against female children they labeled as witches and
that were publicly raped, tortured and killed in the most horrible ways. And, regarding our own pretendedly enlightened
times, only to watch one of those modern American killer or
horror movies to be convinced that the tradition of celebrating sadistic violence instead of love and pleasure has survived into our times.
Here is what R.E.L. Masters, in his study Forbidden Sexual
Behavior and Morality (1962), reports about the Roman
Games regarding children:
—For the Roman Games, male animals of all sorts were trained from
the earliest possible age to copulate with and even forcibly ravish
girls and women. Bulls, giraffes, leopards, cheetahs, wild boars, zebras, stallions, jack-asses, huge dogs, various kinds of apes, and
other animals were taught – not without considerable effort on the
part of their trainers – to perform these functions. Some of the more

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 121

adaptable and enthusiastic ones were further tutored to commit
sodomy on human males and females. (Id., 14-15)

Especially popular at the Games were representations of
scenes from the sexual lives of the gods, with a favorite one
being Pasiphae and the Bull. Needless to say that the bulls,
stallions and giraffes, and some of the other larger animals,
inflicted terrible suffering, sometimes even death, on their
victims, who were often virgins and not infrequently small
children.
—One appreciatively received spectacle is said to have been
staged at which a hundred tiny blond girls were raped simultaneously by a horde of baboons, Chimpanzees and ferocious mandrills,
made drunk by wine and inflamed by the odor of females of their
kind, were loosed upon girls whose genitals had been drenched
with the urine of female chimps and mandrills. On occasion, as a
stirring climax to all of this, the beasts were permitted to kill and, if
they wished, devour their human victims after assaulting them sexually. Such acts invariably brought down the house of the Games, and
were even more popular than the often staged but never wearied-of
human sex orgies. (Id.)

Child Prostitution
Child prostitution was common during Antiquity and
later. As a matter of fact, child prostitution formed part of
almost all Oriental and Occidental societies until our days.
In ancient times, child prostitution involving girls of premenstrual age was carried on as a religious practice in Egypt

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 122

and it served to be a part of sexual life in Persia, Greece and
Rome. Boylove or pederasty was not only practiced in ancient Greece and Rome, but represented an even more
widespread and sophisticated tradition in Egypt and Persia.
— See, for example, the historical novel The Persian Boy (1972), by
Mary Renault.

While in all these cultures boy prostitution was common,
it has to be seen that, in ancient Greece, the situation of
slave boys was different from that of noble boys. Whereas
typically slave boys served in boy prostitution, the love for
noble boys had a different, more idealistic educational connotation.
— See, for example, John Addington Symonds, A Problem in Greek
Ethics (1971), K. J. Dover, Greek Homosexuality (1997) and Hans
Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece (1995).

Regarding child prostitution in ancient Rome, R.E.L. Masters notes:
—In Rome, usually without religious or other pretensions, child
prostitution flourished on a grand scale, with even babies in cradles
being introduced into the brothels, there to stimulate the voluptuaries and sadists with their wailings as their tiny bodies were violated.
The emperor Domitian, who put an end to this outrageous practice,
has been highly and rightly praised for so doing. These cradled babies apart, both young girls and young boys were a standard feature of the Roman brothel where the services required of them included not just coitus, sodomy and fellatio, but the entire gamut of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 123

perversions as the lascivious and debauched Roman imagination,
inventive in this respect, could conceive it. (Id., 381)

Boylove and Pederasty
Among the Greek aristocracy of that time, philosophy
tried to unify sensual and spiritual pleasure in boylove. It may
be true that the Greek adopted pederasty from Persia or
Egypt, or that it had begun in Crete, but the cultural status,
refinement and spiritual goal of this practice was a typical
and unique attribute of the Greek genius.
— The notion pederasty or paiderastaia (Greek) has to be distinguished from pedophilia. Whereas the latter is generally connoted
with the sexual love for children of both sexes, the former generally
describes love and sexual desire for boys, pais, in Greek, meaning
boy and erastes meaning lover. The perhaps best treatise on the
subject of pederasty or boylove is Dr. Edward Brongersma’s Loving
Boys (1987) as it represents a unique compilation of private correspondence in which both love boys and boylovers speak openly
about their love relations. The book was said by critics to be not
‘rational enough’ to be a scientific study in that it was ‘merely anecdotical.’ However, we have to see that every research is biased as
the researcher is inevitably entangled with the object of observation, a fact that now is proven incontestably by quantum physics. In
fact, like itself is anecdotical!

Parker Rossman, in his study Sexual Experiences between
Men and Boys (1976), remarks:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 124

—The Persians said that pederasty had begun in Crete, which was
one of the first civilizations with the wealth and leisure to enjoy such
tastes. (…) In Crete it was the custom for a man to kidnap a boy he
liked, taking him home for a two-month honeymoon after which the
boy was rewarded by a gift or armor. (…) In ancient Persia, for example, as in much of Asia at the beginning of history, pederasty became an exploited vice, typical of exploited sexual cultures. Captive
boys were castrated, depilated, perfumed, and abused in a sensuous pederasty with sought exotic pleasures, with erotic sensations
different from ordinary coitus. Pederasty became a cultivated taste
of heterosexual men who despised gay-homosexuals, for they were
not seeking love, but play and diversion. (Id., 95-96)

Symonds remarks that the Greek ascribed the origin of
paiderastaia to Crete; it was here that the legend of Zeus
and Ganymede was localized.
— John Addington Symonds, A Problem in Greek Ethics (1971), 4.

Love relations between noble boys and men were part of
a culture in which ingenious works of art originated. For
slaves, pederasty was forbidden. Greek noble boys were
educated with values like honor, virtue (virtus), dignity, generosity and knowledge of science and art.
— John Addington Symonds, A Problem in Greek Ethics (1971), K. J.
Dover, Greek Homosexuality (1997).

Thorkil Vanguard writes in Phallós: A Symbol and its History in the Male World (2001):

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 125

—Pederasty served the highest goal—education (paideia). Erós was
the medium of paideia, uniting tutor and pupil. The boy submitted
and let himself be taken into the possession of the man. (Id., 87)

John Addington Symonds put it in the following terms:
—In treating of this unique product of their civilization I shall use the
terms Greek Love, understanding thereby the passionate and enthusiastic attachment subsisting between man and youth, recognized by society and protected by opinion, which, though it was not
free of sensuality, did not degenerate into mere licentiousness. (Id.,
8)
The treatment of paiderastaia upon the Attic stage requires separate considerations. Nothing proves the popular acceptance and
national approval of Greek love more forcibly to modern minds than
the fact that tragedians like Aeschylus and Sophocles made it the
subject of their dramas. (Id. 27)

The sensual, aesthetic dimension of man-boy love has
been expressed poetically by most Greek poets and philosophers, among them Plato, Solon, Plutarch and Anacreon.
—See, for example, Plato, Symposium, Parmenides, Lysis, Plutarch,
The Dialogue on Love, The Life of Lycurgus, The Life of Solon,
Xenophon, Anabasis.

Boys were instructed in both spiritual matters and corporal exercises while they lived in so-called gymnasia. These
schools were often places for the first sexual contacts among
the boys which were easily initiated by the traditional mutual
oiling of the naked bodies after the exercises. Not unusual

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 126

were sexual relations between the boys and their teachers or
other adult men visiting these schools because the official
prohibition for adult men to enter these places was hardly
observed.
— As reported by Plato in his Lysis. See: Plato, Complete Works
(1997).

The rape of noble boys was legally prohibited and prosecuted. However, attempts to legally restrict boy prostitution
in Athens were rather ineffective.
This picture is rather unique in written history; it was perhaps the only time and place in any of the various dominator
cultures of the Occident where male children and adolescents were part of a sexually tolerant environment in which
they could openly practice peer and intergenerational love
and sex without being persecuted for their love.
It may be true that male adults seduced boys by means of
promises and gifts, but it has to be seen that in any relationship between a man and a free boy, the adult assumed certain obligations toward the boy, obligations that were quite
effectively stipulated by a non-written ethical code. This
code included legal remedies for the boys who had been
mistreated by their lover-teachers.
An important fact to consider is the meaning of the term
‘homosexuality’ in this context. It would be a fundamental

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 127

error to suppose that Greek or Roman boylovers were homosexual in the modern sense of the word. This is so because
they did by no means despise women sexually, nor did they
have intercourse with adult men. In the contrary, the typical
Greek or Roman boylover was a man with undisturbed relationships to women, and a man who, while he could be enamored in love with a prepubescent or pubescent boy,
would not react in any sexual way regarding adult men.
It has to be seen that in this culture sexual relations with
women, on one hand, and with boys, on the other, were not
a matter of either-or. It is therefore not surprising that newer
research admits that a homosexual radical is present in all
men, just as it was in the time of the Greeks.
— Thorkil Vanguard, Phallós (2001) and Parker Rossman, Sexual Experiences between Men and Boys (1976).

With the Romans, who tried in many ways to imitate
Greek culture and lifestyle—without however reaching at the
Greeks’ sensitivity, aesthetics, sense of beauty and finesse—
pederasty took on a more vulgar image. Horsemen made
sexual use of their young grooms who were either noble
boys or slave boys.
— R. E. L. Masters, Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality (1962),
and Thorkil Vanguard, Phallós (2001).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 128

But even in Greece, when the culture was in decline, the
more negative and abrasive sexual customs prevailed over
the originally aesthetic and positive attitude toward natural
body pleasure. R.E.L. Masters writes:
—At the decline of the ancient Greek culture, which had been considerably weakened by the Peloponnesian war, the more negative
sides prevailed also in cultural matters. Boy prostitution involving
slave boys grew up enormously. But even boys of noble birth were
castrated by scrupulous slave merchants and were sold to Persia
where they served as eunuchs in the Harems. Besides the painful act
of castration – through which a number of boys bled to death – it
has to be seen that the effect of castration, contrary to common
belief, does not result in a diminution of the sexual drive. In the contrary, castrated people suffer all pains of sexual arousal which can
however by no means be satisfied. Thus, these boys, conceivably
aroused by the young girls and women (who behaved quite shamelessly in front of the eunuchs), suffered, after having endured the
physical torture, a continuous psychic agony which, not infrequently,
transformed their mutilated sexuality into open sadism. (Id., 401)

Whereas in ancient Greece before its decline, boylove
was the privilege of nobles, the Romans preferred the possibility of easy and on-the-spot sexual gratification rather than
love relations with a certain aesthetic beauty. Consequently,
love and sex relations with slave boys were common for Roman nobles and the picture of the Roman sexual life in this
matter comes closer to Persian standards. Examples of de-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 129

bauchery were given to the Roman people by their own emperors. R.E.L. Masters writes:
—Of Tiberius, Suetonius The Historian says that he was accustomed
to swim in a grotto where boys of tender years whom he called his
little fishes, were taught to move about between his thighs, darting
at his penis with tongue and mouth, and biting (or nibbling) at it
gently. With children not yet weaned, he would put his phallus to
their lips, as if it were a teat, encouraging them to suckle it. He also
delighted in witnessing sexual orgies with children as the participants. (Id.)

As for the Orient, Persia, for example, knew boy brothels
‘and pederasty in particular was glorified in song, verse, and
sermon, by both priests and poets.’ (Id., 400)
—In these brothels, called butchakhana, the male children were
taught to contract the anal sphincter so that they could grip and
milk the penis, as the girls of India were taught to do with their vaginas, and as some experts on marital relations are now encouraging American housewives to learn to do in the interest of greater
togetherness. Boys who could master this feat were able, of course,
to afford their customers more exquisite and varied pleasure, and
consequently commanded higher fees than those received by boys
not accomplished in providing such rare sensations. (Id.)

Also in the Far East (China, Japan) boy prostitution was
highly regarded. R.E.L. Masters, referring to A. Edwardes,
The Jewel of the Lotus, reports:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 130

—In China, boys as young as four years of age were tutored in the
fine art of passive pederasty, and in Japan the boy brothels were
superintended by Buddhist monks, whose customers were the worshipers at the temples. (Id., 400-401)

Phallic Aggression
An important aspect in this context, and for this study in
general, is the phenomenon of phallic aggression. The following examples clarify that the notion describes a manifestation of human sexual behavior which has to be succinctly
distinguished from pleasurable and consenting forms of sexual love. Phallic aggression is just another expression for the
violent sexual assault. Phallic aggression or violent sexual assault is nowadays vividly discussed in the literature and the
media regarding sex with children. The bias in this discussion
is that it almost always focuses on the rare cases where children are the victims of either brutish, confused or highly
paranoid adults. To get more clarity about these issues, we
should clearly distinguish between the following two different ways in which human sexuality can manifest:
Variant One
The tender, sensuous, pleasurable, consenting love/sex
relationship and play among children or children/adults
where the child partners enjoy their part of the game and are
autonomous enough to control it to a point to stop it if they
experience discomfort;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 131

Variant Two
The aggressive-voluptuous or aggressive-sadistic sexual
assault that typically does not manifest as a shared pleasurable experience but where one partner, typically the older,
takes advantage of the younger so as to dominate the relationship to a point to perform penetration either by profiting
of the fear of the younger partner or, ultimately, by forcing
the sex act upon him or her so that on the part of the victim a
feeling of total disempowerment occurs besides greater or
lesser physical hurt (rape or rape-like assault).
In Variant Two, sexuality is used as a tool for satisfying
nonsexual urges, namely a power hangup, manifesting as a
desire to control and dominate another human.
Of course, in sexuality involved is always a certain form of
natural aggressiveness but this is not per se to be qualified
as violence. This is so because violence typically is not an expression of power, but a form of powerlessness that compensates for a power hangup. From this hangup result the
destructive consequences involved in violence, and not from
sexuality as such. Phallic aggression is violence because it is
deliberately destructive, targeting at subduing the sexual
mate and rendering him or her a victim, and not a partner.
— John Gunn, Violence (1973), p. 15.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 132

Thorkil Vanguard, in his study Phallós, examined phallic
aggression and concluded:
—We have to conclude, therefore, that different varieties of effect
derived from what we call aggression may be able to act as stimuli
of erection and genital activity in men – the triumphant pleasure of
subduing and humiliating another man, for instance. The aggressive
element, void of all eroticism, is precisely what is operating in such
scenes of collective violence as that described in the biblical tale of
Sodom… (Thorkil Vanguard, Phallós (2001), p. 102.)

The Bible story of The Levite and The Concubine (Judges
19:11-30) provides a twofold example of such sexual violence. The story tells about a Levite and his concubine traveling and given hospitality by an old man for the night. After
the host answered a loud banging at the door, he was confronted with a gang of men demanding the guest to be
handed over to them for rape. The host refused and reprimanded the men because of the hospitality code, but the
gang insisted. Thus, the host offered his own virgin daughter
and the guest’s concubine: ‘Ravish them and do with them
what seems good to you; but against this man do not do
such vile a thing.’ The gang preferred the concubine which
had been cast out to them by her own lover: ‘The gang beat
and raped her all night and left her on the doorstep where
the guest found her dying the next morning.’
This story tells us about the attempted rape of a man and
the completed gang rape and murder of his concubine. We

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 133

have to wonder why the gang originally asked for the man as
a sexual victim?
It would be a grave misunderstanding to take this story as
an example of homosexuality in the Bible. Orthodox Christians interpreted the story in this way and thus covered up
the important message of the tale. For everybody familiar
with rape research and the phenomenon of phallic aggression of men against men, this story is but one example of
many that show that phallic aggression exists.
Another example is the rape of prisoners by their fellow
prisoners in badly handled prisons. Typically this kind of phallic aggression is let out and directed against prisoners who
are convicted for sexual crimes. It is a matter of common
knowledge that pedophiles are quite regularly victims of
rape and violent assault, especially in British and American
prisons, and this even under the eyes and sometimes with
the open collaboration of the prison staff.
— A. G. Davis, Sexual Assaults in the Philadelphia Prison System
and Sheriff’s Van, Trans-Action 6, pp. 2-8, 1968, A.M. Scarro (Ed.),
Male Rape (1982), Floyd Salas, Tattoo the Wicked Cross (1967).
These sources report the decision of the Supreme Court of Sweden
refusing to extradite a prisoner to the USA. This prisoner, a Kentucky physician who was charged with child molestation because he
had fondled some boy patients’ penises, was not delivered to his
home country with the argument of inhuman conditions in American
prisons.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 134

Other examples of male aggression in the form of forced
sex are the custom that ranged for a long time in the Turkish
army where it was common for the officers to force sodomitic
acts upon their subordinate soldiers. Male rape has quite little to do with either eroticism, homosexuality or even with
sexuality as such. It is forced-upon aggression that uses sex
as a tool for male domination in order to inflict pain and humiliation, using the phallus-penis as a weapon.
— Thorkil Vanguard, Phallós (2001), p. 107.

The common expression sodomy, as a devaluating synonym for anal intercourse, has its historical root in the abovementioned Sodom story and shows the negative and actually
completely misguided view Christianity has built into any
form of non-marital sexuality.
Frequently, in cases of consenting pedophilia, when anal
intercourse was part of the love game between an adult and
his child mate, the whole vocabulary of that Sodom story is
used by criminal justice to debase this single part of the love
relation denouncing the whole of it as a forced act of brutal
and aberrant sexual violence resulting in defining the
younger mate as a per se victim. This is in most cases done
without ever asking the question if the boy or girl had consented to passive pederasty, deriving pleasure from it, or
given anal fulfillment to the adult mate as a selfless gift without deriving pleasure from it. Both is namely possible and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 135

has to be evaluated on a case to case basis, and not as a
general opinion.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 136

Conclusion
The conclusion to draw from the present material is that
the common denominator for phallic aggression and other
forms of destructive aggression is violence, and not sexuality.
In turn, as a next result of this research, we can say that it is
irrelevant if the mate in the love game was an adult or a
child, for the definition of violence in a sexual relationship is
not dependent on the age of the partners. Sexual violence is
primarily a release of aggressive tension, an urge to exert
power, to subdue, to humiliate and emasculate the victim.
The baboon sitting on guard with an erect penis demonstrates the prototypical aggressive erection, and when he
mounts a surrendering foe and effects anal penetration this
is seen to be an act of exerting control.
Clinical experience with human males shows that there is
a difference in feeling between the aggressive orgiastic
pleasure and that which is the outcome of a synthesis of love
with a tempered aggression.
It is not surprising, then, that the gang, in the Sodom
story, prefers the guest’s concubine over the host’s virgin
daughter because magically the concubine serves as a surrogate for the man, as a power-object to be destroyed that
belongs to the man who is hated because he’s a stranger or
belongs to an out-group that was despised by the local ingroup.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 137

This is the second, not less important, aspect of the story.
The concubine is given as a substitute for the man; she has
been cast out to them in order to protect the male guest. It
was even her lover himself who had cast her out to the gang
while the host had offered his own virgin daughter. This
shows that in the Jewish-Hebrew value system of the time,
the male gender was considered as higher and even holier
than the female gender; the ravishing and murder of the
man’s concubine was relevant only insofar as she represented
the man’s possession and thus her rape and murder was legally a property offense against the man. Only a terminological turn to say that actually females, in our patriarchal tradition, were not considered as humans at all or, as feminists
put it, the rape of the woman or the rape of a female child
were irrelevant for the Bible.
— See Marie M. Fortune, Sexual Violence (1994), 49-50.

This evidence is so important because the Christian tradition until our days is built upon this ancient, strange and
even aberrant ‘moral’ system. This is not just an assumption,
but it can be seen reflected in the most recent antipedophile laws among the whole of the Anglo-Saxon world.
In ancient times, and in a wide range of present occidental societies’ predecessors, children played their part in many
adults’ sexual wishes and practices. Including the more idealistic, noble and aesthetically attractive pederastic relation-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 138

ships in ancient Greek nobility, children were exposed to all
kinds of sexual approaches and customs from consenting sex
to orgies, banquets, as emperor’s sweeties, until extremely
violent and sadistic customs such as the single or group rape
of small girls by adult men or animals, and even the offer of
cradled babies to customers in some Roman brothels.
Logically, the reality of those acts of sexual violence cannot defend us from considering that in secret, just as today,
consenting sex between adults and children was practiced
on a large scale. Possibly it is just the fact that such relationships were taken for granted at those times that historians
did not see any need or interest in reporting them. This is
unfortunately an argument that, while important, was not
considered by psychohistorians, nor by socially conscious
psychologists. As brilliant as I consider their research, and as
valuable as it is, I regret that this point was until today not
further elucidated in serious scientific research.
As a matter of fact, we have to consider a certain bias in
human psychology, if we like it or not: it is always the spectacular or somewhat unusual, the bizarre side of events which
attracts historical, psychological or anthropological interest,
and not things that are going smoothly and that everybody
finds socially adequate, even if they may be unusual. This
may be the reason for the striking fact that, whereas violent
child abuse has been made out by some concerned histori-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 139

ans, the dimensions of nonviolent and consenting pedophilia
in ancient times have never been examined, if they have not
been totally overlooked. Hence, the present material cannot
be taken as evidence to refute my assumption that such nonviolent and consenting forms of adult-child erotic love have
existed over the whole course of human history.
Regarding the other side of child abuse, physical abuse,
the battery of children as a form of strict education, ancient
patriarchy provides a picture of extreme violence in that the
father as the beholder of the patria potestas was legally
permitted to not only chastise his wife and children for even
minor offenses against the harsh moral code, but could at
will beat them to death, abandon them, sell them into slavery or just slaughter them off.
Christianity
For the understanding of Christianity it is important to
consider the fact that this religion came up during a highly
violent and decadent phase of the Roman Empire where
sexual customs had taken extreme, violent and exploitative
forms. The early Christian gnostics, in their idealistic struggle
for a better world, threw out the baby with the bathwater in
directing their zeal not just against extreme forms of sexploitation and violence, but against body pleasure as such.
— R. E. L. Masters, Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality (1962).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 140

The Church introduced the death penalty for the pederast or the homosexual having practiced sodomy. While child
protection was originally propagated by the Church, canon
law could not effectively prohibit child marriage and its practice continued, only that the age of consent was set to twelve
years of age while marriages with girls under that age were
not uncommon at the time.
— Florence Rush, The Best Kept Secret (1980), 31.

Church-Ordained Child Murder
Contrary to Hebrew law and customs, where a bride
could be legally acquired by contract, money or sexual intercourse, with the Christians only the fact of sexual intercourse
validated the marriage.
— Id. Until our days, canon law requires a marriage to be consummated by sexual intercourse in order to be valid. This demonstrates
well the originally sexuality-regulative character of marriage. It also
shows the act-centered and procreation-oriented character of
Church-institutionalized love, as it was taken over by the later
nation-states, ecclesiastically approved as marriage-sex or
marriage-rape.

In the 6th century, Pope Gregory decreed that any female
taken by a man in copulation belonged to him and his kindred.
—Id., with further references.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 141

With the separation of civil law from canon law in 13th
century England under the Statutes of Westminster, statutory
rape became established. It was not yet a felony, but only a
misdemeanor to rape a girl under the age of twelve.
—Id., 34-35.

Later, in 1576, statutory rape was established as a felony
when the raped girl was less than ten years old. (Id.)
Twelve years remained the age of consent for marriage
and the rape of a girl between ten and twelve was a misdemeanor. (Id.)
— Within the Jewish society, however, the age of consent was considerably lower, generally seven years. In the old Indian society, it
was seven years, too, while the law of Manu fixed the age of a girl to
marry at eight years, see Johann Jakob Bachofen’s Gesammelte
Werke, Vol. 2, Das Mutterrecht, Part I (1861/1948), p. 501.

Especially noteworthy in this context is the witchhunt
phenomenon. Witches were in most cases not old, lame,
bleary-eyed, foul and full of wrinkles as some fairy tales make
us believe, but young girls and women who were beautiful
and sexually attractive, and perhaps also sexually experienced; the witchhunts were a common way for the Church to
get rid of juvenile sex offenders as they would be called today.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 142

—Id. See also E. William Monter, Witchcraft in France and Switzerland (1976), Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1976, and
Sigmund von Riezler, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse in Bayern
(1983).

What was this witchcraft paranoia all about? As a matter
of social psychology, there is no doubt that all what is outside the narrow frontiers of socially approved sexual behavior
provokes fear and often disgust; on the other hand it bears
an almost mystical attraction. Thus, since repulsion and attraction contradict each other, the sex-repression paradigm
invariably creates a schizoid psychic setup in most of the
members of a given sexually repressive culture. As a result, in
a culture that explains the schizoid split in terms of god and
devil, all sex-related phenomena are by definition related to
the devil. Hence, any kind of sexual relation outside marriage
and procreation was considered as ‘copulation with the
devil.’ (Id.) Florence Rush lucidly remarks:
—The witch hunt took place in Europe from the fifteenth to the
eighteenth centuries. In 1484 Pope Innocent VIII issued a papal bull
empowering the Inquisition (the judicial arm of the church) to find,
imprison, examine, torture and execute witches. To facilitate the
process, the Dominican friars Heinrich Kramer and James Spengler
compiled the Malleus Maleficarum, a document which became the
guideline for witch hunting and, dog-eared, appeared upon the
bench of every Inquisitional court. This guideline labeled a woman
guilty of witchcraft when she merely practices her traditional role. As
midwife she was said to offer newborn babies to the devil, as abor-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 143

tionist she slew infants in their mother’s wombs and, because of her
knowledge of vegetation and birth control, she was said to blast the
produce of the earth and prevent wives from conceiving. Coming
from a long line of pagan mothers and grandmothers, the document declared, females did not shrink from the foulest abominations and filthiest excesses, and copulated with the devil. (Id., 37)

Difficult to say what really is the truth here. Florence Rush
cites Jean Bodin, a sixteenth-century law professor and Carmelite monk and Henri Bouget, a lawyer of that time, to corroborate her thesis that witchcraft was entirely a psychological blackout for hiding widespread sexual abuse of children:
—Jean Bodin, a sixteenth-century law professor and Carmelite
monk, in order to root out this heresy established that the usual legal measures were not applicable. Little girls at age six (legal age
for sexual consent in France) were of an age to copulate with the
devil, and therefore old enough to stand trial. Bodin found burning
by fire too swift (half an hour from beginning to end) and preferred
the extended agony of cautery by a hot iron for both children and
adults. Henri Bouget, a prominent lawyer of the same century and
nationality, reasoned that once in Satan’s clutches, the reform of
children under twelve was impossible. He systematically tortured
eight-year old Loyse Mailley until she named accomplices and thus
created the basis for a mass witch hunt. Nicholas Remy, demonologist and Inquisitor, found no lack of examples to prove that their
age does not restrain children from committing deeds of witchcraft.
In England, Jennie Device, age eight, after incriminating her
mother, burned with her as a witch. In the same country Mary Hicks,
age nine, and her mother Elizabeth, were burned at the stake. In

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 144

America, five-year old Sara Good was found capable of casting an
eye and was imprisoned in chains with her mother. In Luther’s Germany, in 1628, Anna Rausch, age twelve, Sybille Lutz, eleven, and
little Murchin, eight and a half, all confessed to having had sexual
relations with the incubus (male demon). Sybille and Anna were put
to death, but Murchin and some other children were remanded to
their fathers for reformation. In a letter to an unidentified friend in
1624, the chancellor to the Prince-Bishop of Würtzburg stated that
there have been 300 children of three and four who are said to have
intercourse with the devil. I have seen children of seven put to
death. In Mora, Sweden, in 1669, authorities claimed that the devil
had hundred of children in his power; fifteen were burned and
thirty-six between nine and fifteen were condemned to be scourged
at the church door weekly for a year. In the Hague at the close of
the seventeenth century, eight youths under age fifteen and one girl
age twelve confessed to fornication with the devil and died at the
stake. (Id., 38-39)

Parapsychology attributed witchcraft to paranormal phenomena and ‘copulation with the devil’ as a possession phenomenon. I wonder if perhaps both theories could be true?
There is abundant historical evidence, but what most shocks
about it is that the Church, instead of being out to finding
the truth, invariably blamed, cruelly tortured or even killed
the victims, and this even if the girls were so young that they
could not suffer a man, for they were considered to being
able to accommodate the devil:
—Although Catharina Latomia of Marche at Haracourt, February
1587, was not yet of an age to suffer a man, he [the devil] twice

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 145

raped her in prison being moved with hatred for her because he
saw that she intended to confess the crime; and she very nearly
died of the injuries she received from that coitus. (Id., 39-40)

Florence Rush attributes the belief in evil spirits to a form
of psychological blackout, and accordingly considers it to be
a cultural pretext for child rape by forwarding a supernatural
cause. While this rationalizing explanation may bear some
truth, I think it would be reductionist to generally explain the
witchcraft phenomenon as a mere fact of societal blinding
out of child rape. We have to realize that it is recognized in
parapsychology that a great number of so-called witches had
actual paranormal capacities and that it was the Church’s
spiritual monopoly that made the Inquisition persecute people who possessed psychic or spiritual powers that the
Church claimed to hold as the exclusive spiritual power
holder.
It is interesting to know, in this context, that Sigmund
Freud, in his study about the psychoanalytic explanation of
witchcraft, writes that the witch’s broomstick symbolizes the
great god penis. Historically, attraction for young virgins was
a normal sexual response for an adult male in both the Occident and the Orient in pre-Christian times. A little girl was
educated accordingly: she had to develop early awareness of
her erotic, pleasing and enchanting capacities.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 146

The threat that the Church as an organization was facing
was spiritual freedom in the form of sexual freedom: the fact
that children could find out about their own truth, individually, and not as part of a herd, and who could thus dare to
question the doctrinaire absolutism of the Church was considered a heresy. And it is obvious that children were able to
revolt and express that revolt verbally and by deed. For we
must not forget that in the Middle-Ages and still during the
Renaissance a boy of fourteen was ready for marriage, a fully
grown man who already as an apprentice, from age ten and
earlier was out of the house and on the street, wandering
from one master to the other in order to learn his métier. And
girls, whereas puberty started much later than today, were
being brides at age seven or eight, and if they were withheld
from consuming intercourse with their future husbands, it
was only for securing the final bond, and avoiding the
youngster to run away with another virgin before marriage.
And marriage would occur between twelve and fourteen, exactly the age range most of these witches were.
Child Protection?
It thus can be questioned if the Church really was applying a child protection paradigm. It seems to me that the
Church never really defended children. Fact is that the
Church had a horror of self-thinkers; and when those selfthinkers were children, that was even more threatening; it is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 147

well-known that a child that really has found out about life
will not easily sign up for any dogmatic and life-denying guru
or sense-giver, be it a Church, a sect, a savior or ‘total consumption’ as today’s postmodern credo. The Christian
stigma on human sexuality made intergenerational love a
crime to be cruelly and mercilessly prosecuted by the Inquisition.
To put it in shorter terms, what was feared in sex by the
Church was not sex itself, but the knowledge it conveys. Sexual beings are not easy to brainwash into blind obedience
and religious fanaticism.
The Demonization of Intergenerational Love
It was long before modern sex laws when every form of
intergenerational sex outside of marriage was equated with
rape; it was the Christian value system that is at the basis of
the demonization of child-adult sexual relations. Here is the
historical root of this perspective that later was constituted
legally as statutory rape. The Church’s child protection paradigm was problematic because it punished the victims.
Where rape occurred, the Church typically refused any form
of true care for the victim, regardless of her age, and besides
never questioned the cruel dogma of the patria potestas that
gave the father a license to all kind of child abuse, child torture and even parental child murder, as such violence against
children could always be justified with acting ‘for the best of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 148

the child’ within the institution of so-called corporal punishment or chastisement.
Also, regarding the Church’s stressing heterosexual intercourse intending at procreation as the only ‘natural’ form of
sexual behavior, it has been argued that the dichotomy
natural-unnatural with regard to sexuality opens the door to
discrimination by discarding out ‘sexually deviant’ behavior.
Homosexuality has long been considered as ‘unnatural’
and today most people in Western societies judge pedophilia in the same way. To engage in ‘unnatural sex’ is tantamount for most people with ‘being perverted.’
The truth is that normalcy simply does not exist in nature,
and thus what we face here is an ideological fake-argument,
so typical for totalitarian and fascist regimes, religious or political.
Let us not forget that throughout human history, human
beings have been prosecuted, tortured and killed for being
‘unnatural’ or ‘perverted.’
In Nazi Germany, even a whole branch of art, that today is
called modern art, was condemned and publicly destroyed
as ‘perverted art’ (entartete Kunst). Intolerance, it seems, begins with the use of dangerous terms such as ‘unnatural’—
and it ends with gas chambers.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 149

Conclusion
To conclude, historical evidence does not reveal that
there was a consciousness evolution from Antiquity to Christianity. It seems that, in the contrary, Christianity created
havoc in our collective psyche by planting in humans a
schizophrenic split between body and mind. As a result, the
suppression of natural body functions became the basis of
the most cruel forms of education as the Church practiced
them in their own religious schools. Religious terror in the
forms of Puritanism and Calvinism spread the view that the
child’s soul was bad from birth, affected by original sin and
that, for this reason, the child’s will had to be broken … or
society would be thrown into chaos. Clarke-Steward, a leading textbook on child development, retracing child education over the course of written history, writes about the period from 1500 until the mid-1700s:
—The goal of child rearing at this time was salvation. Puritans in
particular, because of their fundamentalist religion, considered it
necessary to stamp out sin in children. There was no choice but to
defeat the child, to bend the child’s initially satanic will by hard work
and constant, even severe, punishment. It was less important to
raise a healthy or happy child than a saved child. Happiness could
well be the mark of the devil, playfulness and cheeriness signs of
damnation.
— Alison Clarke-Stewart, S. Friedman & J. Koch, Child Development (1986), pp. 4-30, at 4.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 150

Stevi Jackson notes in her book Childhood and Sexuality
(1982):
—In the era of the demoniac child the idea of the original sin was
closely associated to sex; the child’s sexuality was an integral part of
the beast that had to be kept at bay. (Id., 46)

On the basis of its almost total depreciation of the human
potential—which, even under their own religion, is a blasphemy—this Christian religion systematically destroyed personal identity, inspired art and a truly humane social life until
these days. This is true just as much for socialist or communist regimes where only the institutions are different, but the
disdain of personality, originality and sexual pleasure are
amazingly similar.
The puritanism of Mao’s China was an especially surprising feature in Asia, after the most refined sexual traditions of
ancient China, and it proves my point that it is not the ridiculous ideas like child protection that make for sexual permissiveness or repression, but solely the political and social circumstances reigning at a certain time and place that establish sexual mores. The explanation is very simple in Mao’s
case. He was raised by Western protestants, and completely
brainwashed into Calvinism.
In the Western world, the old Puritan paradigm found
new roots in the modern business culture with its high stress
on competition, the out-beating of others, anti-hedonism

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 151

and appalling hypocrisy together with a general loss of personal identity and soul values. This is so because sexual experience and gain of personal identity are interconnected.
— See Hedy S. Porteous, Sex and Identity: Your Child’s Sexuality
(1972).

In other words, personal identity is to a large part due to
sexual experience, and a function of sexual activity. This is
one of the reasons why children in our present culture hardly
have an identity, and this is wanted by the system. Children
are kept from being sexual for no other reason than this; they
are better consumers when they have a lesser strong identity.
In still other words, it’s not morality that is the reason of the
present puritanical attitudes regarding child sexuality; it has
economic reasons. Today it’s the economic power holder
conglomerates that have an interest that the masses are
growing up as ‘nonsexual’ as possible; some centuries ago it
was the ecclesiastical dominant strata that had an interest in
suppressing sexual wishes. Back in the Middle-Ages and
within religious circles the condemnation of sexual behavior
of any kind had to lead to a loss of self-identity, of personality, of personal responsibility, and accordingly created a craving for protection, be it from heaven or an omnipotent
placeholder of it, the Church. It was this lack of personal
identity—well symbolized in the earth-escaping Gothic cathedral—which was the strongest basis not only for totalitar-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 152

ian churches and inquisitions but also, later on, the holocausts of the Nazis and all its copies around the world.
The themes and techniques of Middle-Age art are quite
stereotyped. Although Gothic cathedrals are extraordinary
architectural monuments, they do not exhibit any individual
or personal expression. In the contrary, the escape from human individuality and personality into an immaterial and uncognizable divine world that is symbolically expressed in the
violently tending upwards of the cathedral’s structures. Painting and sculpture are dominated by a never-ending cult of
suffering and sentimental standard themes in which characteristic traces of the individual artist are as good as annihilated. Collectivism and disdain of individuality in such a
pseudo-religious culture reflects the Pisces worldview which
dominated that era in the psychological development of
humanity.
What remained from humanity after the Christian terror is
but a torso, a mutilated Barbarian form of togetherness that
is neither social nor caring nor humane, but simply paranoid
and sick. Our today’s Western darth vader societies are the
direct result of it.
Victorian Era
The Victorian era is marked by the so-called virgin cult
which was not only a religious cult with respect to the Holy

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 153

Virgin, but at the same time, and frivolously so, a cult of deflowering virgins … as a pornographic group fantasy. R.E.L.
Masters remarks:
—The eighteenth century, one of the most erotically debauched
interludes in the history of the West, found children especially in
demand by voluptuaries and sadists and other perverts, and subjected them to all manner of sexual practices and atrocities.
— R.E.L. Masters, Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality (1962),
394-395.

The Virgin Cult
At no time before in history, virginity was so high in value
as under the Christians. The virgin was a fantasy product of
the strong condemnation of premarital sex, a fetish. Only a
virgin deserved to be desired by an honorable man. Canon
law required from the husband to consummate the marriage
by deflowering his virgin-wife in the wedding night. However,
the Church’s intention to channel human sexuality within the
tight borders of marriage failed, and the rape-the-virgin cult
became a mania in brothels and the newly established industrial areas as for example in Paris under Napoleon’s regime
or, later, the worker districts in London where young girls
abounded who wanted to earn extra money in selling their
virginity to gentlemen.
— J. X. Hood, Scientific Curiosities of Love, Sex and Marriage (1951)
and R. E. L. Masters, Forbidden Sexual Behavior and Morality (1962).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 154

R.E.L. Masters, citing J.X. Hood, writes:
—The mania of defloration of virgins naturally led to child prostitution and many brothels were established for the supply of young
girls. According to Ryan, in the year 1810, a brothel in Crispin Street,
Spitalfields (London) was started to prostitute girls of fourteen and
under. Another such brothel, run by David Romaine in Mile End, was
equally popular. (…) There were always from thirty to forty children
in his brothels! A correspondent of the French paper Figaro, reported that at midnight nearly 500 girls, 12 to 15 years of age, paraded between Piccadilly Circus and Waterloo Place, a distance not
more than 300 yards long. (Id., 385)

I already explained that the male sexual organ can be
used as a phallus, an instrument to hurt, to subdue and to
humiliate. Modern rape research explained that it is less the
pleasure-seeking sex drive as such that causes rape or rapelike assaults, but the need and desire of the rapist to overpower, to dominate and to hurt.
— See, for example, A. Nicholas Groth, Men Who Rape (1980), Jeffrey H. Goldstein, Aggression and Crimes of Violence (1975), Elizabeth Ward, Father-Daughter Rape (1985).

Rape is more an act of violence than a sexual act. R.E.L.
Masters describes this fact quite clearly regarding the Victorian virgin cult:
—To deflower a girl can be an assault, an act of hostility. In the pornographic literature of this period, emphasis is placed on the victim’s screams of pain and cries for help: the blood, the humiliation,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 155

the fear. Copulation with a girl in whom the sexual instincts are not
fully aroused is, as far as she is concerned, a frightening and cruel
attack. Thus, the sexual act, instead of being a source of pleasure
for the participants, has become equated with the degradation of
woman, a means for man to display his superiority and display of
contempt. (Id., 386, quoting Burgo Patridge, History of Orgies,
1960)

Child Prostitution
A typical outcome of Christianity was the double moral
standard in sexual matters. While children were put on an
artificial pedestal of purity and innocence, it was exactly this
imagined purity and innocence of the child that gave the
rapist his specific pleasure. In the meantime, the construct of
the sexual innocence of the child was being disproved by
abundant research.
— Alayne Yates, Sex Without Shame: Encouraging the Child’s
Healthy Sexual Development (1978), Stevi Jackson, Childhood and
Sexuality (1982), Wilhelm Reich, Children of the Future (1984),
Rothschild/Wolf, Children of the Counterculture (1976),, Johnston/
Deisher, Contemporary Communal Child Rearing, A First Analysis,
52 PEDIATRICS 319 (1973), Larry L. Constantine, Children & Sex:
New Findings, New Perspectives (1981) and Treasures of the Island:
Children in Alternative Families (1976) as well as Where are the
Kids? (1977) and Open Family: A Lifestyle for Kids and other People,
26 FAMILY COORDINATOR 113-130 (1977), Chelsea Cain, Moon
Unit Zappa, Wild Child (1999), Richard Farson, Birthrights, A Bill of
Rights for Children (1974), Calderone/Ramey, Talking With Your

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 156

Child About Sex (1982), Foster/Freed, A Bill of Rights for Children, 6
FAMILY LAW QUARTERLY 343 (1972), M. Cook, & K. Howells, (Eds.),
Adult Sexual Interest in Children (1980).

The 19th century brought no change in this respect. At
that time, male London city dwellers could easily have young
girls in the poor quarters of the town where extreme misery
was one of the reasons for widespread child prostitution.
One of the goals of this chapter is to show that the recent
public debate on child abuse and pedophilia is but a historical evergreen and that it is for the most part based on a totally distorted historical picture. Sexual repression and hypocrisy that were instituted by Christianity brought no
change for the better in the destiny of children, in the contrary. The man as the symbol for power and potency in this
quickly industrializing century dominated family, women and
children. To quote Florence Rush:
—This was also a time when man had triumphed over nature, and
since woman was nature and man her conqueror, what could better
assure man of mastery than his ability to inflict pain? Pain became
the essential ingredient for pleasurable sex. (…) And since the defloration of very young virgins can be excruciating, Victorians were
obsessed with a defloration mania. The screams of children became
indispensable, shrill torture was the essence of delight and many
gentlemen would not silence a single note. (Id., 60-61)

In an anonymous sex biography, Florence Rush found the
following description:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 157

—She trembled. I pressed her and gave a tremendous thrust, and
was on the right road … she screamed You hurt—get off—I won’t
let you!. She screeched loudly and struggled violently. I rose on my
knees and looked at the girl who lay quiet with her thighs wide
open and her hand over the face … I was delighted beyond measure, she bled more than any virgin of her age which I ever yet have
had I think. (Id., 61)

The number of minor girls—children aged 12 to 16—
from the poor and exploited working class prostituting
themselves from early age steadily increased. The merciless
steam engine of the Industrial Revolution made a few millionaires, while leaving thousands in poverty and misery.
— In the German, French and English literature, depressing descriptions of the life stories of worker class people can be found. To
quote only a few examples: Gerhard Hauptmann, Wanda; Emile
Zola, Germinal, Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist. Charlie Chaplin reports in his autobiography to have in his childhood been exposed
to cruel beatings in a London boarding school, see Charles Chaplin,
My Autobiography (1966), pp. 27 ff.

Sexual exploitation was the consequence of commercial
exploitation. The two forms of exploitation only differ by the
fact that, whereas the commercial exploitation of the working
class was an officially known and accepted phenomenon, its
sexual counterpart flourished in the underground. And this
underground had enormous dimensions. Out of two thousand six hundred girls arrested in Paris for secret practice of
prostitution, one thousand five hundred were minors.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 158

— Florence Rush, The Best Kept Secret (1980), 63, with further references.

And this was certainly only the peak of the iceberg. Another study found that fifty-eight percent of the unregistered
prostitutes in Vienna were minors. (Id.)
In Paris, during the first part of the century, half the reported prostitutes were minors, some no more than age ten.
(Id.)
In the United States, sexual exploitation of slaves and the
trade of young Chinese girls are reported. (Id.)
Child prostitution and child trade increased to considerable dimensions, also with regard to the financial volume this
business was beginning to take. Florence Rush reports:
—Sex merchants moved from local, national, to international markets. England, Germany, France, Scandinavia and East European
countries engaged in a lively trade, but routes also crossed continents. Malay Street in Singapore, the Babylon of the East housed
Japanese, Chinese, Austrian, French and German preteen and
teenagers in their brothels. American children were found in Hong
Kong, Siam and Calcutta. School-aged English girls were transported through the United States to Buenos Aires. German preadolescents and adolescents were sent to Argentina and Uruguay,
while others moved overland to Prussia, Poland and Russia. This
extensive transportation of bodies could never have operated without official sanction and protection. The police and higher officials
who took bribes never feared recrimination. Why should they? Even

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 159

the King of Belgium increased his annual income by personally trading in English girls. (Id., 64)

Modern Times
The 20th century was unique in that it showed more public
concern than ever before in history for the welfare of the
child. By the same token, the child protection idea became
the predominant paradigm evaluating childhood in Western
industrialized societies.
As we have seen, this ‘protection thinking’ already came
up earlier in history, under the Christian era; but the consciousness, systematic evaluation and practical realization of
a protective environment for children is a typical twentieth
century ideal.
In the philosophical world of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the
idea also has come up long before it became a widespread
social paradigm.
The Sadism of Protection
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s educational novel Emile depicts
an apparently modern educational concept which comes
over as rational and empirical. However, Rousseau’s childcenteredness and rationality is based upon the total control
of the child and uses open or hidden manipulation to direct
the child. This manipulation, this is the paradox, is not rational, but totally emotional.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 160

For the anecdote, I believe it is not unimportant to know
that Rousseau himself abandoned his wife and five children,
before writing Emile. One must wonder about such a father
who then comes up with becoming an authority on childrearing.
The sadistic overtones of the child’s instructor cannot be
overlooked. Thus, the great French philosopher, perhaps
against his intention, has actually led child protection ad absurdum. René Schérer brilliantly unveiled this fact in his study
Émile perverti ou des rapports entre l’éducation et la sexualité (1974/2006) showing with stunning conclusiveness that
Rousseau made no exception to the rule that every effort for
educating the young comes from the pedophilic or pederastic part of our loving attraction to children. However, to the
same extent that this erotic attraction is positive and constructive when it is conscious and integrated, it can become
destructive and violent once it is repressed. This has already
been evidenced by Freud as a general rule of our emotional
setup. Furthermore, Freud’s research made clear that sublimation of erotic attraction is only possible in the case it is
recognized, accepted and rendered conscious.
Many educators, still today, suffer from a deep knowledge gap and emotional immaturity as to their repressed
pedophilic desires that, as a result, regress into sadistic, violent and often uncontrollable urges to subdue, control and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 161

disempower the child. It seems that the modern trend for a
total protection of the child against real life, outside a roseblue plastic ersatz world, is not wholly based upon rational
motives; in fact, fear and bewilderment continue to surround
all topics that deal with the real child, their real needs, emotions, and their real sexuality.
Research on child trauma showed that children who experience sexual relations with adults show less evidence of
fear, anxiety, guilt or psychic trauma than might be expected
and ‘[t]hat there was evidence that the child derived some
emotional satisfaction from the experience.’
In other studies, all thinkable reasons of child trauma after
sex encounters with adults were scrutinized, and one of the
most interesting findings was that in a multiple regression
analysis, the use of force in the incident was the best predictor of victim trauma.
— See Lauretta Bender Lauretta & Abram Blau, The Reaction of
Children to Sexual Relations with Adults, American J. Orthopsychiatry 7 (1937), 500-518.

Not Sex, But Violence Causes Trauma
From this research it became evident that it is notably not
the sexual activity that causes trauma. Since some kind of
force, coercion or seduction, physical or psychic is reported
in almost all child rape cases, the occurrence of child trauma

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 162

in those cases is to be predicted. The evidence available
does not support the often-voiced misconception that also
in cases where no force was used and the child freely consented to the sexual activity with the adult, child trauma
would result.
— See Kevin Howells, Adult Sexual Interest in Children: Considerations Relevant to Theories of Aetiology, in: Cook, M. and Howells, K.
(eds.), Adult Sexual Interest in Children (1980).

In the earlier sub-chapter regarding Christianity, I tried to
show that the present abuse hysteria is in large part due to
the fact that people under the spell of the Christian dogma
typically confuse sex with violence or even think sex was per
se a form of violence. We have seen that this phenomenon
has historical and psychological roots in our violent patriarchal Babylonian past that despite constant lip service to the
contrary perpetuated and institutionalized violence against
children by canon law and subsequent state law.
— Babylon was a thriving, highly civilized city in Mesopotamia, the
ruins of which are situated not far from Baghdad, Iraq. Babylon is
reported by historians as having been one of the most civilized and
sophisticated towns in the ancient world. It also was the holy city of
Babylon from around 2300 BC, and the seat of the Neo-Babylonian
Empire from 612 BC. In the Old Testament, the name appears as
Babel, interpreted by Genesis 11:9 to mean confusion and it is remembered because of its Tower of Babel. God, observing the unity
of humanity in the construction, resolved to destroy the tower and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 163

confuse the previously uniform language of humanity, thereby preventing any such future efforts. The Hanging Gardens of Babylon
are one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

Not Just Freaks Love Children Erotically
Next to the current mainstream paradigm, a new paradigm is forming from about the second half of the 20th century that considers nonviolent and consenting sexual relations between children and adults as a category distinct from
criminal delinquency and that, for this reason, is required to
receive a special and different legal consideration. An increasing number of researchers on the subject now favor a
decriminalization of consenting sex relations for all age
groups. Sigmund Freud once said ‘wherever I go, a poet was
there before me.’ In fact, what we can say today is that most
myths about pedophilia have been disproved by recent
cutting-edge research. As always, our poets knew the truth
long before our scientists did.
The erotic love for children, boys or girls, can be made
out in a large part of our great classic and romantic literature,
to cite only Goethe’s Erlkönig, Thomas Mann’s story Death in
Venice, the writings of Paul Goodman, of André Gide or the
Japanese poet Yukio Mishima, to mention only these few examples from a long list.
During the liberalism of the 1960s and 1970s, not only
writers, but also university professors, politicians, famous ac-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 164

tors and singers and upper class people openly confessed
their pedophilic or pederastic desires or were even involved
in public scandals because of their love. In 1984, the French
magazine Le Crapouillot devoted an entire issue to the subject of pedophilia giving voice to a number of famous French
scientists, artists and pedagogues who openly claimed their
right to be pedophile and to live their love without police
intervention.
There was even a sarcastic saying that well described the
resistance among French intellectuals against the first signs
of the coming witchhunts, Le tout Paris devant le juge which
can be translated as ‘Paris upper-class faces criminal trials.’
What distinguishes, and always distinguished French intellectuals is their courage to voice important issues in society
while their colleagues in other countries prefer to work on
those issues in silence.
Erotic Feelings for Children are Universal
We have already seen that child prostitution existed
throughout human history in both Oriental and Occidental
cultures. What most people do not know is the fact that the
usual client of boy as well as girl prostitutes is not what today
is called ‘a pedophile’ but the average heterosexual male
between ages twenty and sixty, most of them being between
thirty and forty years of age. In an informal investigation by
an advertisement in two nationally distributed American

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 165

erotic magazines, about twenty percent of the 705 forms returned expressed an unequivocal sexual interest in children
under the age of sixteen.
— Ann Wolbert Burgess, Child Pornography and Sex Rings (1984).

The responses were, for example, ‘as young as possible,’
‘10 years and up,’ ‘pre-teen,’ ‘6-12,’ etc. Almost 75% of the
respondents were between the ages of twenty and forty. (Id.)
There is further evidence that the potential client of child
prostitution is not only the pedophile or pederast as he is
described in most clinical studies.
— Ann Wolbert Burgess, Child Pornography and Sex Rings (1984)
and Shirley O’Brian, Child Pornography (1992).

If it is not yet obvious that at all times adults had sexual
interest in children, this fact is now corroborated by scientific
evidence.
— See Kenneth Plummer, Pedophilia: Constructing a Sociological
Baseline, in: Cook, M. and Howells, K. (Eds.), Adult Sexual Interest in
Children (1980), pp. 220 ff. and Kevin Howells, Adult Sexual Interest
in Children: Considerations Relevant to Theories of Aetiology in:
Cook, M. and Howells, K. (eds.), Adult Sexual Interest in Children
(1980).

Adult sexual interest in bigger or smaller children has
been researched in particular detail during the 20th century.
The results are not yet known to the larger circles of society,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 166

as the media haven’t really caught up with the reality of loving children, and are generally conservative in this respect.
Using phallometric measurements, a complicated system
that uses a sensor to measure even the slightest erection of
the penis, together with psychological tests, scientists found
that even males assessed as ‘sexually normal’ experience a
certain arousal level for children. I believe the same results
will show up regarding women, once pedophilia research will
be extended to encompass both sexes. Farson reports more
amply about this research and concludes:
—The question arises how can we call a male (sexually) normal who
has approached a female child! However, the following data show
that children have some arousal value even for normal males.
— Farson, Birthrights (1978), p. 148 quoting Kurt Freund, Assessment of Pedophilia, in: Cook/Howells, op. cit., 139-174, at 161, 162.

Already Wilhelm Stekel wrote that ‘[p]edophilia … is very
close to being a normal component of our sexual drives’,
while he admitted that ‘the normal person’ rather negates
those feelings and represses them. An instructive summery
of the questions involved here is given by Rosemary Gordon:
—We might then summarize the problem of paedophilia, both in
terms of its normal and its abnormal character, as follows. Paedophilia, the love and sensuous experience of child and youth, is a
normal and universal phenomenon. It plays an important part in
guaranteeing the protection of the young against dangers. It en-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 167

sures that they are nourished, cared for, and played with as a part of
teaching of skills which they need to acquire; and that they are
given affection and the sense of security which will implant in them
sufficient confidence both in their own value and in their capacity to
deal with life and its hazards.
— Rosemary Gordon, Pedophilia: Normal and Abnormal, in: Kraemer, op. cit., 36 ff, at 43, 44.

The author points out that we all have pedophilic feelings
and that they are part of our all around love for children, and
do not conflict with the care we bestow upon them. Instead,
they provide a force in us to protect the child, to ensure that
parents bond with their children affectionately, to care for
their emotional and sexual growth. Gorden then refers to
Konrad Lorenz, who points to the physical characteristics of
the young of all species, stating three distinct characteristics
that somehow trigger our ‘caring instinct:’
—a short face in relation to a large forehead;
—protruding cheeks;
—maladjusted limb movements.
She then quotes Konrad Lorenz:
—It is a distinct and indubitable sensuous pleasure to fondle a nice
plump appetizing human baby. Furthermore, I can assert that my
pleasurable sensations in fondling a sweet human child are of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 168

same quality as those I experience in fondling a chow-puppy or a
baby-lion. (Id.)

As a result of my research, I came to believe that we all
have pedoemotive feelings to some extent as a natural part
of our emotional setup and then, on that basis, it can be argued that a fundamental distinction needs to be drawn between creative and destructive elements in pedophilia.
With regard to the ample range of statistics on the matter, the question arises if it makes sense to label broader and
broader circles of the population as pedophiles instead of
admitting that the typical child sex client is the average heterosexual man? This new focus would then enable researchers from various disciplines to look for the real etiology of
pedophilia. And I am quite convinced that research on codependence and emotional abuse then would be considered as important and revelatory for the etiology of pedophilia.
Child Pornography
Regarding child pornography, not many researchers see
the reality from the side of the children involved. Many children decide to leave their violent, abusive or neglective
homes, forced by circumstance to live on the streets and to
earn their basic needs with prostitution. Some would perhaps not have jumped into the unknown since even a violent
home is a home and it is a difficult step to take, emotionally,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 169

to leave one’s family and go on one’s own, without money,
without backup, without a helping hand. In such a situation,
for the street child, the opportunity to meet a stranger is reported to be the typical starting point of an underground career from which the child may derive some sort of pride and
a basic level of protection from the evils of street life. Needless to add that in such a dependency situation, the danger
for the child to be abused is especially high because any
other protection is typically lacking. It has been reported that
children care most about emotional satisfaction from the interactions.
— See Shirley O’Brian, Child Pornography (1992).

Child Prostitution
Child prostitution has become an international concern
yet it has to be seen that the practice of sexuality between
adults and children may not have the same meaning in different societies. The United Nations, under the pressure of
the right wing foreign policy of the United States, have since
more than two decades publicly pilloried governments that
continue to maintain their old traditions and tolerate child
prostitution. These media campaigns, seen from an international law perspective, have in many cases violated the principle of non-intervention as part of the Charter of the United
Nations (Art. 2, 4 UN Charter).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 170

— Chapter I, Art. 2, §4 of the UN Charter reads as follows: ‘All
Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat
or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.’ This paragraph is generally interpreted in international law is a ‘non-interference clause’ meaning
that no state member of the United Nations has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of any other state member of the organization, and this means under no ‘justification’ as they are commonly
forwarded by the United States, such as ‘bringing about democracy,
moral order and justice.’

Psychologically, they have created havoc in international
relations in general since they were considered by the targeted governments as neo-imperialistic and arrogant and,
besides that, totally disproportionate. As a matter of fact, in
Thailand, for example, child prostitution at no point in time
exceeded 7% of the total prostitution.
Physical Child Abuse
It is a relatively recent development in social sciences to
include in the definition of child abuse also the physical
abuse of children, thus embracing both sexual and physical
abuse in the larger term domestic violence. While modern
psychologists such as Alayne Yates, who writes that ‘[t]he
commonest root of the confusion between sex and anger is
child abuse,’ warn about belittling the physical abuse of children, the general public still judges sexual abuse, on one

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 171

hand, and physical abuse, on the other, in a rather biased
manner, belittling, justifying or even encouraging physical
abuse while vehemently negating or even denying the existence of sexual abuse.
— Alayne Yates, Sex Without Shame (1978), 105.

There is an evident lack of rational discrimination and an
according lack of objective information about the effects of
both forms of abuse in the media. Violence, by contrast, is
overtly approved in many more conventional situations, one
of the most common being for use in disciplining children.
This approval is so widespread that many adults are only
vaguely aware of what the difference is between so-called
strict discipline, a code phrase for the liberal use of physical
punishment, on one hand, and violent child battery, on the
other. The rationale behind those biased or distorted value
judgments is that physical abuse is more associated with violence while sexual abuse is more associated with sex.
These associations, in turn, seem to be the result of the
general bias of traditional Christian society with its strong
condemnation of pleasure in general, and sexual pleasure in
particular. Hence the compensatory function of violence as a
pleasure ersatz!
Films where women are ravished are shown almost daily
while films that display tender and loving sex are often put

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 172

on the index of forbidden media. Productions where sex is
shown as a hateful, rape-like behavior by contrast are widely
tolerated. This reveals that, in the American value system,
clean sex is violent sex while pleasurable sex is pornography.
No word to add as to the obvious perversity of such a view.
One of the reasons for the steady upsurge of violence in
our culture is violence perpetrated against infants, small children and adolescents in various forms such as infant neglect,
deprivation of tactile stimulation in early childhood, the taboo on pre-marital sex, physical punishment and abuse and
the language taboo around natural matters in conservative
families, which represent, in all countries, the governing
strata of society. Ashley Montagu writes:
—Corporeal punishment is still widely practiced throughout the
Western world, and the skin not only made a target and a vehicle
for the experience of pain, but an organ which is directly associated
with anger, punishment, sin, aggression, naughtiness, and evil. (…)
Some parents, particularly fathers, make it a point to tell their children before they strap them why they are being punished. One can
thus learn to dissociate the infliction of bodily pain from the display
of any emotion at all. The Nazis were particularly adept in this, and
there can be little doubt, as we have seen, that their affectless inhumanity was in no little part due to their early conditioning, with
tactile experience largely neglected or else restricted to a punishing
kind. This would seem to be an especially undesirable form of conditioning.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 173

It can be observed that there is a historically and culturally coined link between sex and violence in our civilization
that is at the root of our present value system and the social
and legal framework it has brought about. Alayne Yates formulates this complex interdependence between sex and violence in the following way:
—Each distortion shows a link between sex and another emotion
such as rage or fear…, whether in victim or aggressor, the link is
present. It is firmly fused in the early childhood and difficult or impossible to change. The only solution is prevention. In order to prevent such links from forming, we as parents must do more than intellectualize. We must not cruelly inhibit, abuse, reject, abandon, or
severely criticize our children. (Id., 111)

Presently, such forms of prevention are not really part of
social policy making. However, new tendencies and educational projects are in discussion and rapid development.
Marie M. Fortune, a minister, examined the question in a remarkable study, Sexual Violence (1983). Right at the start of
her book, she states:
—There is bewilderment, embarrassment, and ambivalence in our
society about the nature of sexual aggression and violence. But the
real difficulty lies in this society’s persistent confusion of sexual violence with sexual activity. For many in both experience and attitudes, sexual activity and sexual violence have become equated;
distinctions between the two are seriously blurred.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 174

Child protectors should begin to focus on the etiology of
child trauma which are the day-to-day emotional neglect and
deprivation, emotional incest in the form of codependence,
manipulation and physical abuse inflicted upon children by a
structurally highly violent social system.
For drafting effective social policies targeting at decreasing violence against children in all its forms, we should understand that ‘[k]eeping children in ignorance of sexuality
does not protect them … [but] is more likely to make them
more vulnerable.’
— Stevi Jackson, Childhood and Sexuality (1982), 58.

Conclusion
To summarize this chapter, it can be stated that there is
scientific consensus that child abuse is a form of violence,
also in the case where such violence is inflicted on the victim
by sexual means. In both physical abuse and sexual abuse of
children, it is the violence which causes child trauma, and not
the sexual act or activity. By contrast, it is still controversial in
the forensic and scientific literature if in the case of nonviolent love and sex, the shared sexual activity is equally to be
considered under the header of abuse.
The public discussion is not divided on the question if
violent abuse should be banned. Most people today agree
that children should not be treated in any violent way, what-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 175

ever the reason for the infliction of violence may be. But
opinions are largely divided when it comes to the question of
true love relations between adults and children, where adults
try their best to respect the child’s will and where sexual relations are engaged only in case the child explicitly consents.
These cases, that are not clear-cut and that are not the usual
cases that go to court, are difficult to judge in a general
manner, as every case must probably be seen as unique.
It however appears from the main part of the literature
that these cases are rather the exception than the rule. But
this may have to do with the simple fact that love relations
generally are not reported because the child and even the
parents may be convinced that no harm was done, and thus
did not report the incident.
This quite condensed historical survey has shown to
which extent sex and violence are interwoven in our society
because of a long history of morality and hypocrisy that created a sort of collective schizophrenia where sex is often per
se associated with violence. This is however not by nature so,
and there is no genetic defect within the human setup;
voices that suppose such defect seem to suffer from a distortion of perception that is the result of their lacking acceptance of human sexuality within a judgmental and ignorant
society.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 176

There is now quite a lot of evidence that suggests that
the steady upsurge of violence in our culture, especially violence against infants, children and adolescents originates
from infant neglect, deprivation of tactile stimulation, the taboo on pre-marital sex, physical punishment and abuse and
the silence imposed by mainstream culture on voicing any
issues that touch life, death and sexuality.
It can be said that there is a culturally coined link between sex and violence in our civilization that is at the root of
our present value system and the social and legal framework
it has brought about.
We should begin to focus on the real issues of child
trauma which are the day-to-day emotional neglect, tactile
deprivation, and rampant emotional abuse of children in the
form of parent-child codependence, and the manipulation
and physical abuse inflicted on children by a structurally violent social framework. To quote from one of the more recent
studies on child abuse:
—Emotional abuse causes the most long-term harm to children,
although combinations of emotional with physical and/or sexual
abuse cause the most harm to long-term mental health.
—Christopher Bagley, Child Abusers: Research and Treatment
(2003).

Part of the emotional abuse that typically children in
Western culture are subjected to on a daily basis is to force-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 177

fully destroy their friendships with adult partners. And insofar,
we should reflect about the degree of structural violence in a
society which denies in origo the child’s need for privacy and
personal intimacy.
— Christopher Bagley, Child Abusers (2003). See also Bender Lauretta & Blau, Abram, The Reaction of Children to Sexual Relations
with Adults (1937), Brant & Tisza, The Sexually Misused Child (1977),
Nicholas A. Groth, Men Who Rape (1980), Colin Pritchard, The Child
Abusers (2004).

From there it’s but a tiny step to reflect about the values
of democracy and the fact that not only adults but also children enjoy the freedom democracy grants, and that children
have the same right for intimacy that adults claim for themselves.
Morality is a strange concept that throughout human history brought about violence and confusion, and especially
violence against children.
The very morality that was established to protect children
is clearly and paradoxically a psychological mechanism that
in the long run severely damages children’s healthy psychosexual growth and psychosomatic wellbeing and retards
or impairs their growing into autonomy and self-reliance.
Love and sex, not only in Western culture, are forms of behavior that we try to hide and do behind closed doors. This is
generally so and not related to specific forms of sex. Even

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 178

married couples hardly ever expose themselves to their children or friends during intercourse.
Anthropological studies in sexually more permissive cultures found that these cultures are even stricter than ours regarding the secrecy of love and sex, on one hand, and the
taboo of incest, on the other. It is for that matter not really
astonishing that what we find in written history are the outrageous facts of accidented relations, and not the love stories.
When we consider this, we can summarize the following
facts:
—Children have been involved in love and sex with adults
at least since written history, and probably since times immemorial;
—Children have been subjected to more or less heavy
amounts of violence under the reign of patriarchy, which was
during the last five thousand years;
—Children were considered in all pre-industrial cultures
as psychosexually mature around puberty and actually married at that age, and procreated children;
—Children have a certain sexual arousal level for all adult
males, regardless of sexual preferences; newer studies not
yet included in this book now corroborate this fact in finding
this equally true regarding adult females;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 179

—Children served as amuse-jesters throughout human
history, which included free sexual relationships with them
during certain festivities, orgies, gatherings or celebrations,
including religious celebrations, especially among the higher
classes of societies or in the royal establishment or within
pre-industrial societies;
—Children served as prostitutes and temporary sexual
mates for adults through all of written history; in some preindustrial cultures child prostitution was established as temple prostitution with children serving as freely available prostitutes in temples and during religious ceremonies;
—Children of noble birth have been held in praise and
adoration in aesthetically refined civilizations and this fact
must not be confounded with ordinary child prostitution
equally present in those cultures, because both, the more
noble and the more vulgar forms are different expressions of
human love.
To repeat it, as the sources generally do not point to
much of consenting love relations between individual men or
women and children, we cannot conclude from the mere absence of material that those relations have not existed.
When I peruse this material as a trained lawyer, I can only
apply the principle of concluding de maiore ad minor, as
known in juridical logic. This logic principle describes that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 180

what is valid for a complex event is certainly also true for an
event based on the same premises while being of a lesser
complexity. In other words, if we have observed that
throughout human history children have been subjected to
more or less violent forms of sexual abuse, we can conclude
de maiore ad minor that children were equally involved in
nonviolent and loving sexual contacts with adults, where they
played the role of a replacement love object or even, for a
certain time, of a real partner for an adult. What this logical
conclusion however does not allow is to estimate any quantification, any percentage of children having been involved in
nonviolent sexual contacts, and we may never find the answer to this intriguing question because of lacking source
material.
Many researchers, however, take illogical conclusions
from the truncated historical sources and reason that because there are no or very few explicit reports about nonviolent and consenting sexual relations with children, all and
every such erotic relation with a child was per se violent and
abusive.
— See, for example, Lloyd DeMause, The History of Childhood
(1974) and Alice Miller, The Political Consequences of Child Abuse,
in: The Journal of Psychohistory 26, 2 (Fall 1998).

It is obvious that this is a logical error; what we have got
are rape stories that typically go to court, not consenting

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 181

love relations between men and women. This is simply so
because in real love relations there is little chance that the
girl child will denounce her lover to the police.
While in adult-child relations there are certainly more factors in play, making these cases more complex than adultadult relations, I cannot see a fundamental difference here
that would force a logical conclusion that comes to a total
denial of any possibility of an adult-child sexual contact being truly consenting and nonviolent, and harmless to the
child’s safety. Yet most of the present public discussion of socalled pedophilia is based upon this logical error—and
probably for the simple reason of rampant media indoctrination regarding this highly political topic.
In addition, we have to see that taboos have a nasty tendency to enforce themselves against logic and in highly irrational ways, and they distort natural perception of reality,
triggering highly biased reactions from a large number of
people.
A taboo does not need to be rational to be valid, and this
is simply so, as taboos are typically not established by a rational society or a majority of rational people. History shows
with abundant evidence that societies with a high taboo level
are generally freedom-hostile and undemocratic, if not tyrannical, while cultures with a permissive setup regarding
love and sex may content themselves with a basic range of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 182

sexual taboos, and are generally more democratic as they
value personal freedom and trust in the goodness of nature,
and human nature.
Future studies should target at finding a way out of the
ideological and propagandistic agendas that hide the transparent and verifiable reality that children simply have a certain sexual arousal level for most adults, as vice versa adults
have a certain arousal level for children. If we deny this, saying that all pedophilic and gerontophilic attraction is the result of a distortion of perception through early abuse, then
we are called upon to validate my hypothesis that pedophilic
attraction toward children may be the result of parent-child
codependence and emotional abuse.
My research on codependence has given me clues for the
assumption that when somebody has lived through a highly
codependent childhood, and was emotionally rather entangled with their parents, the person is later inclined to project
that conditioning upon children; this results in emotional relationships with children becoming eroticized or even sexualized.
Hence, I propose to other researchers to test, validate or
falsify my hypothesis that the real etiology of pedophilia is
emotional entanglement with parents and caretakers early in
childhood.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 183

Emotionally, nature created a mutual responsiveness between adults and children. I have not found a single researcher who would contest this fact. The only question that
is really still controversial is why and how such emotional attraction can become eroticized, and as a result sexualized?
When adults seek out children as love and sexual mates,
it is comprehensive from a simple point of natural logic that
in that case children, too, will seek out adult partners as possible love and sexual mates. On one side we speak about
pedophilia, on the other side about gerontophilia. Both attractions are obviously targeting each other, and therefore
complementary in a way. But that does not mean, as some
representatives of the pedophile movement make it believe,
that all children would generally opt for adults as love partners if such love was socially accepted.
First of all, we have to consider children who had the
chance to grow up without codependence. These children, I
believe, have a low or no gerontophilic attraction and thus
will mate, if let free, primarily or exclusively with peers.
On the other hand, children who struggled through codependent childhoods have a certain gerontophilic arousal
level just as adults have a certain pedophilic arousal level
when they experienced codependent childhoods. In other
words, adult pedophiles are the grownup versions of gerontophile children. A pedophile man or woman, according to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 184

my research hypothesis, must have been a gerontophilic
child or adolescent.
Hence, when society bothers about the queer thing
called pedophilia, it should bother first about the queer
thing of gerontophilia, that is, children who were conditioned
toward adult mates, and away from peer mates. That that
happens, I reason, is namely society’s own fault, as it’s the inevitable fate for children within an Oedipal Culture.
Behold, I don’t generalize my hypothesis to a point to say
that it covers all possible cases. Let me explain. As a general
rule, adults look for their mates among adults. And children,
when left free, naturally have ongoing love and sex relations
with their peers and also with younger children. But there are
exceptions to the rule that always will make out a certain
percentage, that is impossible to evaluate exactly, and where
there is a natural loving attraction between adults and children across all social strata, across all cultures, across all ages
and across all civilizations.
As this may be rather a minority among adults and children, the general fear of legalizing adult-child erotic relations
is much of a shadow game. In truth, such normalization and
legalization would not change much in the real world, regarding adult-child nonviolent and loving relations, while it
would change a lot regarding violent abuse, if not substantially reduce the occurrence of violent sexual child abuse.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 185

CHAPTER SEVEN
Does Pedophile Love Equate Abuse?
Introduction
In the present chapter I am asking if pedophile love
equates abuse, as it is most often argued in our culture?
Well, I would like to wrap the question up differently, asking you if love, for you, equates abuse? Don’t laugh, for I seriously believe this society automatically assumes that all love
is abuse. It’s just as in modern medicine where everybody assumes that all life, one day, ends up in sickness.
It is common knowledge that in high civilizations of the
past, the exact opposite regard was prevailing, namely that
all life, if lived correctly, is producing health, and more health,
not an automated pattern that leads to major sickness. This
is perhaps simply a matter of self-fulfilling prophecies. While
in the old traditions, people were thinking on the lines of ‘life
keeps itself healthy,’ today, because of various reasons, people rather argue in the opposite way, affirming that ‘sickness
is inherent in all life.’
If this is so, the question if pedophile love per se equals
abuse, while it sounded so ‘regular’ at first, assumes another
taste, another fragrance, and another color; it assumes a flair
of perversity, not to say that the question in itself is perverse.
It is perverse because it is suggestive, manipulative.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 186

The answer is clear and simple. Of course not. Pedophile
love is love in the first place, as any other love is love in the
first place, and not abuse. To repeat it, when a child chooses
an adult over a peer, this decision must be respected if one
day we at all grant children free choice relations; as a result,
we cannot honestly assume a qualitative difference between
the relation child-child, on one hand, and the relation childadult, on the other, that can possibly emerge from this freedom of choice.
Hence, the dichotomy of child-child sex vs. child-adult
sex, so common in our present media debate is a fake equation because on a normative level, there can’t be a difference
in these relations; if the child’s free choice is the decisive
element that triggers either of these relations, they have to
be treated equally, both on a social and a legal level, and
within the framework of permissive education.
— Permissive Education is where all educational measures and activities are humanized and made fit in the daily little critter of relationships. I have faced the worst educators in persons who are highstrung idealistic and have a lot of theory in their heads, and the best
in those who are simple-minded, but attentive to detail, fresh, loving, innocent and spontaneous. What is the character structure that
fosters permissiveness? It goes without saying that it’s a character
that is neither neurotic nor sadistic, but loving, giving and emotionally mature. In my own terms, I would say it’s a person whose emotional flow is intact and where desire is conscious, or has been rendered conscious through building emotional awareness.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 187

My historical survey has implicitly shown that adult-child
loving relations were always part of the love game in our culture, if not worldwide, and the accounts we have, which are
predominantly negative, and which are the only proof that
historians present to us, cannot be taken for the whole truth.
They are accounts of accidented relationships, accounts
of hurt, that report abusive customs and relationships, and
perhaps even, an abusive mindset regarding children. But
they cannot be taken for the whole of the story, for the whole
of adult-child erotic interactions over time.
In such a situation, where evidence is lacking, or the evidence present in court is biased, as a law practitioner, you
are not supposed to take any definite conclusions; in such a
case, the court will either ask for more evidence, or dismiss
the case because ‘doubt is in favor of the accused.’
I use this as a metaphor, of course, because we are not
evaluating legal evidence here, but historical evidence. What
I am saying is that historians, and psychohistorians, should
be subscribed to a professional ethics; when I apply the ethical rules of the law profession to historical research, I must
conclude that in the present case, no definite answer can be
given and we have to say, sorry, we can’t get to know the
whole truth because of lacking evidence, and the evidence
we do have is one-sided and biased.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 188

As a result, we cannot go as far as Lloyd DeMause, Florence Rush or Alice Miller and conclude that all through human history, children were invariably abused, raped, tortured
and infanticided, or used as amuse-jesters and night-pillows.
And a step ahead, this means we can’t conclude that history
‘has proven that pedophilia is damaging for children,’ which
is the usual conclusion taken from such historical research.
Here, what we are facing is not scientific conclusions but
demagogy, not search for truth, but propaganda that serves
the system in which children have to shut up and keep their
emotions in check so that they do not disturb ordained consumption without reflection.
My argument is corroborated by the fact that etiologies
of pedophilia and of child rape are clearly distinct. Our media refuse to make that distinction and thereby breed more
confusion than clarity about the true nature of pedophilia.
Child-Adult Sex vs. Child-Child Sex
The pedophile movement argues that children, in the
typical case, desire sex with adults as a natural and intuitive
choice. Well, after studying native cultures, and among them
especially the Trobriand culture that was subject to important
field studies of both Bronislaw Malinowski and Margaret
Mead, I question the truth of this argument. When looking at
these natural tribes, it seems that children relate first of all to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 189

peers for experiencing their first steps into body pleasure
and sexual curiosity.
The parents, in these cultures, are practicing an active
form of non-intervention in their children’s love life. Interestingly enough, homosexuality and pedophilia are practically
non-existent among these natives, and sex crimes are virtually unknown. Also the low divorce rate of only 4% simply is
astounding. What also astonishes about Trobriand culture is
the fact that they are much tougher than our culture for safeguarding the incest taboo. In fact, children live from age
three in special dormitories in which where parents are not
supposed to go at night, as we know this from Israeli kibbutzim.
— I heard about these Kibbutzim night rules in a reportage on
German television on Israeli Kibbutzim years ago. That particular
Kibbutzim practiced what they called the common standard of
modern child rearing in Israel, and it was clearly stated that from the
age of three, children sleep in dorms supervised by trained psychologists, and not by parents, and that parents have no access to
their children at night. The why and how of this rule was justified,
inter alia, with preventing incest. An exception was made only, it
was stated, when the child was sick and insomniac, and would then
be allowed to sleep with their parents for the time of their sickness.

As with the Trobriand natives, the parent-child separation
is put up as a precaution against incest; in the kibbutzim,
children, from age three, sleep separated from their parents

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 190

in dormitories that parents are forbidden to enter at night,
and where specially trained caretakers look after the safety of
the children.
The question that comes up is if child abuse and pedophilia are perhaps the result of repressing children’s erotic
peer relations while at the same time overdoing the emotional closeness between parents and children in the nuclear
family setting? My research on child abuse indeed is conclusive to the hypothesis that it’s the lacking development of
autonomy in modern child-rearing and resulting parent-child
codependence within the nuclear family that is the root
cause of child abuse and pedophilia.
The present split in the discussion of the subjects of socalled childlove and child abuse results from the fact that in
our society, it is not scientific research that forges public
opinion, but the necessarily partial views of the most powerful interest group. Yet it appears that truth cannot be found
on the basis of group interests and group perspectives since
they are always partial. They represent keyholes. Only an approach that enables the reader to form their opinion in a
state of quiet intuitive insight, without being influenced or
manipulated by pro-and-con propaganda will eventually lead
to a better understanding of the complexity of sexual desire
in general, and desire for the young, in particular.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 191

A few years ago, sending some mail to a group of boylovers that exposed their ideas on the Internet and presenting
in that mail my project for this book, they replied they could
not understand any sexual attraction for little girls since they
considered boylove being a form of role modeling; such role
modeling is in their view impossible to occur in a relationship
between a man and a little girl. Besides the fact that I question why men should only be role models for boys and not
for girls, there are recurrent arguments in the rhetoric of both
pedophile and homosexual interest groups. Their principle
argument appears to be that their sexual orientation is inborn and cannot be changed.
I question this and believe there is no either-or in emotional and sexual attraction. If a person says that he or she
can never and in no circumstance be attracted to a person of
either sex, the person is either dishonest, ignorant about the
pleasure function, naive or emotionally blocked, which
means neurotic.
The nature of pleasure, in general, and of sexual desire, in
particular, is not such that it creates exclusivity in partner
choice. To believe it is infantile despite the fact that it is one
of the strongest polemic arguments of the homosexuals.
They have used this argument in order to gain a residual
form of societal acceptance. However, in my exchanges with
homosexuals, I found that this argument is but a rhetoric.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 192

Most of them admitted that exceptionally, they could sleep
with a girl if only the girl was ‘beautiful and responsive
enough.’ And in their life stories it was obvious that they had
just not found that kind of girl, and one day stopped searching. And as a result of stopping the search for a viable mate
of the other sex, their sexual energy retrograded and inverted. You may argue that among heterosexuals the same
should then apply since love proceeds always in trial and error and that for that reason, many heterosexuals would have
had to turn into homosexuals because of frustration in heterosexual love.
The answer is that because our sexuality is not instinctive,
the mating game is actually a matter of taking chances and
voting for options. In a situation where I feel rejected, living
through a depression that was brought about by a frustration
of my sexual desire going along with a momentary hurt of my
self-image, I may naturally react in reasoning out options.
This may not be mental. It may be subconscious or it may be
on a feeling level. I may decide to give it another try, or I may
dare into getting ahead sexually with the other sex or another age group.
My point is that, in doing so, one by no means becomes
homosexual, pedophile or gerontophile. The fact to get
stuck in some sexual orientation or the other has emotional
reasons and reasons related to personal power. It is not pri-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 193

marily a question of sexual orientation, and still less of any
pretended initial sexual orientation of the kind ‘I’m born a
homosexual.’ There is abundant sex research showing that
homosexuality is well-established among mammals, but only
under certain conditions, the primary being a lack of females
in the group. It is also known that among primates, sodomy
is practiced on young animals from the part of older and
much stronger ones. Thus to cite nature for forwarding a
mechanistic view of sexuality of the kind ‘male jumps female
of same kind, same age and same size,’ as this is very common with ignorant and fundamentalist people is an ambiguous way of arguing. This is so because there is a lot of variety
in nature regarding the mating game, much more than those
simplistic thinkers, who typically deny erotic complexity, want
to believe and accept. Some ants, after copulating, eat their
husbands …
Naturally in all matters of pleasure we try to compensate
for pleasure we fail to get after repeated trials. We then look
for a temporary surrogate pleasure, an ersatz. We do this because of the fear that our original sexual longing may be socially rejected. Fear of living our genuine sexual longings impairs the high potential of creativity that is inherent in sexuality. It means to be afraid of the moving nature of life itself
and its constant change. Sexual anxiety and all inhibitions
that flow from it are manifestations of a general fear of life
that, as Alexander Lowen showed in many of his books, is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 194

firmly rooted in the Judeo-Christian cultural base setup, and
of course equally established in orthodox Islam and Hinduism.
—See only Alexander Lowen, Fear of Life (2003).

Krishnamurti said that sexuality is creativity. However, he
added that for most people in our non-creative culture,
sexuality has become the only form of creativity; and that this
caused a lot of strife and obsession. In Education and the
Significance of Life (1978), Krishnamurti writes:
—The intellect, the mind as such, can only repeat, recollect, it is
constantly spinning new words and rearranges old ones; and as
most of us feel and experience only through the brain, we live exclusively on words and mechanical repetitions. This is obviously not
creation; and since we are uncreative, the only means of creativeness left to us is sex. Sex is of the mind, and that which is of the
mind must fulfill itself or there is frustration. Our thoughts, our lives
are narrow, arid, hollow, empty; emotionally we are starved, religiously and intellectually we are repetitive, dull; socially, politically
and economically we are regimented, controlled. We are not happy
people, we are not vital, joyous; at home, in business, at church, at
school, we never experience a creative state of being, there is no
deep release in our daily thought and action. Caught and held from
all sides, naturally sex becomes our only outlet, an experience to be
sought again and again because it momentarily offers that state of
happiness which comes when there is absence of self. It is not sex
that constitutes a problem, but the desire to recapture the state of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 195

happiness, to gain and maintain pleasure, whether sexual or any
other. (Id., 118)

People who experience high artistic, scientific or intellectual pleasure find it less of a problem to sublimate sexual
feelings than those who lack out on deriving pleasure from
those pursuits. It’s a fact that when sexual fulfillment is temporarily not available, art, science, design or any other intellectual pursuit can become a temporary investment for sexual energy. In that sense, sex could be called a residual form
of creativeness, one that steps in when all other outlets have
become dysfunctional.
With child-focused sexual desires it is no different than
with desire projected upon adult mates, as from a functional
view of sexuality, the mate one chooses is not ‘defining’ one’s
sexual apparatus; the latter, namely, is setup by nature. The
streaming of the sexual energy is not different when desire is
projected upon children, infants, peers or elders. This is an
important observation to be done in addition to current sex
research. So far, sex research was not able to really elucidate
the true reasons and motivations behind the loving erotic attraction to children.
Research on love may be difficult in general as love cannot really be defined. We have to see also that research
never helped us to love more, to be more tolerant and more
understanding for the variety of the human experience which

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 196

also always is an emotional experience and therefore, by its
very nature, difficult to measure in the laboratory.
People do not change their beliefs because of scientific
research, because beliefs are not rational. Ivory tower studies
serve those who sit in the tower, not those who live outside
of it. The latter, and that is all of us, must feel things emotionally; that is however only possible if we take down our
shields, our armors, our set opinions, our defensive assumptions, and open our heart to the streaming of emotions, and
the wisdom of intuition. While science only can touch our intellect, art inspires and transforms our whole being. Truth
then, has to be searched for holistically, in an experience that
combines the emotional and the intellectual sides of our nature, which connects both hemispheres of the brain, so that,
according to the Renaissance ideal, art and science, in a synchronistic kind of movement become philosophy.
If we want to know and understand love, we must get
away from the rigid assumptions and prejudiced opinions of
the mass media and formulate our own individual quest for
truth. I can be argued that poetry, literature, music and art
represent more reliable sources of the multi-faceted reality of
childhood over time than any scientific study on the matter.
A scene drawn on a Greek vase that depicts a Greek warrior
playing with the penis of a boy while both he and the boy
look each other straight in the eyes says more about the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 197

possibility of loving adult-child sexual contact in that culture
than any so-called historical case report.
I go beyond history as a garbage science. I say that we
have to begin hic et nunc. If we want to know if children experience sex as positive and joyful or as negative and humiliating, we have to ask them. And since we cannot ask the
children of the past, we have to begin asking the children
that surround us here and now. Depending on the cultural
conditioning they are submitted to, they will either say the
truth, or lie, or keep silent. In my experience, the reactions of
children are quite predictable.
—Children from sexually repressive, punitive and highly
religiously doctrinaire cultures will keep silent or lie. They are
not likely to tell the truth about their feelings or they have
repressed them to such an extent that they do not even
know what they feel. These are the children who fake to consent, out of fear or false respect and sometimes later betray
their lovers or just keep silent until they are grown up;
—Children from non-repressive yet patriarchal cultures
tend to make up stories about early sex, especially boys.
They tend to make believe to have had all the girls or even
boys in their neighborhood which may be true to the extent
that heterosexual and homosexual play is frequent among
children in those cultures although it is hidden to the foreign
observer;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 198

—Children from non-repressive and semi-patriarchal or
postmodern semi-matriarchal societies are likely to tell the
truth, in a straightforward, unashamed manner, even if they
hurt the feelings of an adult who tries to please them in order to get their consent to sexual play. Thus, they can say no,
when they mean no. And, by the same token, they can say
yes when they mean yes.
This is only a general structure, of course, and there are a
number of variations within one cultural model or another,
depending on a variety of factors, such as religious belonging of the family or father, provincial setting or metropolis,
low-class environment or middle or upper class setting. The
reason why we research on childhood is that we want to
know what children need so that we, as a society, can more
effectively meet that need.
When we agree about this objective, we have as yet to
define which tools we are going to use. If history, for the
above-mentioned reasons, is a rather untrustworthy source
of knowledge and thus a bad tool, we have to look for better
sources of information. 
Let us thus first inquire into the quality and trustworthiness of information we get from historical and psychohistorical sources; let us then evaluate if this information is really
useful for answering the following questions: ‘What can we
know about the quality of adult-child sexual contacts in the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 199

course of human history? Is there any prevalence contained
in this information for childhood sexual experience to be
predominantly negative, predominantly positive, or negative
and positive at the same time, depending on other factors?’
This is a possible theoretical and pragmatic framework for
research on the topic of childlover over time. Research we
have collected so far on this broad topic is far from being
impartial, if it is not bluntly negative in its general outlook.
At present, we are in a phase of collective awareness
building regarding the quality of childhood over time. It
seems that modern civilization, perhaps because of now almost a hundred years of psychoanalytic enlightenment, is
beginning to get sensitized for the true needs of children.
It is impossible to prove that really childhood has always
been negative or abusive! To repeat it, I intuit the account of
positive erotic child-adult love over time was truncated for
reasons of political correctness, with the result that today the
overwhelming part of the literature on childhood, as far as
history is concerned, traces a hopelessly negative picture.
However, if we add to these sources personal biographies
and autobiographies, novels, poetry and the creations of our
great painters, this picture becomes more diversified and
more positive. And as a matter of fact, not everybody has got
a bad or abusive childhood—fortunately so. There is always

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 200

the danger to generalize one’s own personal experience, and
even the most objective of historian or psychohistorian is not
free from this tendency. It is a fact that generally people take
the pen to write their story because they suffer from high inner tension as a consequence of problems or of abuse suffered, not because they feel great. When we feel great, we
tend to expand more on the outside level, take action, get
things done, make money, make love, engage in sport or
travel around the world.
Many poets admit that it is rather in a state of melancholy,
confusion or depression that they feel inspired for great poems, and not in the other case that they feel good and sober.
From my own experience as a writer I know that this is true.
Most of the time when I sat down to get my soul out on the
paper, it was because I suffered so much and the inner tension resulting from all the hurts and humiliations I went
through became just unbearable! As a matter of fact, the
years in which I wrote poems were by far the most difficult
ones I had to cope with in my entire life, and writing poems
helped me tremendously to clear out his inner confusion and
tension. This is the principal reason why world literature and
art treat the unwelcome and hurting aspects of life rather
than the welcome and pleasurable ones. And if this is true in
general, it is so much the more true for childhood stories.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 201

This simple truth may be the reason why we find by far
more negative childhood descriptions than positive ones in
world literature. Besides that, my intuition tells me that people who always see the bad and negative in life and who
have an over-protective attitude toward children have a high
anxiety level and are generally blocked against acknowledging complexity. They are locked up in a fascist mindset that
comes up with simplistic answers about all and everything,
and that, worse, pretends to know everything. These parents
tend to tell their children ‘Shut up, what do you know about
life?’ So the child very early, and very consistently learns that
listening to one’s inner wisdom is a sin, because it equals being disobedient to one’s holy father or mother who, pretendedly so, know everything or for the least know better than
stupid little child.
When people see life as static, instead of perceiving it as
a total and intrinsically dynamic experience, they tend to focus on the ugly and hurtful aspects of life. Thus, from their
biased approach to the dark and light sides of life results a
very fundamental and fundamentalist kind of prejudice: they
emphasize the dark side of life while not giving enough attention to its light and joyful side. On the other hand, children do not have this kind of bias and that is why they tend
to see sexual pleasure as something enjoyable that is related
to a deeper experience of love, provided they are allowed to
experiencing love at all.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 202

Possible Etiologies of Child Rape
On the other hand, this insight could also give us some
hints to explain violent sexual behavior. My hypothesis is that
violent behavior is a consequence of the absence of affection; it may be that affection is blocked or otherwise repressed as something that contradicts the person’s selfimage. Typically, in those relations the adult does not identify
himself as a childlover, but uses one or the other macho
stereotype to explain his somewhat unusual sexual hunger.
The process starts with sex fantasies involving children that
mentally stage forbidden sexual behavior and that the person subsequently represses under guilt and shame.
These fantasies, then, are acted out in a compulsory
movement and often after the consciousness barrier has
been lowered by alcohol, consciousness altering drugs or
other external stimuli. The problem in child rape is abuse of
power which is not primarily a sexual problem or a question
of sex relations, but a question about how a particular person is able or not able to handle frustration and depression
in their lives.
While it has been proven already by researchers like
Nicholas Groth that, in general, most rape cases are either
anger rape or power rape cases, these insights are so much
the more valid for child rape in that the child, because of
their weaker, smaller and more innocent appearance, is an

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 203

almost ideal projection object for those repressed and retrograde love energies.
— Nicholas A. Groth, Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender (1980).

However, we should bear in mind that in order to understand childlove it’s awkward to find out about it by researching on child rape.
While this exactly is the strange turn that Western science
has taken regarding childlove, it is absurd when you look at
it. This namely means that we try to define health from what
we have seen is sickness. However, to know what sickness is
does by far not mean we know what health is, simply because health is much more than the absence of sickness. To
say, childlove is much more than the absence of child rape. If
a heterosexual lover affirmed loving women was good just
because it is characterized by not raping women, he would
certainly be contradicted in public with the argument that
love is much more than the absence of rape!
Pedoemotions are Universal
The path for the future, in my view, is to foster and encourage sane emotional relationships with children within a
social framework of accepted pedoemotions, so that adultchild erotic relations can be lived in constructive and nonharmful ways. Only if we get at coding childlove as an essen-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 204

tially social behavior, we can say that we eventually take the
responsibility we have as a society for saving all the children
still to be raped, tortured and killed if we deny action now
and remain with the ineffective and socially destructive paradigm of a total child sex taboo.
One of the biggest problems in childlove is the shared
responsibility between childlover and love child, which in
many cases may turn out to be a heavy burden for the child,
especially when the parents of the child are ignorant and
supposedly or outspokenly against the love relation.
From this burden of secrecy, depressions, insomnia and
other psychological problems may result. It is for this reason
not astonishing that one of the most extensive studies, that
of the Dutch psychologist Theo Sandfort from Utrecht University in the Netherlands, examining twenty-five boy lovers
and boys, came to the result that psychological problems
were present in the cases only where the parents were ignorant or against the man-boy relation, and that they were totally absent in the relationships where the parents of the boy
fully consented to the relation—which was the case in about
one third of the samples. However, even in the relations
where such burden existed because the couple had to hide
their love, the exams showed that neither of the boys had
any serious or acute psychological problems or hangups.
This is astonishing news for traditional child psychology since

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 205

it proves that the psychological make-up of a child is much
more robust than Western child psychology tends to admit.
Aesthetic and Poetic Childlove
Today, it is to hope that despite draconian punishments
and general child abuse hysteria, poetic and non-sexual
childlove has still its privileged and discrete corners in the
holy or not so holy family of our times. The wholeness of the
family is exactly demonstrated by the fact that it can tolerate
and assimilate adults who give the children that form of
eroticized affection that is typically not acted out upon
through actual sex, but that the parents often neglect because they confuse nutritive tactile care with erotic love.
When I met the French psychotherapist Françoise Dolto
in her Paris apartment in 1986, she told me in that interview
that she was supportive of eroticized adult-child relations
outside the family since it was a way to lower the incest problems within our highly incestuous nuclear urban family structure. This was so, she explained, because the child, especially during the Oedipus Complex and later in adolescence,
could project their incestuous desires upon loving adults
other than their parents.
This view that was shared, at that time and even more so
before (during the 60s and 70s), by many psychologists and
psychoanalysts, now belongs to the intellectual dynamite

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 206

mainstream society tries to conceal by all means. It has to be
seen that Françoise Dolto, when talking about eroticized relations did by no means imply relations where intercourse is
taking place. Hence, we have to be attentive to this subtle
yet distinct difference.
To respond erotically to a child is according to Dolto a
sane reaction; to pursue that erotic interest up until actual
intercourse with the child is not, according to Dolto, a sane
reaction.
Today however, the child abuse paranoia resulted in a
much less distinctive regard. Research has been suppressed,
funding taken away or has been directed into other channels,
for example those of the child protection industry.
It sounds somewhat out of the air when child protectors
claim the sexual innocence of the child or similar hypotheses
that were shown to be myths already at the beginning of the
last century. But anyway, this debate is not of much relevance
for the poetic childlover because he or she abstains from
approaching the child sexually. Loving children poetically,
without acting out on erotic feelings, was not at any time in
human history regarded as a dangerous behavior, until child
protectors declared that even erotic feelings for children
were a potential abuse case. To show how biased this view is,
a general study or monograph about the aesthetic value of
childlove needs to be written.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 207

Presently photographers seem to be more active than
writers to invoke, through associations and a very sensitive
way to exhibit children, a foretaste of what I would call the
aesthetic value of childlove. I primarily think of Jan Saudek.
Saudek is special in that his message is clear, yet subtle
and non-obtrusive, and therefore acceptable also for nonpedophiles. The message is honest in that it does not fake to
show an objectivized child or a post-modern version of Rousseau’s Émile, but a decorated child that is voluntarily and
humbly seen as a projection container. In fact, it is illusory
and moralistic to judge depraved our need for the child to
being a fetish and receptacle for our dreams, our Sehnsucht
for a better world, our poetic fantasies of a lucid tenderness
that is not male or female, nor otherwise fragmented, but
androgynous, whole and truly innocent, divine and eternally
lovely.
— See, for example, June Singer, Androgyny (1976).

Poetic childlove is unlimited in its dream-like dimension,
in its poetics. It is somehow associated with the belief in fairies, in supernatural powers, in animated nature, and a God
Pan—that had his place in the Greek Pantheon, and that
wishes to be respected by humans for his conquests of innocent little girls.
— Pan is the Greek god who watches over shepherds and their
flocks. He has the hindquarters, legs, and horns of a goat, in the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 208

same manner as a satyr or pane. The parentage of Pan is unclear; in
some myths he is the son of Zeus, though generally he is the son of
Hermes. His mother is said to be a nymph. In universal mythology
Pan is associated with the male sexual drive, and sometimes with
sexual desire for young girls.

There are many poetic writings that are the result of childlove, such as the Peter Pan story or Kim, by Rudyard Kipling
which describes a wonderful love relation between a magician and a little British boy in India, the Petit Prince by SaintExupéry and many others, but they leave open the question
of a possible sexual relation, or leave it over to the reader’s
fantasy. The whole of modern child art production including
Walt Disney is the result of childlove, yet of a childlove perhaps voluntarily restrained to its poetic and platonic dimension.
One may argue in the forefield that these productions
may not comply with my rather exact definition of childlove
as an erotic form of love. However, I argue that erotic intelligence is not per se to be acted out sexually, through sexual
behavior of any kind, but can remain a world of fantasy, and
live its erotic dimension in the poetic domain.
To begin with, I find our society’s definition of sexuality a
joke, if not an aberration. We are sexual in a much larger dimension than monkeys mounting each other as a game of
instincts. We humans are not instinctual, but consciousness

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 209

impacts on our very genes as has been shown by both quantum physics and psychoneuroimmunology.
— See, for example, Candace B. Pert, Molecules of Emotion: The
Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine (2003), Richard Gerber, Vibrational Medicine: Energy Healing and Spiritual Transformation (2002),
Donna Eden, & David Feinstein, Energy Medicine (1998), Amit Goswami, The Self-Aware Universe (1995), Michael Talbot, The Holographic Universe (1992).

There are to be found less friendly childlove productions
as well, often by anonymous authors, such as the Diary of a
Gentleman, which I mentioned earlier on and which was one
of the Victorian bestsellers. However, the cynical sadism typical for this kind of productions cannot really find an audience
among true childlovers. The author, a noble living during the
Industrial Revolution in England, and frequenting young
prostitute girls from the poor worker milieu in London, exhibits a strange form of pride in raping these girls literally to
their blood, deriving from his conquests a deep manly satiation that almost totally misses out elements of empathy,
compassion and shared pleasure. My heart was bleeding
when I read his accounts that were republished in Florence
Rush’s book about the sexual abuse of children.
My reaction to that stuff was visceral and immediate, and
not the result of reflection. It was as if my whole body and
soul revolted. Yet in modern culture sadism is so deeply ingrained in general morality, which is only logical because

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 210

morality is sadism, that people tend to take such sordid adventures for granted and argue ‘Well, that’s exactly what pedophilia is about and that’s why it’s abject.’ And here’s the
error. There are also heterosexual lovers who have not made
the transition from the mute sex communication called rape
to explicit sex communication that manifests through shared
intercourse. Rape simply is a form of silent masturbation,
where the partner is not present in her total reality, but only
on the fantasy level of the lover.
I am not for that matter spreading illusions; pedophile
desire strives for fulfillment as any other form of sexual desire, but orgasm and fulfillment can be achieved in many
other ways than by penetration. I do not deny that penetration gives an additional thrill, whatever a man’s sexual preference be, but a caring childlover will know to avoid harming
the child. Research statistics have shown with an astonishing
constancy over the years that most pedophiles do not attempt to penetrate a child against their will, nor in the case
when a child is well willing to be penetrated, but because of
inexperience doesn’t really understand what this implies. In
such a case, when proceeding to penetration would obviously be painful for the child, caring pedophiles would abstain, and achieve fulfillment in non-harmful ways.
This is actually a matter of common sense, and there is no
reason to believe that pedophiles have lesser common sense

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 211

than other people. Besides, it’s also a matter of sexual experience. It has been shown in clinical reports that most of the
men who do harm to children by penetration or in other ways
during the sexual encounter, are either sexual virgins or have
had very little sexual experience with children.
In most cases, and where sadism is not part of the game,
the childlover will try to find viable compromises between his
desire for fulfillment and the child’s interest to being hurt as
little as possible. There are many ways to achieve orgasm in
tender ways, without any penetration needed, for example,
between the child’s legs, or through masturbation while caressing the child’s naked body. Most children are more readily available for such kind of activity than for example doing
fellatio or kissing; most small children do not like to kiss,
while there are exceptions.
I have seen parents from Spain and Belgium frenchkissing their children, while I do not have reason to assume
that they were in any way sexual with their offspring. On the
other hand, it cannot be denied that french-kissing does
trigger sexual arousal, generally, and in this case, probably
both in the parents and the child. However, it has to be
noted that erotic attraction between parents and children is,
without actual sexual follow-up is not felt as illicit in many
cultures of the world, Spanish and Belgian cultures among

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 212

them, while the same activity would be felt as almost criminal
in British and American culture.
In my experience as a babysitter, babies really like to
french-kiss with parents and caretakers but most parents and
nursery teachers teach babies that such behavior is indecent.
This early wet-kiss taboo is probably the reason why many
children are apathetic to mouth-to-mouth kisses. Some children are even really allergic against it, and childlovers have
to understand all this, and much more, if they want their love
children remember intimate communication and embrace as
a positive, empowering and enriching experience.
After these explanations, it may hopefully not come over
as a propagandist statement when I argue that the beforementioned pamphlet of a Victorian gentleman anonymous is
by no means to be taken as a representative pedophile publication. In fact, much of the material commonly cited in bibliographies and link lists about pedophilia is of that kind and
has thus little value for research on childlove, the loving, empathic and emotionally balanced, and not chaotic or sadistic
erotic attraction for children.
To find cultures that bestowed on erotic childlove an aesthetic value, we have to go way back before Christian times.
Christianity never made an attempt to understand childlove,
even though the Vatican Library is reported to contain abundant material depicting and reporting sex stories between

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 213

priests and minister children. Depending on who was the
person in charge or the Pope, these cases were persecuted
with more or less rigor.
There were minority voices that stated pederasty between priests and young boys to be beneficial for both the
priest and the boy. It was argued inter alia that a priest was
committing a lesser sin by having sex with a child than with a
woman. I do not know what the opinion was regarding small
girls but I tend to think that the taboo on homosexuality
within the Christian belief system is stricter than illicit sex
with a virgin since in the latter case it is believed, according
to the Genesis, that the woman, though small, is always the
beginner.
On the aesthetic level, the Church has definitely not contributed to integrate childlove in its paradigm. Its position is
similarly defensive as the official positions of Islam or Buddhism while, here as well, sex relations between religious officials and children are reported in the literature. While those
events are simply taken as abuse or, in a less aggressive way,
as ‘weakness of the flesh,’ I could so far not see an effort
within organized religions to come to at least an open discussion, a paper, a research or otherwise a creative way to
deal with the fact that children have a sexual side, and that
it’s okay, and a plus for them, when they are sexually attractive for adults. In ancient times, that was rather different.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 214

In the meantime, almost everybody knows that pederasty
was practiced with the Greeks and the Romans, but few
people looked deeper, to see that in those cultures, pederasty was already on the decline and had taken low and abusive forms. Where we see childlove blossoming without such
abuses, and without the sadistic component, is in still older
cultures such as for example Minoan Civilization, prepharaonic Egypt, ancient Persia and Turkey until, still farther
back in time, the Sumer civilization. The abuses came about
through slavery, later on, and were not originally contained in
the custom of loving children erotically.
First of all, lovers are not per se abusers. This is so for all
love, not only for childlove. Lovers are those who live their
love in conscious awareness of all its implications. Abusers
are those who repress their love or are unconscious about a
drive they do not understand and not really try to handle.
This is true for both adults and children, for children can be
lovers, too. They have been pushed in our culture into the
role of the passive ‘sufferer’ in the love relation which is an
ignorant reduction of their total ability for love, and sexual
love.
In ancient cultures, children were not yet seen as beings
of a second class, but as adults’ possible love partners. Sexual relations with children were widespread and they were
socially regulated. Ancient societies, unlike our present

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 215

postmodern industrial cultures, were aware of the immanent
sexual attractiveness of children—while incest was effectively
prohibited, and much more effectively than today, because
every father could easily hold his fingers off his own offspring
by finding willing children in temple prostitution and brothels. That is why it was easy for parents to comply with the incest taboo; they could effectively restrain from seeking sexual favors from family members. This may have been one of
the reasons why ancient society regulated childlove; religion,
at that time, was a foremost social regulator and was able to
provide the social institutions for that purpose. One of the
main outlets was temple prostitution. Temple prostitutes
were young boys and girls, and in a great variety, so that
every lover could find what he needed for his individual
taste.
I do not know exactly from which age the children went
there, but I suppose it was from the usual age of consent at
that time that was 7 years with the Hebrews and the Egyptians, probably lower in Sumer—supposedly three years and
one day, if we are to follow the information on ancient clay
tablets.
Childlove and copulation with children had an aesthetic
value at that time and was on the same level as religious
service, while men who frequented temple prostitutes were
not marginalized in any way; in fact, most of these men were

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 216

married and had a family. The children did the work as a religious service as it was believed that intercourse they
granted to men who desired them sexually was actually intercourse with the Goddess of Love, Aphrodite or a similar
goddess according to their tribe or society.
Ancient cultures bestowed to temple prostitution an aesthetic, artistic value. Poets chanted childlove, and what we
still have in Plato’s Banquet or similar writings can be considered a tiny leftover of the original abundance of this kind of
creations that we lost over time through the ruthless art vandalism rampant in later moralistic epochs, and especially the
Barbarian attitudes against erotic art that orthodox Christianity and Islam practiced over many centuries.
The youthful energy of Hermes, God of the Merchants
and Thieves was that of young boys around puberty, who irradiate a youthful bliss that is able to charm the hardest male
into complacent friendship and love.
The myth is probably much older and the archetype of
the eternal youth, a never-aging adolescent, is one of the
oldest myths of humanity, represented, for example, in the
astrological sign of Gemini or the Peter Pan story. Its female
counterpart is Aphrodite, the Goddess of Love, for in ancient
representations she is not depicted as an adult woman but
as a young girl, driving men to the worst of love crimes with
the sweet passion she inflicts upon them.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 217

Affectionate vs. Sadistic Childlove
It appears that with one group of men sex fantasies involving children tend to be affectionate, and with another
group of men fantasies take on violent and sadistic forms. It
has been found that sex fantasies are important for integrating our desires, especially when their fulfillment meets societal disapproval.
Until now it could not be demonstrated by research if
erotic fantasies initiate sexual acting out or rather avoid it
through a non-targeted energetic release of the fantasizedupon content in masturbation. The literature on the subject
is hopelessly controversial. The only thing that experts appear to be agreeing upon is the universal existence of sex
fantasies within every human being, child or adult. The crucial question, it seems, is how we cope with such fantasies,
while the question much more interesting for the psychologist is why we have such fantasies at all and what their function is in our psyche?
First of all, I think erotic fantasies or, more generally put,
love fantasies are an involuntary production of our psyche
and a form of creativity that is induced by the loving current
or psychic energy that we constantly exchange with others.
The fantasies could represent ways how we respond to loving energies received from others and they could be ways to
mirror this love transfer back to the person that emitted it.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 218

The particular characteristic of love fantasies is that they are
thought forms that contain love wishes, specific ways we wish
our love and desire to be fulfilled physically and, often, sexually, with the other person as a mate and partner. I want to
focus here only on sexual fantasies while there certainly are
also many non-sexual love fantasies.
Sexual fantasies can be classified into affectionate and
sadistic. While in affectionate sex fantasies, sex is fantasized
upon as a form of loving sexual exchange, involving or not
penetration or intercourse, sadistic sex fantasies contain
elements not contained in the merely affectionate sex fantasy. These fantasies regarding the sexual mate are characterized by the mate being tricked or dragged into the relation, fooled, corrupted, degraded, perverted, entrained, kidnapped, beaten, spoiled, hurt, damaged, victimized, overwhelmed, raped, gang raped, assaulted and to the very extreme, tortured and killed. While in the affectionate sex fantasy, the love game is an exchange with the sexual mate, in
the sadistic fantasy there is typically a one-sided debasing
action that is inflicted upon the mate. In the first case we encounter empathy, in the second, hostility.
How can sex be linked, then, to positive, affective feelings, on one hand, or to negative, hostile, degrading and
even hateful feelings, on the other? The secret is that sexual
urges can get linked to every possible feeling because it’s

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 219

not sexual urges that decide about how those urges are lived
out, but non-sexual emotions and, first of all, the way we
handle personal power. When personal power has been
smashed early in life and the person has an overwhelming
power need, there is a tendency toward compensating for
this lacking power by abusing of power over others. If, by
contrast, a person has been able to built an adequate level
of primary power, self-power or soul power early in life and
did not feel smashed or crippled in the realization of their
ambitions, power typically is lived positively and not as a
vacuum to be filled. In most sexual problems, especially in
cases where sex becomes a weapon to subdue and humiliate
others, the true problem is not sex, but a power hangup that
triggers a destructive hunger for power, and more power.
These are very strong urges.
Sex, then, becomes the specific pathway or tool this
power hunger is going to be satisfied on the expense of another and at the cost of his or her discomfort. In sadistic pedophilia, this pathological thirst for power is particularly
harmful wherefrom result the violent social reactions against
such crimes. The whole pedophilia discussion is actually
overshadowed by this single very important but rather marginal aspect of pedophilia.
Of course, no cause and no endeavor is pure. There is always a perverted form of it to be found on the human

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 220

agenda, but the manipulation and the social hate campaigns
are to be explained by the fact that the few marginal cases
where pathological power thirst becomes linked to childfocused sexual longing are taken for the ‘normal’ picture of
pedophile love. The fact that every kind of love can be lived
both constructively and destructively does surely not mean
that humans should restrain from loving. This, however, is in
last resort what the nonsensical argument of the majority and
the media in matters of childlove boils down to! Seen from
this angle, its absurdity is more shocking than the absurdity
of abuse. For if abuse is a perversion of desire, the allegation
that certain forms of love were nothing but abuse is a perversion of life!
Sadistic childlove, on a fantasy level, is a necessary counterpart of affectionate childlove. Fantasies are not actions;
fiction is not reality. That sadistic fantasies get acted out is
because social norms and attitudes do not provide an outlet
or sufficient outlets for constructive affectionate childlove.
Sadism is a denial reaction of the bioenergetic system; its
root cause is the pent-up sexual energy and emotional
stuckness, and not the natural and flowing sexual tension. It
originates in love denial and is a direct consequence of moralism and collective love prohibition.
Research with heterosexual men has shown that even
among socially well-adjusted subjects once in a while sadistic

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 221

sex fantasies involving women are experienced. More detailed research has shown that, typically, sadistic fantasies
come up if either the sexual object is not available or that
she refused to be a sexual mate, or that generally jealousy or
anger is part of the experience. Every porn sex site on the
Internet or, in general, heterosexual pornography proves this
fact as the overwhelming tenor in heterosexual porno is that
the female is shown as an object, and that rape-like acts by
far dominate the scene. Thus, sadistic fantasies can be said
to be socially accepted when they are situated within heterosexual love.
This research also showed that in the great majority of
cases, sadistic fantasies are discharged by masturbation and
are not resulting in sexual assaults against the women that
were the subjects of the fantasies, or other women. I cannot
see why, when such phantasms involve children instead of
adults as sexual objects, they should be considered differently!? My hypothesis is that sadistic fantasies involving children come up primarily because of a lack of tangible love
possibilities and the more or less prolonged sexual frustration.
However, the present public discussion suggests that sadistic sex fantasies serve no purpose or are an indicator for
the perversity of the desire itself. As shown above, fantasies
also exist with heterosexual lovers who have no homosexual

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 222

or pedophile interests. In addition, to respond to this argument, we should begin to see clearly what perversion is and
what it is not.
Perversion appears to be produced by fear. And it is
equally true that psychological fear is perversion, an up-side
down of the élan vital, a retrogradation of the love energies,
an obstruction of the life force.
The most important thing to know about perverse desires
is that they come up through the repression of original desires; thus, the perverse desire kind of replaces the original
desire and compensates for its lack. In other words, the perverse desire has two functions, a replacement function and a
compensation function.
Perversion, we could attempt to define, then, is a strongly
distorted form of sexual love, a sexual desire that is mutilated in a way to result in its very contrary. Instead of love and
life, what comes out in perversion is hate and death. In the
Freudian terminology, we would say that perversity is not a
manifestation of libido but a variant of the death instinct.
One may argue that rape is a perversion from natural mutually consenting love, and I think much speaks for that view,
but it does not help us any further in our regard on pedophilia.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 223

Does Pedophilia Equal Child Rape?
Instead, the question stands in the room if pedophilia
equals child rape? To repeat it, one may consider rape as an
act so hostile and so far removed from normal love that it has
to be considered a perversion; but we have to see also that
this is by no means a criteria to be applied only for pedophilia. Surely, some pedophiles rape, but also some heterosexuals rape, and some homosexuals rape. Rape has reasons
that are not related to one’s sexual orientation. It has primarily power reasons.
— This is the tenor of a widely published and influential rape researcher, Nicholas Groth, in his book Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender (1980).

Rape is a form of compensation for feeling powerless that
uses sexuality as a weapon against another rather than a loving exchange as it is in affectionate sexuality. I think once we
seriously consider these implications, we can learn a lesson
about human love considering its very contrary.
Krishnamurti often said in his talks that we cannot define
love while we can define and look at all what is not love.
Looking this way at perversion, we can see that in all perverse behavior is to be found a residual form of thwarted
love that, if it was not so tragic, would certainly be considered as clownish in some way, or scurrilous. When we look
even deeper, we encounter fear, much fear. We can then see

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 224

that it is fear, and nothing but fear that originally distorts love
into perversion.
In love there is no fear; love is carefree, love is abundant
and it is giving. Perversion is paranoid, it is avaricious and
heavily focused on an exorbitant need for self-gratification;
in its inability to yield, and to give, it is utterly narcissistic.
Love is sharing, and shared pleasure, while perversity is egotistic and lonely enjoyment at the cost of another, even at the
cost of his or her life. Thus, while in love there is always natural care, perversity typically is little or not caring about the
mate.
What are the fears that distort natural love into perversity? A generalized answer does not exist. There are complex
reasons, individual and collective. I always found our culture
unnatural and perverse in its very roots. To prohibit the child
to live their natural emotions and sexuality is perverse. There
is no argument to be brought up against that. This millenary
practice in itself is a flagrant violation of nature in its most
tender origins.
Free Choice Relations for Children?
I contend that child sexuality is such a controversial issue
only for one single reason: people intuit that allowing the
child to be emotional and randomly sexual will deprive them
of a powerful tool to control children.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 225

Sexually enlightened and experienced children have little
in common with the dull and insensitive consumer rats
brought up in our repressive modern culture; and they are
not easily blindfolded. They will not throw themselves onto
every new merchandise because they have a naturally gratifying relation with their bodies.
In addition, people intuit that they would not be able to
maintain their violent and projective attitudes toward pedophiles, simply because a number of children would demand
emotional and sexual relations with adults who feel randomly
or exclusively attracted to children. Thus, they fear to lose
even more control over their offspring.
Here, we have the true psychological reasons why child
sexuality and pedophilia must logically be banned from a
consumer culture that functions through manipulating the
individual into consumption, and more consumption. Let me
give an example.
There is in Cambodia a stringent campaign against child
sex, since about 2004, which was initiated by the United
States government, UNICEF and NGOs from various European nations. The standard UNICEF poster that is displayed
at strategic locations carries the header:
—Sex with Children is a Crime.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 226

My suggestion is simple. The Cambodian government
should fund and carry out a second campaign that is addressed to children and that is promoted under the header:
—Sex with Adults is a Crime.
Seeing the whole propaganda under this perspective, it
appears absurd. Why does it appear absurd? Because no
government in the world would do that? No, not for this reason. It’s absurd because it reveals the whole falseness and
the extreme bias of the propagandistic plea to demonize
adult-child sexual relations. If children were informed in the
same way to be forbidden to have sex with adults as adults
are informed to carry their hands off children, questions
would be asked, and these questions, then, would reveal all
that is presently hidden in the media rhetoric about so-called
‘international pedophilia.’
It would namely become obvious that the plea of child
protection is a no-namer, if not an utter fake; the protection
of children deprives them of their right for free choice relations and erotic self-determination.
In one word, such a campaign or the very thought of it
reveals that the true reason for the pedophilia taboo is the
enslavement of the consumer child, and no other reason.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 227

Lover vs. Offender
The media discriminate very little between the one who is
in for love, and one who is in for offending society. Not only
is there no discrimination, but the media even suggest that
there is only the latter type of person, extrapolating this
character and by implication saying that this is what is called
‘the typical pedophile.’ The media suggest that these men
who clearly are a minority—
—are perverse in their sexual setup;
—are representing the majority of pedophiles;
—are organized in worldwide rings;
—are speaking in public pro domo the childlove cause;
—are justifying violence, abduction, and penetration of
the child.
The two types or characters are easily recognized. The
obsessed schizophrenic and chaotic type, that by far dominates most of the media reports, has a facial expression that
is mask-like and lacks expression of emotions and of empathy. These men appear to have done a deal with society, a
devil’s deal one may say: they have taken the revenge position, the position that says, I’ll take revenge at society by using that child as an assault-receiver.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 228

Here, the child becomes some kind of sacrificial object for the chaotic unconscious of the perpetrator-rapist.
These men are regularly very little educated and have a definite macho-mindset, typically unaware of their feminine side,
their anima, which makes that they usually are rough if not
brutal with the little mates they tend to abduct from home or
school.
The detail of abducting the child is an archetypical element that is really important. Without the fact of abduction,
these offenders would probably not find the thrill they need,
because then the collective ‘revenge’ aspect of the assault is
not strongly enough expressed. Some of these offenders
have a political agenda in the sense that they use the child as
a sacrificial goat and poison container for actually assaulting
society at large. In this sense, they do not really belong to
the group of sex offenders, but the group of what is nowadays called terrorists and that was earlier in history called anarchists.
Cases of this kind have in common that offenders do seldom display signs of empathy or emotion, and that they are
outspoken and sometimes bluntly honest. Some even seem
to derive pleasure from the fact to be hyper-explicit, shocking, and accusatory, instead of being defensive and vulnerable.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 229

This type of offenders appear to actually retaliate at society for being marginalized with their love, and this may explain why they turned violent. These offenders are not the
ones who commit passion crimes but they are among those
who do reflect upon what they do, and who have a philosophy behind their crime, or the crime even is used as a strategic tool for political reasons in their hidden agenda.
In such kind of cases I cannot speak of love because the
character of the deed is intently to hurt society by hurting a
child; thus, what appears to be the case here is a sort of
‘sexual terrorism,’ targeted at violating the emotions of many
people who really suffer from the idea that a helpless child is
brutally raped; by deeply penetrating in children’s bodies
and souls, these offenders inflict hurt on a collective scale.
Masaru Emoto’s water research has shown to what extent
vibrations can affect our thoughts, bodies and emotions, so
perhaps it’s not too far-fetched to say that those crimes can
act like real bombs, which is why I use the analogy of terrorism to describe these cases.
I think if the general public or at least journalists were not
really confused about this, they would not as easily put these
cases in one pot with cases where adults are in for having
had sex with a child within a love relation.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 230

So, analyzing this carefully, it appears that these people
are not childlovers because their primary intent is not love,
but various non-sexual motives that have to do with hurt,
with being hurt themselves when they were children and with
taking revenge at society at large, using the victim as a sacrificial goat. Unfortunately so, the very zeal of the child protectors for ‘fighting perversity’ is what drives these people so
deadly furious in counter-attacking society, virtually sacrificing children for their abysmal cause of hatred and revenge.
It is significant here to point out that in these cases, both
society and these sadistic child abusers are defending an
ideological cause. It’s a vicious circle altogether. Here we
speak about ideologies, not about love.
Not only from my own research, but as a conclusion of
the abundant forensic, clinical and psychiatric material I went
through over the years, I found that those who label themselves childlovers or pedophiles tend to have a different set
of character altogether.
First of all they are emotional, which can be seen on their
faces. While sadistic, chaotic and schizophrenic offenders
tend to have mask-like faces where emotions are banned
from getting at the surface of the personality. Consciously
pedophile men and women tend to have faces where emotionality and empathy are present; while some of them may
suffer from a narcissistic hangup, they generally seem to be

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 231

more vulnerable as a group than sadists and suffer more
from enforcement procedures taking against them compared
to the often astounding stoicism of the sadistic or schizophrenic type. In fact, they are able to cry which is something
surely defended by the character set of the hard-core violent
abuser types. What we face here simply are different kinds of
people, while law enforcement treats them as one rut.

CHAPTER EIGHT
Is Pedophilia a Sexual Perversion?
Introduction
In this chapter, I am going to ask if pedophilia, as it is often argued, is per se a perversion? I have reported already
earlier on in this study that according to psychiatry, all sexual
paraphilias are no more considered by psychiatry as a sexual
perversion.
However, in the popular media, and in political debates,
the theme is recurring to equate pedophilia with perversion.
It’s almost daily talk in our television reports and talk shows,
and yet it’s factually incorrect.
The assessment of the DSM is interesting in that the only
difference between the paraphilias and ‘normal’ sexual behavior is the ‘intensity’ of the fantasies. It is asserted by researchers that non-clinical studies of individuals with unusual

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 232

sexual interests demonstrate that these individuals are indistinguishable from those with ‘normophilic’ sexual interests.
That means in clear text, that the DSM argues in a circular
manner and is ultimately simply an ordeal of normative values that are thrown over the head of the patient, and sold as
‘diagnosis.’ Well, sorry, this is what in all gulags was and is
done to intellectual and political dissidents, and thus, we are
not dealing here with an instrument to be applied in a democracy, but with a toolset of fascist control.
There is an interesting side-remark to be made about the
psychiatric assessment of paraphilias effected by Dr. Charles
Moser that I am going to review further down, on the question if the paraphilias are mental disorders, or if their inclusion in the DSM was based on normative rather than factual
considerations?
Now, regarding pedophilia, while the authors argue for
removal of all paraphilias, they assert at the end of their paper, pedophilia was a ‘special case,’ in that pedophiles occupied ‘a particularly odious position’ in our society. Hence the
authors argue that the removal of pedophilia from the DSM
did ‘not bring any advantage to pedophile offenders, in the
contrary.’
The authors state that the removal of pedophilia from the
DSM would ‘focus attention on the criminal aspect of those

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 233

acts, and not allow the perpetrators to claim mental illness as
a defense or use it to mitigate responsibility for their crimes.’
— Dr. Charles Moser & Peggy J. Kleinplatz, DSM-IV-TR & The
Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal, Journal of Psychology and
Human Sexuality, 17 (3/4), 91-109 (2005), 11, ‘The Special Case of
Pedophilia.’

Well, this comes as a surprise for it’s not logically understandable why pedophilia should make a categorical exception among the paraphilias, to get a ‘special treatment?’
What the authors do here is actually taking with one hand
what they have given with the other; in other words, it is a
circular argument. The social situation of pedophiles is not
the cause but the consequence of the arbitrary laws on the
matter and the normative nonsense that is codified by the
DSM—as the authors themselves criticized it. So this is a tautological and illogical conclusion—uroboric nonsense!
Their argument is bluntly and clearly normative; how can
these people come up with believing they were empirically
oriented psychiatrists whose diagnoses would need to be
based on facts, not unverifiable diagnostic dogma? With that
turn at the end of the paper, the authors show that they are
as dogmatic as the early sexologists were, and that their
whole rhetoric is but a paper claim without being carried by
an intention to really bring about a reform in our sexological
landscape.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 234

This being said, it may be understood by the reader that I
prefer to develop my own logic in this and other books,
rather than paraphrase the nonsense that ‘accredited
authorities’ abound of in their ‘scientific treatises.’ If the logic
of ‘scientific authorities’ in sex research goes as far as it was
demonstrated by this paper, then I better develop my own
etiology that at least is based upon direct perception, intuitive insight, and experience, not the paper knowledge of socalled scientists.
In one word, should these authors be reminded that the
topic they were talking about is not DSM or any other capital
letter nonsense, but love! And of that, sorry, they obviously
understand strictly nothing. Quid est demonstrandum. (Who
would have expected they did?)
What are Sexual Paraphilias?
In addition to my glossary item about sexual paraphilias, I
am adding here more specialized information. While for
most people today in modern societies and in the urban environment, heterosexuality may go beyond intercourse malefemale within a valid marriage, and may encompass promiscuous sex, premarital sex and even group sex, and while
homosexuality equally is recognized socially since about
twenty years, this is not so far the case for the so-called sexual paraphilias, as for example pedophilia, gerontophilia,
nepiophilia or zoophilia.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 235

— Please note that this statement may not be true for certain countries where religion is still more or less compulsive or even coercive,
and it may not be true even for very liberal countries, when you go
to a rural, provincial environment, and a population that is older
than average. All these factors need to be considered. When I express myself generally here, it always means in a modern secular
society and an urban setting, and in addition, a certain education
level of those who are dealing with the information.

Let us look a moment at this rather unusual term, first
from a dictionary point of view, then from a psychiatric perspective. The Dictionary application for Apple Mac OS X defines a paraphilia rather normatively as ‘a condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.’ Merriam Webster’s dictionary
seems to see it in more modern terms, defining paraphilia as
‘a pattern of recurring sexually arousing mental imagery or
behavior that involves unusual and especially socially unacceptable sexual practices (as sadism or pedophilia).’ Healthline (healthline.com) contains very useful information that I
will quote:
Definition
Paraphilias are sexual feelings or behaviors that may involve sexual partners that are not human, not consenting, or
that involve suffering by one or both partners.
Description

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 236

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (known as the DSM) fourth edition text revised (DSM-IV-TR), the manual used by mental health professionals to diagnose mental disorders, it is not uncommon for
an individual to have more than one paraphilia. The DSM-IVTR lists the following paraphilias: exhibitionism, fetishism,
frotteurism, pedophilia, sexual masochism, sexual sadism,
transvestic fetishism, and voyeurism. The DSM-IV-TR also includes a category for paraphilia not otherwise specified,
which is the category for the less common paraphilias, including necrophilia, zoophilia, and others.
Pedophilia
Pedophilia involves sexual activity with a child, generally
under age 13. The DSM-IV-TR describes a criterion that the
individual with pedophilia be over 16 years of age and be at
least five years older than the child. Individuals with this disorder may be attracted to either males or females or both,
although incidents of pedophilic activity are almost twice as
likely to be repeated by those individuals attracted to males.
Individuals with this disorder develop procedures and strategies for gaining access to and trust of children.
Now, the question is if pedophilia really is a ‘disorder’ in
the sense of the DSM. I will discuss this question in the next
sub-chapter. Here, I would like to make it clear to the reader
what a paraphilia actually is.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 237

Please be aware that there are two levels of discussion,
the level of our popular media and of the populace at large,
and the level of sexology, the level of actual sex research, as
well as the psychology of sexual behavior. While you may argue that this is always the case, with whatever subject we are
talking about, the distortion, if not aberration of truth that
has taken place in the discussion of sexual behavior in our
culture has long roots. It has to do with our anti-sexual ecclesiastical dogmatism that reigned for at least one thousand
years in Europe and that has left deep scars in our collective
unconscious. In a way all matters sex are subjected to shame
and guilt, and there are few people who can even discuss
them in a democratic, and somewhat rational manner. And if
this is true generally for sex, it is so much the more true for
adult-child sexual interaction, and pedophile attraction. This
is why even randomly objective observation can’t be found,
other than in dusty libraries, but surely not online, on the
Internet. All that had a resemblance of truth was removed by
police and security forces since about fifteen years now, and
during that time, not surprisingly so, the turn to fascist opinions on the matter became all too marked.
This is why, as a general information, it has to be seen
and understood that the argument ‘If this was true, I would
since long have seen it on television or on the Web’ is a cognitive misevaluation. It’s a pitfall of perception. This domain is
taboo in our society and that means not just the behavior it-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 238

self is penalized and demonized but talking about it as well;
hence, free speech in these matters has been severely restricted, to a point that a monolithic politically correct image
on the question was distilled and that is what is served from
all the servers around the world, as the ‘truth’ about pedophilia.
I can only say, as I said it as a child already, when I looked
through the veil, that this is the way stupidity is duplicated
and eternalized, but not the way the human being is going
to evolve in consciousness. Sexuality is the number one
complexity issue we have about the human, and if this complexity is denied, we are going to get where we got in 1933,
the straight haven of fascism. That’s why I argue that our position regarding pedophilia, or the paraphilias, is paramount
for either safeguarding democracy, or leading us into the
abyss of further holocausts and crystal nights. This is how
matters are, and this explosiveness of the topic is certainly
not to be put on the back of pedophiles themselves, but on
the back on a society that is simply too stupid to get eventually, after 5000 years of patriarchal madness, to a point where
it begins to understand life systemically, and intelligently.
In addition, in matters of pedophilia, the academic level
is not much more enlightened than the popular level, as
there are myths that are sold for truth—just as the fact that in
the DSM, the homosexual pedophile is taken as more dan-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 239

gerous than the heterosexual pedophile. I know that there is
no conclusive research that could back such a claim, and yet
it was put in the definition, simply because the psychiatric
establishment wanted it to be there, in the first place.
In the abstract to the article The DSM & Paraphilias, submitted in 2003 to the American Psychiatric Association (APA)
by Dr. Charles Moser, Ph.D. M.D., a practicing physician, psychotherapist and professor of sexology at the Institute for
Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco, it is
stated:
—The DSM-IV-TR (2000) sets its own standards for inclusion of diagnoses and for changes in its text. The Paraphilia section is analyzed
from the perspective of how well the DSM meets those standards.
The concept of Paraphilias as psychopathology was analyzed and
assessed critically to determine if it meets the definition of a mental
disorder presented in the DSM; it does not. The Paraphilia diagnostic category was critiqued for logic, consistency, clarity, and whether
it constitutes a distinct mental disorder. The DSM presents ‘facts’ to
substantiate various points made in the text. The veracity of these
‘facts’ was scrutinized. Little evidence was found in their support.
Problems with the tradition of equating particular sexual interests
with psychopathology were highlighted. It was concluded that the
Paraphilia section is so severely flawed that its removal from the
DSM is advocated.
— Dr. Charles Moser & Peggy J. Kleinplatz, DSM-IV-TR & The
Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal, Journal of Psychology and
Human Sexuality, 17 (3/4), 91-109 (2005).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 240

It is enlightening to have a look at the evolvement of the
DSM regarding the paraphilias, and also to look at the history of sexuality. In our culture, there is really no intelligent
approach to be found for understanding the diversity of human erotic attraction, and as a result there was and is very
little tolerance for sexual minorities. This was and is, contrary
to what Moser writes in his paper, not universally so. Not ‘historically and cross-culturally’ as he asserts, was there accusation, death, and imprisonment for any interest in specific
sexual practices, but well in our root cultures that are coming
from Judeo-Christian patriarchy.
The pattern of emosexual life denial is typical of patriarchy and was the most ruthlessly practiced in the few cultures
that today are the high-tech countries, and the richest countries, around the world. Guess why they are rich and hightech? Through their extreme sexual intolerance, they have
driven people virtually ‘out of their bodies’ and ‘into their
brains,’ namely through hypertrophy of the left brain and the
neglect of, and disregard for, the qualities of the right brain.
That is why we are leading split existences today, and one of
the reasons of the paraphilia complex is exactly a lacking integration of mind and body because of the cultural dressage
early in childhood. That is also why we have cancer and immune deficiency syndrome, and a range of other ‘lifestyle
diseases’ that would better be called ‘anti-lifestyle diseases.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 241

It’s a form of neurosis that is culturally sanctified, justified
and legalized in all possible ways. This schizoid split, as I call
it, is programmed into our very genes, as members of this
cultural tradition—while I deny that this is universally so.
Western researchers have always had this bias to declare
as universal what really is limited to our own cultural perversity. This was already the case with Freud, and with Moser it’s
not lesser the case. And while this paper surely has its merit,
it is flawed in this point, and would have had to be much
more radical, if this important cultural perspective had been
seen, and validated. In old India, China, Japan, Persia, Turkey, Egypt, and most tribal cultures, sexual preferences could
vary much more than in any of our violent patriarchies, and
this has been assessed by a number of researchers, among
them Riane Eisler.
— See Riane Eisler, Sacred Pleasure (1996).

It is true that all but procreative sex was traditionally considered in our culture as sexual perversion, and later on, as
mental disorders. The authors admit that ‘[i]t is exceedingly
difficult to eliminate historical and cultural factors from the
assessment of unusual sexual interests.’ They go as far as affirming that ‘equating of unusual sexual interests with psychiatric diagnoses has been used to justify the oppression of
sexual minorities and to serve political agendas.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 242

There was an important change in the DSM-III (1980)
where for the first time, it was intended ‘to be neutral with
respect to theories of etiology;’ at the same time the nomenclature of the paraphilias changed from ‘sexual deviation’ to ‘paraphilia,’ a descriptor that the authors call ‘supposedly atheoretical and non-pejorative.’
Is Childlove ‘Sicko’ Behavior?
In the populace, especially among the uneducated, but
also with a certain number of people who received higher
education, there is a long-standing belief that pedophilia, or
generally, the erotic attraction for children was ‘sicko’ behavior, a form of mental derangement or psychic insanity.
Apart from the fact that the same was believed in the
past regarding homosexuality, there is per se nothing that
indicates why a person should be ‘mentally deranged’ only
because their sexual energy manifests in a slightly different
way than that of the majority. All in this field is simply so
messed up by prejudice and life denial, and the terrible scars
done to real knowledge by the ecclesiastical dogmatism that
is a fact of our collective past that one must not wonder to
see people entangled and torn up with such pitifully ignorant
views. And as today a propaganda of the same sort, only under a different header, and with a different target intention is
the order of the day, we are not really a step ahead in our
evolution to an intelligent race that understands that human

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 243

sexual behavior is not animal-like, not based upon instinct,
but entirely upon learning, that is, sociocultural conditioning.
As Riane Eisler writes in Sacred Pleasure (1996), p. 22:
—In short, sex does not, as a once-popular song had it, ‘just come
naturally.’ Rather, as illustrated by the jarring differences in the prehistoric and contemporary sexual symbols and images we have
been comparing, sex is to a very large degree socially constructed.

When the DSM changed from ‘sexual deviation’ to
‘paraphilia,’ that means something. It means that from a
mental health perspective, childlove is no more considered
as ‘sicko’ behavior. And here we are not even talking about
Dr. Moser’s proposition. Just with the turn to DSM III (1980),
we already see that the normative stigma upon pedophilia
and the other paraphilias was alleviated, and a more functional regard began to make its way through psychiatry. This
functional regard is where we are today, and it’s the regard I
apply in all of my books.
Now, let’s see how things were developing. Already back
in 2000, the APA, based upon the latest edition of the DSM,
asserted that a literature review was required to update the
DSM, and that any further development of the DSM should
henceforth be ‘supported by an extensive empirical foundation.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 244

— Dr. Charles Moser & Peggy J. Kleinplatz, DSM-IV-TR & The
Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal, Journal of Psychology and
Human Sexuality, 17 (3/4), 91-109 (2005), 3.

Now, what the authors write is that their own extensive
literature review ‘found no literature to support most of the
assertions made in the paraphilia section of the DSM and
several studies were found to contradict the text.’
The authors conclude that objective data to support the
classification of the paraphilias as mental disorders is lacking.
As I pointed out already earlier in this chapter, the comparison with homosexuality is interesting; the authors state
that about 30 years ago, it was expected that the other
paraphilias were going to be removed from the DSM together with homosexuality, but this was not the case.
The interesting question is, why was homosexuality removed, then? The authors write that objective data were
lacking for supporting its inclusion; research confirmed that
homosexuals did not fit in specific psychiatric categories. The
authors suppose that the removal of homosexuality from the
DSM had political reasons, and that the situation, right now,
for the other paraphilias was practically the same as before
with homosexuality. Only a political decision, the authors say,
could lead to the removal of the paraphilias, or some of
them, from the DSM.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 245

This is of course explosive information when you hear
that said from the pulpit of psychiatrists judging their own
diagnostic manual.
If it’s political reasons only that were at the basis of the
removal of homosexuality, and if it’s political reasons that the
paraphilias were not removed, then sorry, I am right when I
say in this book and other books of mine that the fact that
pedophilia is considered mental derangement, rape and
chaotic behavior has political reasons, and is not for that
matter corroborated by any facts or any research.
The following part of the article discusses if the
paraphilias are mental disorders, or not, and the authors
plead they are not. What is interesting here is that my own
historical view of the development of sexual paraphilias is
shared by other researchers. The authors, quoting Bullough
& Bullough, Sin, Sickness and Sanity (1977), confirm my view
that what today is called paraphilia, was called sin by the
Church, and what was called crime now is called pathology
or, in popular language, ‘sicko’ behavior.
The authors retrace how ‘sexual sin’ became ‘sexual pathology;’ they mention Krafft-Ebing’s Psychopathia Sexualis
(1886/1965) as being a classical case. I have since long been
disturbed by the incredible arrogance and arbitrary judgmentality of those early sexologists, including Stekel and
Moll, German, all of them, who were not far, in their general

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 246

worldview, from the Nazi ideal of ‘racial and genetic purity,’
and whose views must scandalize any serious sex researcher
in our days.
But it was these people that were quoted as the early
‘authorities’ in matters of sexual behavior, also in legal textbooks; their treatises on sexual pathology stand for the
‘normative’ approach to sexology that preceded the present
‘functional’ and ‘empirical’ approach in sex research that was
mainly founded by people like Bullough, Rubin, Moser,
Green, and others.
I have recently shown there is equally a normative approach in psychoanalysis that parallels and duplicates this
blindfolding tradition later on with the psychoanalytic establishment.
Hence, no rational law making is to be found at the basis
of the demonization and criminalization of pedophilia; it is
what it was, arbitrary church laws turned into modern penal
law without any thought given to it by the modern lawmaker.
It’s a shame for any of our large democracies to have such
laws in place, and in addition, what is even worse, they are
unconstitutional altogether.
Childlove vs. Perversion
The persistent denial of mainstream international culture
to socially code pedoemotions within a framework of ac-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 247

ceptable erotic behavior is a fatal lack of responsibility with
disastrous consequences all over the globe.
—The majority’s response to their own natural pedoemotions is but
repression and oblivion, the classical attitude of cannot-be-whatmust-not-be that we know so well from Goethe’s Faust drama. They
are afraid of erotic intelligence, and they tend to fight an even basic
form of emosexual consciousness. The consequences are communication disabilities between adults and children and a generally
uncreative attitude in the educational work with children.
The essential truth gained from years of research into the functional
processes of life is that all parts of the psyche must be given a voice
so that a constructive inner dialogue can be set up.    
Part of this research is to show the role of loving children as an important manifestation of human love as it develops naturally as
compensation for the lacking child-child sexual contact in our society and the general emotional repression of the child in the patriarchal and feel-hostile culture.
It is to be shown that the repression of those compensatory love
functions disturbs this natural love orgonomy and creates violence
and abuse. Thus, child abuse is not brought about through pedophilia but in contrary through the repression of natural pedoemotions.

In order to work out a draft for such a positively coded
behavior pattern, we need to have a closer and deeper look
at what childlove really is, and why in fact adults turn toward
children for emotionally intelligent reasons.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 248

What is it, after all, that is so erotically attractive in children? Or is it something that can only be perceived by people sensitive for it because of their own hangup or erotic
specialness?
While it is obvious that without the love for children, the
human race would since long have disappeared from the
globe, it is still a matter of confusion what the place of erotic
attraction is within the greater framework of loving children. I
do not need to cite psychologists for stating that love and
erotic attraction is not necessarily the same, while they go
together on most occasions.
A closer look at language patterns seems to suggest that
there is an erotic element even in the natural desire or wish
that a couple has for procreating a child.
The French language is particularly transparent here. The
expression for a couple to desire a child is ‘désirer un enfant’
while the exact same expression, used in another context,
would mean to sexually desire a child, because, for example,
‘désirer une femme’ means in French the wish to have intercourse with a woman.
The whole psychiatric construct of the Oedipus Complex
is based upon the assumption that the child sexually desires
the parent of the opposite sex while being caught in a pattern of homosexual identification with the parent of the same

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 249

sex. Without the underlying assumption that parents and
their children desire each other sexually in some way, the
psychoanalytic theory would never have come to exist; psychoanalysts tend to argue in addition that the Oedipus
Complex was a universal phenomenon, to be observed in all
cultural settings, while this assumptions has been clearly invalidated by anthropological and ethnological research.
In my interview of Françoise Dolto in Paris back in 1986,
the famous child psychoanalyst affirmed the importance of
what she called ‘parler désir’ (talking desire) as an educational activity so as to create a verbal coding for child-adult
sexual relations in the child’s psyche. It has to be seen however that Dr. Dolto did not advocate the acting out of pedophile desires in the form of real-life sex within an educational
relationship and even more so vehemently rejected as wrong
and abusive such acting out in a therapeutic relationship with
a child. However, regarding all other non-educational and
non-therapeutic relationships between children and adults
outside their family, she believed that society should code
this form of sexual behavior that was in her view a normal
part of human relations since times immemorial.
It is indeed irresponsible to leave the public discussion
over to interest groups, pressured politicians, fearful religious
leaders and a hypocrite and misinformed mob that feeds
upon the stingy and the perverse in order to keep alive with

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 250

a basically negative worldview, a worldview that is deeply
schizophrenic. It is quite obvious to observe, in such a situation, how non-sexual emotions such as repressed anger, frustration, depression and schizophrenic splits occur, and why
the desire tends to be lived out perversely through abduction, sexual assault and murder.
These negative results are not an outflow of erotic love,
but are created by non-sexual phenomena when the natural
discharge of the sexual impulse is impaired by social stigma
and denial.
Society so far does not contribute to understanding childlove and thus contributes to the rise of more or less perverse
forms of it. By the same token, a misinformed and irrationally
minded public acts here as a group victim of irresponsible
propaganda, instilled or tolerated by corrupt politicians and
political or religious leaders who believe in an archaic eyefor-eye, a witchhunt paradigm or in what I call ‘the impossible human.’
The persistent denial of mainstream international culture
to socially code pedoemotions in a framework of acceptable
erotic behavior represents a fatal lack of responsibility with
disastrous consequences all over the globe.
Where democracy shows that it is but a hidden form of
terror or the oligarchic tyranny of a group of elite neo-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 251

fascists, it has lost its right to be qualified as a democratic
form of government, and it has to be taken into reform by
responsible citizens.
While I do not think that violent forms of political conduct
can bring any good, for what they bring is still more violence,
I request a deeper understanding, a stronger commitment to
truth and a better communication between all parties involved in the public discussion. I honestly believe we should
open up to a debate that is public not only on paper, but
public in the old Roman sense of the word, as a matter of the
res publica, of public concern. And it is with empathy and
concern, not frivolity and certainly not aggression and violence that such a public discussion has to happen if it is at all
to bring anything positive.
The present discussion reminds me of how Freud characterized, at the beginning of the 20th century, the situation he
faced when he first began to apply psychoanalysis in the
treatment of neuroses. For what Freud pointed out at the
beginning of the 20th century is still valid at the beginning of
the 21st; what dominates the situation is a double standard,
falseness, cowardice and a collective shut-your-mouthattitude over issues that are considered social dynamite.
Actually, the issues have barely changed. At Freud’s time,
it was neurosis that plagued our culture, today it is paranoia,
and schizophrenia.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 252

Even though many people may have a vague idea of
what pedophilia really means emotionally for both the lover
and the love child, the implications of loving a child erotically
must be looked at with more accuracy.
To begin with, let us evaluate child-child erotic contacts.
Peer relations, strangely enough, are often overseen in the
recent heated debate on child-adult sex. The first to desire
small children as sexual partners are adolescents! This is no
secret for psychologists, educators and all who are close to
adolescents and know about their bubbling sexuality. Yet, in
recent years a really shocking amount of criminal sentences
have been pronounced against adolescents who had sex
with younger child mates. Only then, it seems, the mass public noticed the age-old fact of life that adolescents are sexual, and perhaps more sexual than the rest of us.
However, seen from the perspective of how children are
living together and considering the practices in tribal cultures, love relations between adolescents and smaller children are completely natural and healthy. Of course, I do not
include here adolescents who have exorbitant power needs
because something went wrong in their upbringing. Because
in these particular cases I agree with the judges that the
smaller child may easily be victimized.
Originally however and in a sane environment, adolescents’ desire for smaller children is rather tender and roman-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 253

tic while it certainly includes sexual arousal; the sane adolescent will not overpower a younger child just because he’s
stronger but he will try to impress the child with his greater
knowledge, force or social influence. It’s a love game, then,
and not a rape game. And it will take considerable time until
an ado will begin to act out his sexual desire with the child.
He namely fears reject more than all in life. He therefore prefers to wait longer and have a longer-lasting friendship with
the little boy or girl than to proceed ruthlessly and experience a setback.
Adolescents are very sensitive, even those who come
over as brute or coarse. That’s often a façade or shield they
are using to hide their deeper feelings, for fear of being ridiculed.
What actually happens in sane adolescent-child relations
is that the adolescent is protective regarding the smaller
child, sometimes as protective or even more protective than
a parent. This protectiveness includes tenderness and natural
care. Most adolescents, female or male, adore to babysit and
they are deeply hurt when parents are mistrusting and reject
their advances to babysit a small child. They may even grow
a hidden form of hatred toward all adults if this happens to
them repeatedly, especially when their fears to be rejected
are not rationalized and communicated. As a result of the
present pedophilia hysteria and child protection paranoia, I

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 254

picked up from the literature and the Internet that male adolescents are no more given public trust as eligible babysitters, a phenomenon that can have disastrous consequences
for their psychic and emotional wellbeing later in life.
Love relations between adolescents and children are very
lively, full of energy, full of joy, full of sexual tension, too. In
Africa, Southern Europe, the American Hispanic culture or in
Cuba and, of course, in Middle and South America, they are
widely common, being a part of the daily folklore. Also in the
Arabic culture they have a well established place within a
greater set of social rules that put the older brother on a particular position, a position close to the father. From that position is derived the power of the first-born or second-born
son over smaller siblings within the extended family structure, and accordingly, the range of possible abuse of that
privileged position.
It’s only a step to the next age group, also very strongly
represented in childlove relations, the age-group twenty to
about thirty-five. It is interesting to observe that the nature of
these relations is quite different from adolescent-child relations. There is less physical play, fewer outdoor activities,
more fondling, more closeness, more tenderness, more social activities, too. A childlover of more than thirty years of
age for the most part lives a rather lonely life, different from
a group-oriented adolescent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 255

The experience of his loved ones will be influenced by
this loneliness even if most childlovers can change their lifestyle quite flexibly once they get in touch. But what I have
observed is that true childlovers tend to reject youngsters
and also young girls who do not want to comply, at least for
a minimum of time, to contemplative moments of shared
tenderness.
Tenderness is perhaps the key word in childlove as it is
the key word in love, but certainly not in what today is practiced as heterosexuality and marriage. The obvious lack of
tenderness in fashionable love affairs and in many marriages
strongly indicates that these relations are not love, but forms
of socially approved rape, a way of maintaining archaic forms
of mating that may ideally suit monkeys but not humans.
Human love is spontaneous and tender, but public discussion tends to focus on where things have got out of hand
and where relations turned south or have turned abusive. As
if real love could not exist in adult-child erotic relations! And
yet every loving act defies the perverted standards of life
haters and persecutors. Every bit of courage of a father to
sleep with his naked children for giving them warmth, trust,
loving care and body energy defies the system. Every kiss
and warm embrace bestowed upon the boys or girls in a
class by a male educator defies and challenges the system.
Every time an early child care worker takes a bath with a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 256

baby, defying the perverse rules in day care centers all over
the Anglo-Saxon world, destroys a bit of a system that creates robots, perverted humans and schizophrenics, not sane
adults.

CHAPTER NINE
Love or Laws?
Introduction
What are sex laws good for? Are they regulating sexual
behavior? Are they helping the state supervise what we do in
bed, and with whom? Are they protecting minors? Are they
safeguarding morality?
What is the reason they have been established in the first
place, and when? And by whom? Are they built upon rational
and verifiable principles, or upon irrational assumptions, or
the dubious term ‘public morals,’ which ghosts around in legal textbooks.
What about facets that show the complexity of nonsadistic childlove, and its closeness to caring, loving behavior
that is typical for the parent-child relation? The definition of
the paraphilias contain that element of potential harm, of
dangerousness, and also the clause of lacking consent.
Dr. Moser writes in the before-mentioned paper that this
definition is flawed, as it can be shown that even sexual sa-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 257

dists choose their partners according to their need for consenting relationships; newer research showed in addition that
they do find their partners, as there are many more people
consenting to this kind of unusual sex interaction that involves bondage, sharp objects, and here, well a certain dangerousness of it all. But it’s not true that sexual sadists were
rapists in that they needed to have non-consenting intercourse. Dr. Moser made that very clear in his paper.
However, as I mentioned before, he makes a clear distinction regarding adult-child sexual relations, not from the psychiatric point of view, but because of criminal law. Laws can
only be changed by the lawmaker and we need to respect
what is set in place. The present study makes no exception
here, and I can only say in full agreement with Dr. Moser that
what I can do here is to show there are arguments that a future lawmaker may decide differently on the question.
I am going to show in this chapter the interesting parallels between childlove and sensuality, the importance of sensuality especially for children and adolescents, and their often unfulfilled need for more sensuality. Hence, when the
pedophile relation remains in the realm of the sensual, without stepping into the outright sexual, then not only do criminal laws not apply, but also from a social and ethical point of
view, there is virtually nothing that can reasonably be forwarded against such kind of relations, as the behavior on the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 258

side of the adult is simply caring, not demanding, and not
offending.
Besides, I also describe behaviors that well fall under
criminal laws, but I describe them to show their sensual and
non-paraphilic character. I assume that children do have the
ability to consent to pleasures given and taken. I also put up
a hypothesis, namely that it’s possible that a number of those
who call themselves ‘pedophiles’ do not actually search out
sex with children, but tender sensual relations that have a
predominantly caring character. While in their fantasies, they
may well desire penetration, they somehow manage to hold
back because of the obvious vulnerability of the child partner, to even attempt it. Hence, an argument could be made
to treat non-penetrative adult-child sexual relations differently than penetrative ones.
Further, I am going to elucidate the question if pedophilia is considered as ‘criminal behavior’ simply because of
the fact it’s regarded as abnormal? Hence, we have to ask, is
there any ‘normal’ sexual behavior; in other words, can a
standard of sexual normalcy be defined at all?
After, these preliminary questions, I come to the essential,
namely the strangest body of law there is in the world, sex
laws.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 259

In my career as a lawyer I have dealt with these laws quite
a bit, as they were my particular research topic, while I was
not the only jurist to be disgusted by them. I remember that
in our criminal law class at Saarland University law faculty,
Professor Dr. Kraus, criminologist, was long before me! He
said that none of our so-called sex laws had merited the
qualifier ‘law’ as they were for the most part arbitrary injunctions, built upon extra-legal considerations, such as moral
opinions, instead of being drafted as rational and verifiable
deeds. In addition, he showed us with many examples that
most of these laws are flagrant violations of constitutional
guarantees, especially the guarantee of nulla poena sine
lege, also known as due process, and thus of the very foundations of democracy.
After a year of postgraduate research conducted in the
United States, at the University of Georgia Law School (UGA),
I was so revolted by the disturbing current sex laws that I put
myself at work to draft a legal bill that intently liberates all
forms of mutually consenting sexual behavior from state supervision and control and leaves the stress solely upon cases
involving physical and sexual violence. In this draft bill, that I
am going to publish and discuss further down, I propose a
law that does not punish love or life, but only violence which
is something no responsible society should tolerate.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 260

In my attempt to publish that first paper on physical and
sexual violence against children, I was rejected by three publishers, one from Germany, one from the Netherlands and
one from the United States. My paper was found to be either
‘too feminist’ or ‘too revolting,’ depending on the orientation of the publisher. But I was encouraged to persist in my
efforts, for example by Françoise Dolto (1908-1988), the late
French child therapist and author of worldwide renown that I
knew in person. Dolto agreed with me that sex laws as they
are at present, and especially the laws for the protection of
minors, with their legal consent ages, are really punishing
life, and that their effect upon minors is all but protective;
she found that these laws namely enslave children and rob
them of their body. On the other hand, it has to be seen that
many psychoanalysts, and especially those, like Dolto, who
follow the Freudian approach, are double-tongued in that on
one hand they concede the child the right for self gratification in form of masturbation, but on the other deny the child
real erotic relationships with a mate, and thus partner relations. In fact, from the moment Freud rejected Reich’s activism for children having erotic peer relations, with the argument that ‘culture has to prevail,’ psychoanalysis by and large
backed up Western society’s persistent denial of children’s
free love life.
Sex laws seldom hit their goal because few people are
inclined to follow legal rules that are off-track, irrational, inef-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 261

fective, unjust or arbitrary. This is true for whatever legislation, not only for sex laws, but equally for alcohol or drug
prohibitions. There appears to be a paradox: prohibitions
contain an inherent seduction to be broken, even if there is
draconic punishment waiting for the law breaker.
Democracy can be measured on the scale of its prohibitory statutes. A system that regards its members as irresponsible wheels in a machine will tend to rule all and everything
about them, leaving them little personal choice, and granting them only a minimum amount of personal freedom. Such
a system will try to impose strict inflexible rules of conduct
upon each individual and leave it to the judiciary to deal with
those who offend the ant republic.
Anglo-Saxon terminology is in this respect revealing in
that it speaks of the offender and the sex offender. These
terms show that under the present paradigm criminal law actually retaliates against people who offend the system and
that victim protection is a fake concern. Thus, we are still in
the midst of the Middle-Ages. Furthermore, the term sex offender is outright ridiculous whatever one understands under
it; nobody can offend sex, and sex cannot offend the system.
So who does offend what in this truly criminal terminology?
The so-called offender then is actually not a sex offender but
rather a ‘morality offender.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 262

By contrast, a society that basically trusts its individuals,
and regards them as responsible citizens will formulate its
criminal laws only as a regulatory means for extreme, violent
or dangerous behavior. In other words, such a society will
only be inclined to use criminal laws for the purposes of confronting violent and thus non-consenting sexual behavior.
Since violence is violence regardless of the form it takes, a
democratic society will consider love and sexuality as basic
forms of human expression and togetherness. It will apply
restrictions only where violence is superimposed upon sex or
linked to sex in a way that sex becomes a weapon to overpower, to subdue or to humiliate the sexual partner. Thus,
the target behavior for criminal laws will be violence, and not
sex. In other words, it is the element of violence that will
qualify for sexual behavior being illegal.
From the moment we liberalize sexuality from its moralistic stigma, and children from child protection, which are both
residues of inquisitory church laws and, as such, have no
place in a modern legal system, we have no choice but admit
that sexuality, for people of whatever age, cannot reasonably
be subjected to governmental regulation and interference.
Regarding laws of consent, they have hardly any justification in a democratic society because their rationale is not
really protection but rather paternalistic control and enslavement. What I am trying to say is that the current age of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 263

consent laws are a form of ‘false imprisonment,’ if you will, in
the sense that the lives of children are heavily guarded and
thus their very freedom is limited.
In addition, it has to be seen that sex laws are largely ineffective to prevent sexual violence, which is a fact everyone
knows who reads the daily news.
On the other hand, there is no rationale to incriminate
consenting love and sex between generations whatever the
age of the partners may be. If sex laws at all protect anything, it’s morality—or what in legal textbooks is called ‘public morals,’ which is a chewing-gum clause that can be used
to put behind bars all and everybody when their opinions do
not please the current government. It’s really a clause that
opens the door to fascism and tyranny; while such clauses
have been banned throughout our modern legal system,
they still do their devil’s business in sex laws.
You can justify practically all with such lofty expressions
and it’s precisely because of their lacking contours, that this
term and many other similar terms are not fit for being part
of modern criminal law as they violate constitutional liberties
and are thus unconstitutional. What I am saying is that if only
one person would fight it through our legal system until the
Supreme Court of the United States, there is a high probability that the catch-all clause of ‘public morals’ would be de-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 264

clared unconstitutional under the Constitution of the United
States of America.
Karl Marx has convincingly shown that moral opinions in
any given culture are but an overlay pattern or roof structure
over the base structure that is made up by the social and
economic conditions. You can also say the moralistic roof
structure of any given society follows the economic root
structure. This can exemplarily be shown with age-of-consent
laws.
With growing industrialization, and the corresponding
longer educational cycle, the child remained a child for a
more extended period of time. Still within the craftsmanshipsubsistence culture of the Middle-Ages, social maturity of
the child generally coincided with sexual maturity, at age
twelve to fourteen.
Before the shift from liberalism to fascism in the years
1996-1998 in most Western countries, the reform of age-ofconsent laws was seriously discussed by various national parliaments, such as for example the Italian, the German and
the Dutch parliaments. In Germany, the Green Party came up
with the proposal to lower the age of consent to 14 years of
age. In Holland, the situation was even more liberal as the
police did not persecute sua sponte any contravention to the
age of consent when the child was more than 12 years old.
Only in case that both parents and child submitted a written

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 265

demand for criminal persecution, the police enforced the
law.
Another point of discussion were homosexual pedosexual contacts; it was said that they should eventually be
treated in the same way as heterosexual pedosexual contacts. Traditionally, even in Holland, these relations were
treated differently. And in most States of the United States,
they are treated differently as well. For example in Georgia,
the age of consent for girls is eighteen, for boys twenty-one.
As there is no rational basis for the discrimination of
same-sex pedoerotic contacts, most parliamentary committees wanted to abolish them, as they had been abolished in
Holland after the spectacular intervention of Senator Dr. Edward Brongersma who was charged with a six-months prison
sentence for having had sex with a boy of sixteen years of
age.
However, Dr. Brongersma fought against the judgment
and eventually won the legal action against the Dutch Government, and as a result the penal code was changed to
abolish any difference between heterosexual and homosexual adult-child sexual relations.
It is obvious that the lowering of ages of consent cannot
qualify for a real paradigm change! This kind of liberalization
rests with the old repressive patriarchal paradigm. And when

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 266

we look behind the curtain, we understand that the only purpose of this so-called reform was political day-time fuss, and
not a real change of basic beliefs.
Childlove and Normalcy
Some people forward the opinion that sexually all what is
not adult-adult love is ultimately the result of some or the
other form of inhibition or perversion, and that, thus, there
was something like a concept of normalcy that says ‘the best
sex is the one between two adult and mature partners of different sexes.’
In personal correspondence, the person who wrote me
this sentence came up with an extended and profit-based
project for ‘curing pedophiles’ through exposing them to
sexually highly experienced prostitutes in Thailand. This guy,
who is a fervent avatar of logical reality, intended to charge
every prospect the sum of twenty thousand dollars for such a
treatment. I replied to him that I have formal objections
against any such form of so-called therapy, and this for wellfounded ethical reasons. Let’s not forget that such ideas
abound in all fascist and totalitarian regimes and were an integral part of Hitler’s euthanasia strategies. This is what I
have to object:
—Normalcy does not exist in nature;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 267

—Normalcy is a left-brain concept, a pure intellectual
construct;
—The formula normalcy equals heterosexuality follows
the same bias;
—Heterosexuality is a cultural concept or idea, nothing
real;
—Sexuality is not a fixated condition;
—Humans are not animals who follow instinctual conditioning;
—Human sexuality is not a self-executing drive;
—Human sexuality is not an automatism;
—Human sexuality is not distinct, not abstract from human emotions;
—Sex attraction follows emotional attraction, not vice
versa;
—Sexual attraction cannot be split off from the individual
person;
—Sexual attraction is part of the soul continuum of the
person;
—Sexual attraction is invested with vital energy;
—Transforming a human being sexually is no solution;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 268

—Transforming a human being sexually violates human
dignity.
The argument that ethical considerations are not relevant
when the person gives a valid consent is juridically not tenable as there are a matters so vital that they cannot be given
to being consented to, as for example, consenting to another killing oneself will not discharge the other from murder
or manslaughter, and here the same must apply as sexuality
is an intrinsic part of a human life, whatever this sexuality is
like.
Asking people to pay a huge sum of money for sexual
transformation or changing on demand the sexual conditioning is unethical in my view. In the case that full consent is
present, it is still unethical when the money taken for such a
treatment is exorbitant; besides there is little chance that the
treatment will be effective.
While the sexual setup can well be changed in some
cases so that a boylover may indeed be able to sleep with
women, the more important emotional attraction that is at
the basis of the sexual component will not be affected; thus
the man will perhaps well sleep with girls but he will go out
emotionally dissatisfied or even with a bad taste because
emotionally he still will feel attracted to boys; this is what
feels right for him; thus the re-conditioning will rather have

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 269

added to the discomfort of the person than to her comfort
level.
This is so because emotional attraction that is, to repeat
it, at the basis of sexual attraction, is not the result of conditioning; it has many origins, some being karmic, others being
individual, and not all are involuntary; in fact, some are the
result of conscious choice. For example I can choose to care
for children because I am against money and power, while I
can see great good in taking care of children, especially in a
world that is so cruel to children in many societies. And I give
a priority to my emotional attraction to children and say, for
example, it counts more for me than social status and comfort, or a high salary.
I can then choose to become an educator for realizing my
vision. At the basis of my decision is my emotional predilection for children. So this decision is based on an emotional
preference and this emotional preference in turn is based
upon something we are hardly conscious of, and that I call
soul values. And then I go one step ahead and say that in
certain cases and for reasons we do not yet really know,
people develop a sexual attraction on top of their emotional
preference, or as a result of it. Behold, not all people do, but
certain well, and often without being conscious of it—until
it’s too late. The only solution here is not treatment, but total
acceptance of our attractions, whatever they are; because

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 270

this acceptance is the condition of a higher level of consciousness to develop.
When I replied with these arguments, the person wrote
back:
—I believe the most fulfilling sexual experience any mature human is capable of even at an individual level (excluding certain genetic factors) is with a mature partner of the
opposite sex.
And I replied further:
—As you stated at the very beginning, it’s a belief. And I
would even say that it’s nothing but a belief. In addition, no
genetic factors conditioning human sexuality have ever been
validly proven. They were all more or less part and parcel of
terror regimes’ doctoring people for social adjustment and
thus, in terms of the Red Cross Conventions, exerting forms
of torture. So-called scientific research based on such kind of
soil cannot be trusted by any serious scientist. While one
might argue that in view of body shape and size of genitals,
two adult partners ideally fit in each other (while this is again
an assumption because a petite young woman being penetrated by a huge bulldog man may experience extreme pain)
but not an adult and a child, the answer here is equally simple: not all in sexuality is teleological with the ultimate goal
of (total) penetration; all is here subject to dialogue, to mu-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 271

tual bargain, to peaceful discussion, to trial-and-error over
time, to play-like fun, and so on. And the ultimate satisfaction is not always and I would even say typically not the sexual satisfaction but the emotional satisfaction or the congruence between emotional and sexual fulfillment with one and
the same partner. This can well happen between an adult
and a child, despite the obvious divergence in body size and
genitals. I would even to as far as saying that the very fact of
the existence of childlove shows that nature has not programmed us like machines that do sex as a robotic obsession
so that, as it were, ‘all fits in each other.’
We are not machines, we are human beings. We are more
like cigars, hand-made and individually differently shaded,
some coming with broken leaves, some having a different
tint. We are not cigarettes, machine-produced, every single
piece like any other one, exactly the same. There is no
straight line in nature, only in human intellectualism. The
compulsion to ‘do sex’ is a left-brain concept, a pure intellectual construct and it came up probably as an anti-reaction
against patriarchal sex repression.
It also is part of the competition culture where sex is most
of the time a matter of performance which makes that many
men today are driven, time and again, into temporary, sporadic or even long-term impotence.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 272

When Law Punishes Life
Let us have a look what ages of consent are good for, or
supposed to be good for! What is the idea behind segregating age groups and why is sexuality not allowed for all age
groups? Why do laws almost everywhere rigidly fix certain
ages for sex, and do not ask if sexual activity was constructive or damaging, peaceful or violent, coercive or consenting?
Law experts tend to argue that a precise age of consent
assures legal clarity and certainty because in most cases it
was not to make out if an individual child would experience
sex positively or negatively.
Another argument brought forward by criminologists is
that criminal law could not handle psychological questions
and therefore needs to be clear-cut. I heard several of my
lawyer colleagues advancing this argument that upon further
inquiry reveals to be barely correct. The true answer is that
age of consent laws have no rational basis at all, and that
their existence has merely historical reasons: they were the
successors of Canon Law, that is, Church law that preceded
state law in all Western cultures.
Hence, the answer can only be found if we look at legal
history, and inquire into how those age-of-consent laws came
about in the first place, what their original meaning was, and
why they were at all introduced.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 273

This inquiry is interesting because it will give the answer
to the question why there was and will be no paradigm
change in matters of sex legislation! This is so because the
socioeconomic base layer for these laws is no more existing.
I have done this inquiry for the criminal law of the United
States which is a common law jurisdiction; criminal laws vary
from state to state and there is a large body of case law to
help interpreting the statutes.
Sex laws are existing only since the beginning of patriarchy, and thus since around five thousand years. A marking
event in history that usually is associated with the beginning
of sex laws is the so-called Code of Hammurabi, which
probably for the first time in legal history contained a provision for the rape of a female child.
— King Hammurabi (1792-1750 B.C.), sixth king of the Amorite Dynasty of Old Babylon, is considered as the avatar or even founder of
patriarchy by most social historians. Hammurabi’s Code of Laws is
by far the earliest-known example of a ruler proclaiming publicly to
his people an entire body of laws, arranged in orderly groups, so
that all men might read and know what was required of them. This
body of law was also the first in history that contained a compulsive
rule on sexual behavior which was enforced by Draconian punishments, which regularly included violent beatings, torture, forced
castration or even the death penalty.
Section 130 Code of Hammurabi
If a man violate(s) the wife (betrothed or child-wife) of another man,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 274

who has never known a man, and still lives in her father’s house, and
sleep with her and be surprised, this man shall be put to death, but
the wife is blameless.

From the wording, two interesting conclusions can be
drawn. First, it was possible at this time that men married
female children and consummated the marriage with them,
second, the code did not want to protect the females but
their male proprietor, an interpretation which is conclusive
when looking at the origin of the word ‘rape’ in English, it
namely comes etymologically from Latin rapus and meant
theft; the term originally had no connotation with sexuality. It
was applied for the theft of human beings, as this was a
common behavior in olden times for males to get a sex partner or even a spouse, just by ‘stealing’ a young boy or girl. In
most cases, those abductions however were of a temporary
nature, as the child was taken back home after a fortnight.
What is more, such cases did not end in a tragedy, as it is so
common today when a child is abducted for sex. In preceding cultures of which one was the matriarchal Minoan Civilization of Crete, the only sex taboo was incest in direct line,
whereas otherwise there were no sexual restrictions.
Notably, in this culture, the sexuality of children was completely free and looked at with a permissive attitude; this is
still today the case with peaceful native cultures, as I reported earlier in this study.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 275

When we seriously wonder why we have sex laws and
what they do in our society, or ought to do, we may realize
how little our laws actually act against the madness-track that
we are on as a society. What is the use of establishing laws
based upon principles that, not only being irrational and
largely out-of-date, were put up against the laws of nature,
and of love?
At the end of the day we have endless prison miles filled
with people who are in for their love or for having mishandled their vital energy. I am asking where the benefit of such
lawmaking is for the betterment of society and the advancement of humanity and culture?
It is a fact that sex laws very clearly are preventing children from receiving various forms of body pleasure, despite
the fact that, in the meantime, it is scientifically proven that
tactile and emotional deprivation creates havoc in children’s
psyche and immune system. My thirty years of research on
sex laws involving children revealed that the rationale, or
rather irrationale, behind these laws evidently is the alleged
sinful character of sex, and not any possible destructive consequences of violence inflicted upon a child. This is not surprising since present sex laws are the remnants of a legal
body created by the Christian Church, that was founded
upon moralism rather than humanitarian, let alone bioenergetic principles.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 276

At the time when the predecessors of our current age-ofconsent laws were drafted, the child as a person had no legal
status; children’s legal status was derived from the legal
status of their father. It is very important to keep this in mind
when reviewing present age-of-consent laws for they were
drafted originally from this perspective, and not from our
perspective as 21st century citizens with our focus on the
child’s ultimate welfare. This is particularly important when
we deal with terms such as ‘sexual purity,’ ‘innocence,’ ‘decency,’ ‘modesty,’ ‘moral conduct’ or ‘moral integrity’ for
these terms actually let us see that the object of protection is
not the child or the child’s physical integrity, but a societal,
cultural, ideal or religious value such as morality—whatever
this is. And whatever it is, it shouldn’t be of relevance for a
modern lawmaker in a democracy that wants to mark a difference to fundamentalist horror regimes.
While the sexual purity or innocence of a child is historically a relatively recent idea, and while this idea may have
some importance within the Christian value system, the mass
media today seem to suggest that we deal in so far with a
biological or psychological truth.
— See Unlawful Sex (1985), 4.3, p. 20.

And this despite the fact that progressive child psychologists such as Alayne Yates clearly state that a child’s sexual
purity is a pure myth.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 277

— See Alayne Yates, Sex Without Shame (1978).

Despite that, our outdated sex laws take it for granted
that a child has to be protected from experiencing the most
pleasurable side of life. Many a brutal attack against a child is
performed by parents or educators exactly because children
act against the innocence terror imposed upon them by an
anti-life culture, and actively pursue to have sex with peers or
adults they love. And how ferocious punishments tend to be
for this truly innocent reason, and how disproportionate they
regularly are, is a matter of common knowledge.
Alexander S. Neill, founder of Summerhill School in England reports in his book such an incident following sex play
he had as a boy with his sister.
— See A.S. Neill’s autobiography Neill! Neill! Orange-Peel! (1972).
The traumatic effects of such early punishment for sex play and its
lasting influence on the personality of the later adult have since
long been discovered by psychoanalysis.

Sex laws are among the most hilarious perversities in our
whole legal body. When girls were only sexually mature at
around 14 in the Middle Ages, they could consent to sex
from age 10. Later, when puberty occurred at about 12 years
of age, the consent of girls under 16 was considered legally
invalid. Today, in the Western world, puberty happens between 10 and 12 years of age because of highly potent and
hormone-rich nutrition, but a 15-year old girl cannot make

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 278

love with her older boyfriend without the boy risking to be
charged with statutory rape.
What is the point of such legal nonsense? The fact is that
there is no logic in sex laws because they are not made on
the basis of rational reasoning but reflect irrational moralistic
ideas that originate from non-legal sources: church law, folk
wisdom, superstition and a more or less total ignorance
about physical love as it is so typical for the puritanical
Anglo-Saxon culture as a whole.
What these laws do is to kill life and pervert man into a
beast that has spoiled its natural and innocent sexuality, replacing it by a mix of sex-plus-violence that makes him a
highly dangerous creature.
The proscription of love, as we defined it as being mutually consenting sexual activity between humans regardless of
age, is likely to cause psychosomatic disease, and generally
turns man into an aggressive individual. So, for everybody
who has some common sense left, it should become clear
that those laws have to be revised or, best, abandoned if
humanity is to survive into a less violent and peaceful era.
Statutory Rape
Three precedents by the Supreme Court of Arkansas in
1891, 1897 and 1904 show evidently how statutory rape came
to be recognized as a legal term. While, according to an

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 279

early English statute, the original rule incorporated in American common law was ‘if any person shall unlawfully and carnally know and abuse any woman-child under the age of ten
years, it shall be a felony without clergy,’ the courts have extended more and more the term ‘abuse of a woman-child.’
— Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), § 291, p. 43.

In a 1891 case, Warner v. State (54 Ark 660, 17 SW 6), the
Supreme Court of Arkansas still distinguished between rape
as non-consenting intercourse which was punishable with
death, and the carnal and unlawful knowledge of a female
child under the age of puberty which was punishable between 5 and 21 years in the penitentiary.
The court stated that ‘[t]he crime of carnally knowing a
female child under the age of puberty can be committed
only when the victim is under 12 years old, and has sufficient
intelligence to know the nature of the act, and to consent,
and does consent thereto.’ According to an earlier decision
of the same court—Coates v. State (1888), 7 SW 304—, puberty was deemed to begin with 12 years of age. In the case,
the girl had been 11-years old and the accused had offered
proof as to her consenting to intercourse.
In the 1897 case, Bond v. State (63 Ark 504, 39 SW 554), a
new statute was considered which made punishable carnal
knowledge of a girl under 16 years of age with or without her

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 280

consent. Thus, the distinction between forcible rape (intercourse without consent) and consenting intercourse, which
was still a basis of the 1891 precedent, was abandoned by
the new statute. The result was that forcible rape, which
means sexual violence, became assimilated with consenting
intercourse! Even without looking at consequences of such
an abstruse legal situation, from a legal policy point of view,
it’s not only nonsense, but forbidden to do that as a legislator. It’s against all and every rule of sound legal policy!
It had two consequences. Firstly, the former ultimate punishment in form of the death penalty for forcible rape was
lowered to the punishment of statutory rape (5 to 21 years
penitentiary). Thus, the rapist of an adult woman was punished much harder than the rapist of a girl under sixteen!
Secondly, consenting intercourse with girls between ages 12
and 16 became, for the first time in history, a crime! This is
strange because the courts affirmed that puberty was happening at age twelve whereas under the former liberal common law maturity happened much later.
Thus the question remains open what in fact the new
statute was to protect if not a pure morality principle?!
In the 1904 case, Plunkett v. State (72 Ark 409, 82 SW 845),
the Supreme Court of Arkansas used for the first time the
new legal term statutory rape which is per definition no rape,
but a consenting sexual activity, legally deemed as being a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 281

rape-like offense. In the case the girl had been fifteen, had
consented to intercourse and had born a baby. It was not
certain that the accused was the father of the baby. But on a
charge for statutory rape evidence that the girl had had sexual intercourse also with other men was not admissible!
Thus, even if the girl had had regular sexual intercourse
with other men and the baby had been from another man,
the accused would not have been able to construe a defense
from this fact. This again shows that what the new law of
statutory rape actually protected was some dubious notion
of ‘public morals,’ but not the corporal integrity of a child.
This is furthermore corroborated by the fact that the statute
only punished unlawful sexual intercourse, that is intercourse
outside a valid marriage.
At the time, girls could notably marry at age fourteen.
Thus, had the accused married the girl before the intercourse happened, sex would have been lawful under the
statute and no punishment had resulted from the intercourse. So what, in fact, has all this to do with rape and sexual violence?
In addition, laws in this area are of a vagueness that must
be a thorn in the eye of any sincere legal expert. We have
seen that rape and statutory rape are two distinct offenses
and that statutory rape has nothing to do with the forcible
penetration of the female sexual organ against her will, but

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 282

that it typically is a consenting sexual activity between two
persons of different age. It is therefore pure sophism and
against the constitutional principle of due process to classify
it as a rape-like act. The annotated and revised Arizona Statutes collection notes:
Ariz Rev Stats Ann, § 13-1401(3)
Viewed conceptually, a female under a specified age is also
deemed incapable of consenting and hence her apparent consent
is treated as immaterial.

Not enough with this legal mess, certain states also extended the term ‘sexual intercourse’ to encompass ‘any
manual masturbatory contact with the penis or vulva’ (Arizona).
— Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), § 293, p. 65 citing Code Ga Ann, §
26-2019 and § 298, pp. 105 ff.

In good English, not only when the older boyfriend
sleeps with our 15-year old, but already when he caresses
manually her vaginal lips, and when they do this in Arizona,
he has raped her in Arizona—statutorily, but nonetheless.
Viewed conceptually!
Child Molestation
In Georgia, another rape like offense is called child molestation:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 283

Child Molestation
A person commits child molestation, with imprisonment from one
to twenty years, when ‘he does any immoral or indecent act to or in
the presence of or with any child under the age of fourteen years
with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of either the
child or the person.’

In good English, someone who touches a child’s genitals,
or let his genitals touch by a child, or shows the child how to
masturbate, even if this person is the child’s parent, in Georgia goes to prison for twenty years at maximum. For, viewed
conceptually, the child has been ‘raped’ by the sex knowledge received through such teaching.
This is only one of many examples that demonstrate that
it is not the child that is protected by such laws, but the perpetuation of adult sexual inhibitions and a totally corrupt and
perverted morality! It is a crime worth twenty years of prison
to show a child having sexual pleasure.
In Iowa, the sexual contact with a child is a ‘lascivious act
with a child,’ in Illinois it is ‘indecent liberties with a child’ or
‘contributing to the sexual delinquency of a child.’
— Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), §§ , 297, 300.

This latter formulation is particularly significant. Not only
that human sexuality destroys children and animals, it also
renders children ‘delinquent.’ The very contrary is true, as
was shown by Alexander S. Neill in Summerhill and other

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 284

free schools and by Paul Goodman in their work with delinquent adolescents: it is exactly the denial, imposed by an
emotionally and sexually frigid society, to love, to live their
budding sexuality in a healthy way which contributes essentially to their getting on a wrong path.
Our sex laws, our sex trials and our correction system are
a modern copy of the Church’s Inquisition and have very little
to do with a modern penal law system. They are an what I call
legislative perversion. And the question is if a society with
such an aggression level has a mandate at all for protecting
children against physical or sexual violence, for it is itself
based upon nothing but violence!
The perversity of these laws becomes particularly evident
when one compares them with the jurisprudence on corporal
punishment that reveals how little this same society cares
about the pain and the suffering inflicted upon a child ‘in the
name of its own good.’ To tear up the skin of a small child
with a whip, to blow the naked bottom of a child with a stick
is lawful; to lick it tenderly is qualified as ‘anilingus’ and is a
criminal offense equated with sexual penetration, deviate
intercourse or sodomy, and worth twenty years of jail.
Wait a moment, what appears truly deviate here is the
value system of a society that punishes innocent natural
pleasure and worships violence, perversion and brutality!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 285

In addition, let me mention the fact that violence against
the child as endorsed by social custom that lets children fight
in martial arts competitions, for which parents and educators
actively encourage children. These competitions are violent,
they are not just playful or entertaining. Children are fought
into submission.The fact that it is in a controlled environment
with rules makes no difference. What is more dangerous for
children, receiving sexual instruction from an adult that will
benefit their erotic intelligence and wellbeing, or being face
to face with another child in an organized fight competition
where the child risks minor, moderate or serious injuries including broken bones, blood shed, emotional and physiological trauma?
Law Reform
The history of sexual laws involving children can clearly be
retraced in the Netherlands. It was briefly outlined by Dr.
Edward Brongersma, Dutch lawyer and Senator, in his Berlin
University course, in 1981.
— This and the following information about the Dutch sexual law
reforms have kindly been provided by Dr. Edward Brongersma, at
the time Senator of the Dutch House of Lords, and himself involved
in the reforms as a parliamentary member. The information was
given to me as a script entitled Der Speijer-Report, 1981 (in German
language) that Dr. Brongersma had originally drafted for a lecture at
Berlin University, Germany.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 286

Until 1886 sex with children of both sexes was not punishable in the Netherlands, in France until 1832.
Homosexuality was punishable with the death penalty,
but only in the ecclesiastical courts, which is the courts that
applied Canon Law, the body of law established by the
Christian Church. The same is true for the common law, with
regard to sodomy.
— See Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), §§ 294 ff. It is typical for the
Christian Church’s act-centered mechanistic view of sexuality that
sexual behavior was judged and classified by the ‘acts’ performed,
and not as a physical form of human love. As a result, in common
law, sodomy was defined in accordance to the former ecclesiastical
laws (canon law) from which it had been adopted as the ‘carnal
copulation of persons in other than the natural manner,’ i.e. in a way
which was against nature (see Wharton’s Criminal Law, § 295, p. 77).
Needless to mention that it was the Church who defined what was
‘nature’ and what was not.

Contrary to the Church’s Inquisition laws, Montesquieu
wrote in L’Esprit des Lois that society should only punish behavior that was damaging to its members, and not what was
only against certain moral rules.
From 1810 to 1886 the Netherlands’ civil law statute was a
translation of the French Code Napoléon under which nonviolent intercourse was not punishable regardless of the sex
and age of the partners! Only after 1886, in the Netherlands’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 287

first own penal code, Het Wetboek van Strafrecht, an age of
consent of 14 years was introduced.
The proposed 14 years as the age of consent became 16
years in the parliamentary discussions. A minority in the
House of Commons used the opportunity to propose punishment for homosexuality. But the majority refused: no moralizing in the penal code. But this was only until 1911.
A catholic minister of justice finally was powerful enough
to change the situation and penalize homosexuality. This is
the way laws are made.
It is interesting that a socialist M.P. remarked at that time:
‘One day we’ll have to regret this, for homosexuality is not
damaging.’ But this law was only for homosexual acts with
persons under twenty-one years. It was the Nazis who, during
their occupancy in the Netherlands made punishable homosexuality among adults. The Dutch parliament, according to
Brongersma, did never accept this and declared later to
deem this law as being non-existent.
This went on until 1968 when the Speijer-Report was
drafted in which all myths about homosexuality were disproved with profound scientific references. Inter alia, it was
stated that since it was eventually accepted knowledge that
children are sexual, the opinion grew that the dangers from
sexual encounters for children and adolescents have been

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 288

overestimated. In its conclusion, the expert commission
stated that ‘seduction’ did not play the role that most people
attributed to it; they said that even in cases where the adult
initiated the child in the sexual activity, the child in many
cases awaited from the adult to be initiated. This was found
to be true for both homosexual and heterosexual encounters
between children and adults. Finally it was stated that initiation, in what sexual direction whatever it led, could in many
cases contribute to more mental and physical sanity, and not
to depravement.
Behold, all this is stated in an official document of the
Dutch government. The Minister of Justice at this time, Polak, supported the report and made it a basis for a legal reform draft. The draft was so convincing that in the 2nd
Chamber of the Dutch House of Commons only 5 members
out of 150 had voted against it—these were from the ultra
right wing part of the political spectrum. The Dutch House of
Lords adopted the draft bill unanimously.
In October 1969, the Dutch parliament, according to the
Speijer-Report, abolished the law which discriminated homosexual pedophilia thus fixing 16 years as the appropriate age
of consent for man-boy sexual relations, which was formerly
21 years. In most countries, the discrimination of homosexual
pedophilia is still existing, yet the ages of consent differ.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 289

In England, the Indecency with Children Act 1960 makes
punishable any act of indecency, or incitement to indecency,
with or towards a child under 14, regardless of the sex of either the child or the offender. In addition, and to repeat it,
homosexual relationships were prohibited with persons under 21 years of age. The Policy Advisory Committee on Sexual Offenses (1981) has recommended that this age should
be reduced to 18.
—See Unlawful Sex (1985), 8.26 and 8.29.

It is similar in Germany where the general age of consent
is equated with the legal definition of ‘child’ (person under
14 years of age), while there is a discrimination according to
the nature of the relationship: 14 years (§ 176 StGB), 16 in ascendancy relations, 18 in dependency relations (§ 174 StGB)
and 18 for homosexual acts (§ 175 StGB).
— Dreher/Tröndle, Strafgesetzbuch und Nebengesetze (1985), §§
174 ff.

In France, nonviolent indecent attacks (attentat à la pudeur sans violence) on a child under 15 years is punishable
according to art. 331, al. 1er and 3 Code Pénal, but also nonviolent indecent acts on minors between 15 and 18 years if
ascendancy relations are in question (Art. 331–1). Equally
homosexual acts with a minor between 15 and 18 years of
age are punishable (Art. 331– 2).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 290

— See, for example, Roger Merle, André Vitu, Traité de Droit Criminel (1982), pp. 1510 ff.

In Denmark, the age of consent is 15 for both sexes,
without any further discrimination of homosexual acts.
In Switzerland, the age of consent is 16, but there is much
criticism in the literature on this age of consent and proposals are made to fix 14 years as a more appropriate age limit.
Besides that, however, so-called homosexual seduction is
even punishable with persons above 16 years of age.
— See Günter Stratenwerth, Schweizerisches Strafrecht (1984), pp.
28, 29. The same article (§ 191) of the Swiss Penal Code encompasses both dependency and ascendancy relations as qualifications
in punishment.

The Dutch legislation, too, foresees a protection clause
for homosexual relationships with minors over 16 years of
age. Such relations are still punishable when the prosecution
can prove ‘relevant danger to the child’ that was a consequence of the homosexual act and that would not have occurred in a heterosexual encounter. However, such cases will
be extremely rare. The scientific research upon which the
Speijer-Report was based revealed that by the 16th year of
life, the sexual propensity is developed to such an extent
that a youngster who is heterosexual cannot be diverted by
seduction into permanent homosexuality.
— Unlawful Sex (1985), 4.17.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 291

In practice, the prosecution and police forces from that
time until the 1990s refused in about 66% of all cases to file a
criminal action for adults involved in an erotic relation with
children beyond the age of 12. After the fundamentalist fascist drift in the Netherlands in 1996, as a consequence of
American pressure and the worldwide public child abuse
hysteria, however, the situation has changed very much for
the worse.
Still in 1981, a petition of the association of the work
group for pedophilia and of the greatest Dutch association
of primary school teachers was presented to the Dutch government aiming at the total abandonment of all age of consent in sex laws. Another petition was presented in 1987 to
the Dutch Minister of Justice proposing to specify conditions
under which the prohibition did not apply, notably in those
cases in which the child initiates or actively engages in the
sexual activity. The petition was signed by a considerable
number of persons including law professors, lawyers, prosecution attorneys, physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychotherapists, sociologists, youth workers, priests or authors,
and was a representative sample of the Dutch society.
Moreover, the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Moral Legislation (Melai Committee), which were published in 1980, and the draft of a bill, presented to the Dutch
cabinet in 1985 are worth to be mentioned. The Melai-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 292

Report proposed that the prohibition of sex with persons
under 16 years of age, that however excluded dependency
relations, should be changed into a prohibition of sexual
rapprochement of such persons, which means that the report
only wanted to punish pimps or brothels, or people who engage in a sex business involving children. The draft bill of
1985 contained a prohibition of sexual contacts with below
16-year olds that have been prepared or promoted by presenting or promising gifts, abuse of ascendancy or by deception.
This decriminalization would only apply in nondependency relations. Thus, incest with children under 16
would remain entirely forbidden. At present the age limit for
incest is twenty-one.
— Dr. Jan Schujer, Ministry of Interior, The Hague, Netherlands,
kindly provided this information regarding the content of those petitions and the legal draft projects.

As in the Netherlands, the debate in France, Denmark,
Germany and Switzerland and other countries went on over
years as to lowering the age of consent from sixteen to fourteen years of age. Compared with the previous state of the
laws however, that is, before the 19th century, a single lowering of the age of consent seems to be dysfunctional in that it
looks like ‘propaganda for progressiveness’ rather than a real
effort for drafting more rational criminal laws. After all, we

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 293

have to ask where is the justification for age fourteen? Why
not thirteen, twelve or eleven?
The question is if an age of consent has any rationale at
all? At least, when fixing the age at the age of puberty, one
could argue that puberty or sexual maturity is a biological
event that can be considered a justifiable landmark for reform drafts concerning the age of consent.
Love Reform
After these rather tedious details, I would like to focus on
our initial question ‘Love or Laws?’ and ask if we were not
completely mistaken to engage in law reform rather than
thinking about reforming our relationship with love?
This sounds perhaps frivolous but is not meant to be; my
perspective and effort for a new solution is serious and not
just a leisure occupation. I have now researched on these
topics for exactly thirty years, as I did my first basic research
in Spring 1985, and have invested considerable time, energy
and resources to get a rather precise idea of how this paradigm change in matters of human sexuality is to come about.
For most feminist authors, the idea of a basically new societal attitude regarding love and sexuality is surely a point
on their agenda. Nobody doubts this. And yet, when we rest
with ideological positions, a larger perspective of truth
seems to precluded, as we will stay with our particular bias,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 294

as feminists, as homosexuals, as pedophiles or as sensationhungry journalists.
I think it is significant that my first research study was rejected by Global Academic Publishers, a boylove editor in
the United States and Netherlands that namely published Dr.
Brongersma’s books. They thought my views were not radical
enough and too much on the line of feminist ideas. Myself
not being addicted to feminism, the reply of the editor surprised me, but it showed me to what extent most people
think in established categories, unable to view life, and problems, from different angles. Truly, I do not need to be a feminist to correctly report what feminist authors think and write
on a certain topic. And when I just leave it out from my study
because I don’t like feminism, I am not a scientific author, but
a pamphlet smearer or boulevard press reporter.
And in fact, I think we are clearly in an impasse once we
begin to reform impossible laws, laws that were basically
made during times of extreme irrationality and by highly violent secular or religiously fundamentalist governments of the
past, and that in many respects violate our most cherished
constitutional guarantees! When we see that, we are perhaps
able to do that paradigm change right now, in our own consciousness, by looking differently at the problem or our basic
question. What do we want? Love? Or Laws?

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 295

What do we need in a future society that will be based on
rational and freedom-loving principles and that respects the
individual and trusts the citizen? Is it more and more laws?
Behold, I am not preaching a gospel here and I do not
talk about an idealist principle. I am in fact against idealism
and ideals because they are truly destructive, as Krishnamurti
has shown, and because they have contributed a great deal
to the present chaos of violence, superficial and blindfolding
entertainment, environmental pollution and the ruthless
massacre of many of our most precious native cultures.
When we talk about love, we do not talk about an ideal.
Love is an energy that is all-present in the cosmos; love in all
its forms, also as physical love, is part of life, of energy, and
not a mental concept. And as such, it is reality, do what you
will! Thus, when I talk about love, I talk about reality, the reality of nature, or of the universe. And this has been proven, in
the meantime, by quantum physics, and that is by itself a major scientific paradigm shift that throws us, if we want it or
not, into the holistic science paradigm of the 21st century.
When we are at all serious as scientists, or as childcare
professionals or child psychologists, lawyers or judges we
cannot continue to close our eyes in front of children’s emotional, tactile and sexual needs, and we cannot continue absolving society for mutilating the child’s emotional and sexual wholeness and transforming children into schizoid per-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 296

sonalities through the collective denial of their most basic
and important emotions.
And we cannot continue to justify abhorrently unjust, irrational and perverse laws with the smeary and non-verifiable
argument they ‘protected’ our children. While we know for
sure that the best protection is freedom, and love!

CHAPTER TEN
The Violence of Morality
The Legal Split in Child Protection
A new and democratic legal bill, if ever the criminal law
system regulating human sexuality remains in place, must
target upon violence and not sex, and incriminate both
physical and sexual violence, not more and not less. Since in
both physical and sexual assault, violence is the determining
factor of the offense, it is more effective to treat both kinds
of offenses in one and the same legal bill and not, as it is
now, in a range of largely diverse bodies of laws distinct from
each other, and which present no congruent scheme and
hardly any synergies.
As the word ‘violence’ has a rather ambiguous meaning,
the draft bill uses the term ‘harm’ to precisely define what is
the rationale of this bill. Harm is a term which is well-defined
and it can be verified in each case, using empirical methods

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 297

of scrutiny, if or not there was physical, mental, emotional or
sexual harm done to a child.
The second point where the new legal bill should differ
from previous legislation is that harm done against adults, be
it physical or sexual harm, on one hand, and against children,
on the other, should be treated in one and the same bill, and
not in different and divergent laws. The reasons for incriminating violence are exactly the same whether the violent assault is directed against an adult or against a child. Violence
is violence, no matter against which members of the community it is released or inflicted.
I can only throw a tiny spot on the immense jurisprudence
dealing with the delicate topic of legal corporal punishment
versus illegal child battery. For the purposes of this study, it
will suffice to summarize the basic findings on both, to get at
an integrative conclusion. Of course, the limitation on the
Anglo-Saxon legal system bears no preclusion, nor prejudice
or value judgment with regard to a possible international
perspective.
It is a matter of common knowledge that so-called physical or corporal punishment as well as sex laws regarding
children vary from culture to culture. Cross-cultural studies on
the practice of corporal punishment as James W. Prescott’s
paper Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence (1975) have
come to the result that it is the combination of patriarchal

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 298

values, a monotheistic religion with one single male god, the
early deprivation of tactile nutrition and the prohibition of
premarital sex that leads to violence, and thus also to violence against children, especially in its socially sanctified
form as corporal punishment which is structural violence at
its best.
In fact, what we are facing here are customs, traditions
and social mores that have become legalized, thus making
for the strangest body of law in human history. Of course,
because of the limited scope of my research, the legal rules
presented and discussed here can only serve as examples. In
the United States, like in many other countries, the corporal
punishment of children is generally accepted and more or
less widely practiced. I am of course aware of the fact that in
countries like Denmark, Sweden or Norway, where corporal
punishment is legally prohibited, we are facing an entirely
different situation.
But as the United States of America are very influential
worldwide through their dominance of the international media, I have started my research with the American legal situation, and still today think that it was the right way to do so.
For if some states of the USA change their criminal laws because of the insights provided by modern scholarly research,
the signal function is not to underestimate. In my view, such a
scenario would trigger a global change of sex laws for more

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 299

rationality, more equity and more real safety for our children
worldwide!
As for the present legal situation in the United States,
criminal justice assumes the task to define the limits where
lawful corporal punishment exceeds into the huge grey zone
of unlawful child battery. As the judge considers the social
rules and mores in this field as a kind of guideline, and since
these social rules change constantly over time, it is inevitable
that the law in this matter is constantly shifting as well. Besides the time factor, there is also a territorial factor.
A judge in a small town in Texas may rule in a different
way than a judge in, say, Boston or New York, simply because
social mores differ with regard to the limits of physical punishment and the values attributed to paternal correction. This
is not a fault of the laws nor can it be held that the Texas
judge is less qualified to rule about the matter. The fact simply is that the law in this field is not exact in the sense that
criminal justice in this particular field reflects to a large extent
social and cultural considerations, thereby granting a considerable discretion to the judge, the jury and the prosecution to incriminate certain behavior, or not incriminate it. As
this leads to considerable legal insecurity, which is not desired in any jurisdiction, a total abolishment of corporal punishment of children has been suggested.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 300

—See only Dean M. Herman, A Statutory Proposal to Prohibit the
Infliction of Violence upon Children, 19 FAMILY LAW QUARTERLY,
1986, 1-52, with further references.

The general formula under the present state of the law is
that corporal punishment of children by their parents or persons in loco parentis is not unlawful ‘if it is administered in
good faith with parental affection, … and not cruel or merciless.’
—Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), §§ 99-282.

If this sounds reassuring, one might doubt when reading
further in Wharton’s Criminal Law textbook:
—According to some courts, the punishment is unlawful only if
permanent injury results; a parent is not liable for excessive or even
cruel punishment if he acted in good faith. (Id., 310)

In the precedent People v. Green (1909), the offender was
charged with assault and battery of his adopted child Mabel,
a twelve-year old girl. In the following case report, the offender is called respondent, and the girl complaining witness:
—On the day in question, …, respondent missed a 50-cent piece,
and charged the complaining witness with its theft. She, however,
denied having taken the money, whereupon the girl was disrobed,
partially by Mrs. Green and partially by herself, and when she was
naked and alone with the respondent was whipped by the respondent with a small riding whip. The respondent then tied her hands

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 301

behind her back, having placed her nightgown on her, and left her.
She was kept so tied from Friday afternoon until Sunday about
noon, during which time the respondent fed her upon bread and
water. On the Sunday morning following the whipping, the respondent and his wife left Mabel alone and went into the country. During
Sunday forenoon she made some outcry and attracted the attention
of Mrs. Jennie Wilton, who lived in the house adjoining respondent’s. Mrs. Wilton notified some firemen in the engine house
nearby, and the girl was taken naked and with her hands still tied
from the room through the upstairs window of respondent’s residence into the home of Mrs. Wilton. From there she was taken to
the police headquarters and placed in the charge of Mrs. Francis
Stoddard, the matron. Her condition is described by the matron as
follows: ‘From here to the bend of the knee (illustrating) was so thick
with marks, and underneath the marks the flesh was dark blue,
green, curdled, and over that was the lashes, every one as large as
my little finger, that was raised on her body. Across the abdomen,
the lower limbs, was six marks, cut, where the blood oozed out and
scabbed over. Seventy marks across here (indicating) that was not
cut, but these six were cut. Had broken the skin and also across the
lower limbs here, until the blood had oozed out, and scabbed over,
and when I bathed the little thing with witch-hazel and water she
cried, and I could not bathe them any more.’ (119 NW 1087, 10871088)

It should be noted that in this case the Supreme Court of
Michigan ruled that the limits of lawful corporal punishment
were indeed exceeded, and that the respondent was liable
of child battery. But it is noteworthy to see for what reasons
the court came to this conclusion. Contrary to what one may

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 302

think, it was namely not the fact that the girl had been maltreated in a severe way by her foster father, but the fact only
that she had been naked during the assault. It was not the
lashes big as a little finger, it was not the pain inflicted on
her, it was not the fact that her skin was broke and the blood
oozed out at various spots, it was not the cruel imprisoning
of the child during a whole weekend, it was not the fact that
she had been tied up and put on a hunger diet. It was the
fact that she had been stripped before she was violently assaulted:
—We think one of the most serious elements of the respondent’s
offense is the conceded fact that he compelled the complaining
witness, a female between 12 and 13 years of age, to stand before
him nude and receive the castigation. This act is tended to shock
her modesty, to break down her sense of decency and the inviolability of her person, which is the most valuable possession of a young
girl. (Id., 1090)

This clearly means that if she had been assaulted with her
nightgown on, all would have been okay. No word about the
serious wounds and all the horrible suffering the girl was subjected to. It was the extravagant component of her nakedness, a subtly sexual connotation, that was decisive for the
judges to hold that she was mistreated, not the excessive
degree of violence, not the sadistic brutality and merciless
treatment she was subjected to by her adoptive father. How
could the authoritarian paternalistic attitude of the judges be

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 303

better expressed than in the words they used, ‘modesty,’
‘sense of decency?’ It is obvious that for these judges, the
slightest sexual tenderness between the girl and her adoptive father would have been held ten times as harmful as the
brutal assault and the impudent violation of her corporal integrity. This is even more apparent, although in some hidden
way, in the final statement of the court:
—It is not the intention of the court to in any way weaken parental
authority. On the contrary, we hold that it is the unquestionable
right of parents and those in loco parentis to administer such reasonable and timely punishment as may be necessary to correct
growing fruits in young children; but this right can never be used as
a cloak for the exercise of malevolence or the exhibition of unbridled passion on the part of a parent. (Id.)

In another precedent, State v. McDonie (1924)—96 W.Va.
219, 123 SE 405, 37 ALR 699—the West Virginia Supreme
Court of Appeals had to deal with an action against the
mother of a six-year old boy who was cruelly mistreated by
his stepfather. The mother not only tolerated the brutal assault on the little boy, but it was proved that—
—… she fully and freely acquiesced in the cruel punishment inflicted on her son by the stepfather; that she brought the rods and
switches used and stood by, not only without any attempt of interfere, but apparently aiding her husband in every way, as testified to
by a witness present at the time. (37 ALR 699, 700)

Here is the case report:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 304

—It appears that on the evening before the particular occurrence
which led to the arrest of the defendant and her husband, the boy
had absented himself from home, and was found at the home of his
grand-father, the father of Mrs. McDonie, and brought home sometime just after midnight by an uncle. Mrs. Cassler says that after the
uncle had gone, Joe McDonie brought in a bundle of switches and
handed them to the boy, who in turn gave them to her. She says
there were ten of them, and the smallest was as large as her largest
finger. That then McDonie began whipping the boy in the dining
room, and slung him against the wall, while defendant sat there and
witnessed the assault; that the child ran upstairs, followed by
McDonie, and that she and defendant followed them up; that the
husband ordered the boy to get into the bathtub and take his clothing off, which he did, and then turned the hot water on; that all the
time the child was pleading with the mother to take him out, and
tried to turn the water off himself, but the husband threw him back
several times brutally against the side of the tub; that they tied the
child’s hands behind him, and McDonie whipped him while he was
in the hot water and held his head under the water until he strangled and bubbles arose to the surface; that defendant appeared to
be no more concerned than if it was whipping a dog, and she would
smile at me; that the child continually appealed to his mother to
take him out; and that the only time Mrs. McDonie was not present
was when she went after more sticks. Witness says that she afterward talked to defendant about McDonie’s treatment of the child,
and that defendant said she loved Joe better than she did the child.
This witness had been living in the house with the McDonies about
two weeks and says that during that time Joe McDonie whipped the
child brutally almost daily; and that several times defendant asked
him to whip it. (Id., 701)

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 305

There is hardly anything to comment on this concerted
action of brutality from the part of the three adults, including
the passive cold-blooded witness, against that poor little
child. The witness speaks of the child as an ‘it,’ not a him or
her, as if speaking about a thing and not about a person. The
Calvinist worldview of conceiving children as strange and
somewhat devilish objects when disobeying becomes clear
in this case.
There is a pretty list of precedents cited in the case report
after the following statement of the court:
—Inasmuch as defendant was the parent of James M. Gibson, she
had a right to punish him, so that even if malice is presumed, in order to justify the conviction, the statute requires that the acts must
have been done not only maliciously and unlawfully, but with the
intent existing at the time the punishment was inflicted, either to
maim, disfigure, disable, or kill. (Id., 700)

These conditions evidently show that a parent’s discretion
for crippling and disfiguring a child for lifetime is virtually unlimited. For how can the intention to maim, disfigure, disable
or kill ever been proved at evidence for a court since it is a
purely inner intention?
Another case, State of Wyoming v. Spiegel (1928)—39
Wyo 309, 270 P 1064, 64 ALR 289—states the following point
of departure: ‘For a parent or one standing in such place to
strike a child in punishment for disobedience or other mis-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 306

conduct is not an assault and battery, but is the exercise of a
legal right.’
One may think that, over time, the judicial and social
standards for admitting battery have changed. However, the
Anglo-American legal system with its principle of stare decisis, the rigid adherence to often age-old judicial precedents
does not favor flexible adaptation of legal rules to factual
changes in the value system. Only statutory legislation that
expressly overrides judicial precedents can bring effective
change!
In addition we have to doubt if social standards regarding
parental and educational violence against children have
really changed in any significant way since the 1920s. The
fact that these precedents with the cited commentaries are
to be found in a 1979 treatise on criminal law does not encourage a positive answer to this question.
Wharton’s Criminal Law expressly states: ‘A parent has
the right to administer proper and reasonable chastisement
to his child without being guilty of a battery.’
—Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), 309.

In good English, a parent has the legal right to inflict violence on a child, as far as this violence is ‘proper and reasonable.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 307

Proper violence, proper wars and proper bombs. Reasonable violence, reasonable casualties, reasonable weapons.
The structural violence in this vocabulary speaks for itself,
and I spare any further comment.
As to the United Kingdom, Cross and Jones’ Introduction
to Criminal Law states that ‘the use of force does not constitute an assault or a battery if the accused is acting in the exercise of the right of corporal punishment.’
— Sir Rupert Cross, Introduction to Criminal Law (1984), 134.

The definition is similar to the one used by American
courts and the precedents cited under this judgment date
from 1860, 1869, 1873 and 1934. One is from 1973. Obviously,
a hundred years did not alter very much in a value system
that considers the child the devil in person!
After all, educational violence against children appears to
be a rather stable institution in all civilizations that share a
patriarchal past. With regard to the corporal chastisement of
pupils by their school teachers, the general formula under
common law was:
—At common law, a schoolmaster or teacher possessed discretionary power to inflict punishment upon his pupils and was not liable
for battery in so doing unless the punishment caused permanent
injury, was inflicted arbitrarily and without proper cause or maliciously. (Wharton’s Criminal Law (1979), p. 311)

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 308

The more recent opinion of the United States Supreme
Court in the case Ingraham v. Wright may reflect the present
state of the law:
—The use of corporal punishment in this country as a means of disciplining schoolchildren dates back to the colonial period. It has
survived the transformation of primary and secondary education
from the colonials’ reliance on optional private arrangements to our
present system of compulsory education and dependence on public schools. Despite the general abandonment of corporal punishment as a means of punishing criminal offenders, the practice continues to play a role in the public education of schoolchildren in
most parts of the country. Professional and public opinion is sharply
divided on the practice, and has been for more than a century. Yet
we can discern no trend toward its elimination. At common law a
single principle has governed the use of corporal punishment since
before the American Revolution; teachers may impose reasonable
but not excessive force to discipline a child. (…) Although the early
cases viewed the authority of the teacher as deriving from the parents, the concept of parental delegation has been replaced by the
view – more consonant with compulsory education laws – that the
State itself may impose such corporal punishment as is reasonably
necessary for the proper education of the child and for the maintenance of group discipline. (Id.)

What was abandoned as a humiliating practice against
criminal offenders is still good enough for treating school
children! If we only replace the word ‘force’ in the text of the
judgment by the word ‘violence,’ one of its sentences reads

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 309

as follows: ‘Teachers may impose reasonable but not excessive violence to discipline a child.’
Group discipline seems to have such a high importance
that it justifies group violence.
Violence as a social sanction is thus, according to the
United States Supreme Court, a proper means to regulate
social relations. And a trend for elimination of group violence, and all violence, shall according to this judgment evidently not come from American jurisprudence!
Overcoming the Split
When we see that laws in a particular field are ineffective,
arbitrary, irrational and nonsensical and that they bring about
more social confusion, more violence, more harmful behavior
than at the time when those laws did not exist, why do we
want to uphold these laws?
My answer is simple. Because we are afraid of freedom!
We argue that freedom brings chaos. That’s so because we
do not understand nature. Nature does not need control to
be good. Nature brings about all living and maintains the
sun to shine without needing governmental control or funding.
Nature has brought about sexual attraction. Man has
brought about sexual violence. Nature has created pleasure,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 310

man does all to destroy it. Nature has given us freedom, man
does all to do away with freedom and establish unfreedom
as the order of the day. Nature has instilled in children sexual
curiosity, man has distilled age of consent laws—and without
asking those who are concerned by these laws, the children.
Every age of consent is arbitrary in some way and dependent on the myth of children’s innocence in sexual matters, as well as on ambiguous religious or cultural assumptions and customs.
History research brought to daylight that throughout human history, ages of consent constantly varied according to
the economic and social context of a given society or community and the value system resulting from this context. It is
since long disproved that it is procreation ability that grants
children competence and capacity for giving or receiving
sexual pleasure. The truth is that procreation capacity is not
necessary for a child to be able to consent to body touch or
for exchanging sensual pleasure with certain preferred persons whatever their age. Especially for children below the
age of reason, our usual societal regard upon sex as a matter
of ‘acts’ and their distinction into non-penetrative and penetrative ones does not make sense.
When a child is enamored with an adult, the child tends
to express willingness also for a penetrative embrace, even if
the child is physically not yet ready for intercourse. In the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 311

magic world of a small child, loving interaction with an adult
is part of an integrative worldview that makes no difference
between the nature of various pleasures, and where the sexual game is a matter of fantasy, not a factual understanding
of its physical reality.
The actual willingness for full sexual intercourse often to
be encountered with small girls who are enamored with an
adult man is not surprising. It is not based upon what sexology calls the ‘facts of life,’ but an expression of that magical
reality the small girl lives in and expresses in a poetic language. It does not bother about the size of the genitals that
are going to be put ‘in each other,’ while this may funnily be
expressed that way, and it has no act-centered sexual opinions. It is based upon emotions, and the flow of emotions as
a vital ingredient of love. It is beyond body poetics and
rooted in the small child’s encompassing magical reality.
We may not fully understand child sexuality, but I think I
can safely say that for the child the magic anticipation of intercourse is an intrinsic element of psychosexual growth and
a sane expression of small children’s fantasy world. This psychological reality, to say this clearly, does not justify pedophilia as a political agenda, or a future political agenda. It
asks for protecting the magical space of the child by not imposing educational control and supervision of the child’s in-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 312

timate sphere. It’s, so to say, a principle of non-intervention
that I advocate here.
Age of consent laws perhaps had some rationale in times
where the actual age of puberty of a child coincided with a
child’s sexual and social maturity. This is historically thus valid
for the Middle-Ages where it was with around twelve to fourteen years that a young person could consent to sexuality,
marry and establish a business. In all later periods, and especially in modern times, an evident clash is to be noted between the actual emosexual maturity of a child and his or her
legal age of consent.
This brings about social and legal uncertainty and actually
degrades children instead of helping them to mature functionally into responsible adults and interdependent members of the community.
Present age of consent laws inhibit children from natural
sexual and non-sexual life experience and hold them imprisoned in an artificial cocoon of immaturity that retards and
even disables the full expansive blooming of their bioenergetic and spiritual potential. Research has shown that a rigid
age of consent barrier as legal discrimination between unlawful sex and lawful sex with children is in practice of little
functional value because of the differences in the actual development and maturity of every child.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 313

Instead, it has been seen that it is rather a matter of values why social groupings opt for more severe or else more
liberal sex laws.
It became particularly evident during the reform discussions in the Netherlands that it is not in children’s best interest that reform is undertaken, but for a political purpose and
with the after-thought of realizing certain political goals.
Those who share liberal social views and emphasize the
autonomy of the child tend to favor a low age of consent
while those with traditional views and right-wing political orientation tend to emphasize strict sex laws with a pronounced
attitude to holding children back from autonomous decisions, thereby implicitly denying children’s innate right for
self-determination.
In principle children are able to give valid factual consent
to sexual activities with adults, which includes being penetrated as part of a loving sexual embrace. This ability is independent of the child’s age; it is unrelated to certain biological events such as puberty or sexual maturity, or else emission capacity. It is a mere question of actual willingness.
Besides that, it is a matter of culture and education if, or
not, a child only shows sexual curiosity and engages in autoerotic sex play, or shares, more actively, in a fuller range of
sexual interaction with others. The assumption made by early
psychoanalysis that sane children were ‘only’ autoerotic and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 314

not able for partnership, is superseded by newer sexological,
psychological, ethnological and psychoanalytical research
showing that children, when given freedom, will explore all
that is sexually possible, including complete intercourse with
both children and adults. It is not a matter of any fictive or
legally recognized maturity.
Early psychoanalytic findings, such as those by Sigmund
Freud that seem to show that children tend to engage only
in autoerotic sexual satisfaction were rendered under the
spell of the highly puritan morality of the industrial bourgeoisie of that time. On the basis of the child’s general capacity
to give and receive pleasure, the child is able to decide in
each instance what feels right and what feels wrong regarding sex and love with oneself and others. The fact that societal attitudes through the process of educational conditioning
will influence the child’s general attitude in sexual matters
cannot be a reason for letting societal interests shun the
emotional and sexual needs of children!
Besides that, even the proponents of traditional legal solutions did not generally and per se wipe the idea of a factual
consent of a child to sexual activities from the table. These
people usually point to the fact that under the present laws,
any such factual consent of a child to any child-adult sexual
activity is deemed legally invalid.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 315

We thus face a tautology. The reply does not answer the
question. It elegantly circumvents it.
Somehow, many researchers from the strata of traditionalthinking people have in my view not totally excluded the
possibility of a socially adequate range of nonviolent sexual
activities between children and adults, leaving open the possibility of a different and sexually more liberal social situation
being one day realized within a different legal system that
backs it up. In the commentaries on statutory rape is to be
found that the factual consent of the child is legally invalid or
immaterial. This argument logically implies that such factual
consent is possible! It is inconsistent, then, to argue with traditional criminal law experts that children generally did not
know what they consent to when it regards their sexual
wishes or desires.
Children do have the ability to know what they find
pleasurable and gratifying, on one hand, and what they find
appalling, on the other. Sexuality is a way of exchanging
pleasure, it’s a form of communication, and it is as such only
one of various experiences that enrich our lives. And as with
all other life experiences, there will be a first time when this
pleasure is experienced and there will also be one or the
other form of initiation to it.
That such initiation of a child, when it comes from the
side not of a child, but of an adult, should be abusive in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 316

every single case has little or no factual backup. Research
speaks rather for evaluating every case and restraining from
general judgments because set opinions about the matter
can hardly cope with the variety of possible experiences.
More recent research repeatedly confirmed that trauma is
not generally experienced through the sexual initiation itself
but through certain behavior from the side of the adult that
the child feels is inappropriate, or that is appalling because
of coercion or strong pain, or because the child is silenced
by threat with the purpose of keeping the experience secret.
In commentaries on traditional sex laws it is often said
that premature sexual knowledge and experience had to be
avoided by all means or that early sexual experience would
disturb the sexual development of the child. This argument
evidently contradicts the truth that all in life grows and
evolves as a result of experience and not as a result of avoiding experience; as such, this argument simply cannot serve
as a basis for legislation.
Upon deeper regard this argument, often to be found in
right-wing circles of society, appears to be an ideological
credo that serves to maintain an artificial image of childhood
that in little or no way cares about the real needs of children.
It can be argued that in former highly patriarchal societies
the sanctified power of an adult male when sexually approaching a child would regularly to be qualified as abuse.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 317

There is certainly some truth in this, but the value of this argument changes considerably for present-day culture that
has considerably restricted the power of the adult male when
it goes to sexual mating.
According to modern research, violence and power
abuse in sexual encounters between adults and children
rarely occurs and is rather the exception than the rule of such
encounters. While traditional child rearing required from the
child an almost total submission under the command and
the authority of the parents and teachers raising and educating them, in modern democratic society the child is not invariably and totally subjected to authority but granted a substantial amount of freedom and personality rights that include free speech and a still expanding range of options and
freedoms for self-realization as well as a constantly growing
impact upon deciding about his or her own professional future. It can even be argued, and it is rhetoric among leftist
groups in Western society, that it is the authoritarian system
in politics, society and family itself that brought about child
abuse in the first place, and not the modern view that considers children as members of the community in their own
right.
It cannot be denied that physical child abuse is to a large
extent justified by patriarchal morals; while sexual abuse is a
controversial matter.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 318

Traditional circles of society tend to blind out the existence of child abuse or project it on sexual minorities; on the
other hand, more progressive circles tend to overreact and
exaggerate child abuse in modern society.
Whatever opinion one may personally have, it cannot be
denied that our culture that is still basically patriarchal has
built, over times, a high degree of structural violence that
makes it very difficult to change sex laws because of a basic
lack of trust in the self-regulatory systems inherent in nature.
This is why only a responsible legislator can change those
laws rather than waiting for a majority of the population to
be ready for this change. Modern legislation must care about
the best of the subjects to be protected by the law, as is
children in this case, and not or much less about ideological,
religious, traditional or custom opinions of the majority of
the population.
In a strictly authoritarian system children range among
slaves; abuse will occur without being called abuse. In a
democratic society, however, children are partners and have
choices to engage in life in ways that may be unthinkable in
highly controlled social systems but that meet children’s
need to grow, and also, to grow in autonomy.
There is no essential difference between the consequences of physical and sexual violence against children.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 319

Both physical and sexual violence can have traumatizing effects on the child’s psyche.
By contrast, in the absence of violence in sexual relations,
children tend to receive some form of gratification from the
experience. In addition, psychology corroborated that children are emotionally indiscriminating, and that it is generally
not the age of a possible partner or mate that is decisive for
them to love this person, but other, emotional factors such as
friendship, care, closeness, availability, understanding or continuity.
A study conducted by Anna Freud on children kept in
shelters during the heavy German bomb attacks in London
during World War II came to the result that children are not
invariably emotionally attached to their parents but to anyone who cares for their nutrition and emotional needs.
—Anna Freud, Children and War (1943).

As a matter of fact, some of the children only unwillingly
accepted to get back to their parents after the end of the
war because they had emotionally attached to one or the
other caretakers in a shelter. The study also concluded that
fear is not inherently present in children, not even in war
times but a result of the parent’s fear that is transmitted to
them telepathically or by implicit action. Without parental
enticement to be afraid, Anna Freud concluded, children are

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 320

matter-of-fact and able to enjoy virtually any situation that
arises, how dangerous it ever may be.
From all the factors that are decisive in sexual relations
between children and adults, one factor has been found the
least important, the child’s age. A girl of sixteen can be totally unable to consent to a sexual activity with a peer or an
adult while a girl of four may feel safe and competent to
agree to sex with an adult she loves. Sexual development in
fact has shown to depend much more on factual and positive
life experiences than on certain biological key events.
The latter are still necessary and important to happen but
relatively secondary with regard to a child’s factual love capacity. The inherent danger that children can become victims
of emotional or sexual exploitation, are equally independent
of the child’s age. The danger exists for all children, with the
difference however that the experienced child will be much
more able to cope with unwanted sexual approaches than
children that are raised in overprotection, fear and guilt, and
sexual ignorance.
Highly protected children have shown to be much more
vulnerable to exploitation than children who can experience
love and sexuality according to their own curiosity and the
opportunities that life brings to them naturally. Children
raised in authoritarian settings are generally unable to cope
with unexpected situations because in the normal course of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 321

events decisions are taken for them and not by them, and
they are not the rulers of their destiny.
By contrast, children from liberal families tend to develop
a more or less effective self-protection that shields them
against actual exploitation. The law does not have and does
not want to have the function of keeping children immature
but must consider children as beings-in-growth in accordance with the child’s need to build more and more autonomy as they grow up.
Effective legal protection can only be provided on the
basis of equal rights for children, and it has to be seen that
the abandonment of authoritarian structures in education will
in last resort make the passive submission of children to
physical or sexual attacks on them less likely to occur.
On the other hand, it has often been argued by criminal
lawyers that a legal system with strict ages of consent bears
the advantage to provide strict guidelines about what is
permitted by the law and what is illegal.
There is certainly some truth in this argument. But apart
from the fact that in love encounters it is quite uncommon to
inquire about the exact age of a mate, I claim that for adults
to assure that the sexual activity with a child they engage in
is nonviolent under the definition of a statute is a legal fact

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 322

easier to verify than finding out about the exact age of a
child.
A future legislation should be sex-affirming, positive and
rational, as well as effective for defeating violence. It should
not be moralizing, but built upon scientifically corroborated
findings and experiences. As such its primary intention
should be to prevent violent crime, and violent sexual crime,
instead of nailing people with useless draconian punishments.
To achieve this goal, the legislation should be highly restrictive toward violence encompassing even slight forms of
psychic pressure under its definition. Such an approach
would then be consistent with the insight that it is violence
that is to be feared, that is dangerous to a child, an adult or
the community, and not sensual pleasure and sexual diversity.
Basic novelties of such a future legal bill should be the
abandonment of age of consent and the retreat of state and
federal authorities to ruling and policing into the family and
into love and intimacy, thus abandoning the age-old persecution of nonviolent and consenting relationships between
persons of different age, regardless of their sexual or nonsexual nature. Eventually, the most daring novelty is the establishment and legal authorization of special consultants to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 323

effectively deal with cases that are to be qualified as violent
physical or sexual attacks on children.
The allocation of the burden of proof should be drafted
as an exception to a general rule of nonviolence put up as a
starting point of the bill. With regard to the criteria of the activity in question to be nonviolent, it should be legally presumed that the child consented to the sexual activity when
that activity was nonviolent and that the child was able to estimate to what they consented to, except in those particular
circumstances where consent was deemed legally invalid.
In cases of doubt, the defendant should bear the risk that
consultants prove the child was unable to consent either by
showing that there was no factual willingness of the child or
by proving that the child exceptionally lacked the necessary
ability to make an informed decision. The burden of proof
should be reversed when the activity was to be qualified a
violent sexual assault as an aggravating judicial circumstance.
Research demonstrated that physical violence against
children cannot effectively be dealt with by a legal dichotomy of lawful corporal punishment, on one hand, and unlawful child battery, on the other. Besides the fact that under
some jurisdictions even brutal and truly harmful physical attacks on children would still be justified as lawful corporal
punishment, if only the parent or educator acted in ‘good

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 324

faith,’ the dividing line between the two areas is extremely
difficult to draw and the legal uncertainty thus considerable.
This lack of sharpness of the pertaining laws is certainly
not for the good of the child. It rather serves the perpetuation of an authoritarian, repressive and inhuman educational
system that is outdated because it produces uncreative, fearful, and codependent human beings. And whatever position
one may take, there is no doubt that both corporal punishment and child battery are violence inflicted upon children.
Hence, there is no rational reason to treat both forms of behavior in a different way.
Actually, the only difference is an internal factor—good
faith—which is what lawyers call a chewing-gum clause because it’s very hard to prove or disprove in reality and thus
serves judge and jury to get at about any thinkable outcome
that serves to corroborate their feelings and that, by doing
so, opens the door to all and every form of prejudice.
The intention of a democratic and childcaring legislator
can only be to prohibit the infliction of violence upon children. Moreover, it has no rational basis to grant certain
adults such as parents or educators a free license to violently
attack a child for whatever reason, educational or other.
The general law policy behind any future legislation on
prohibiting violence against children should also consider

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 325

that mere gifts or promises given in exchange to sexual favors are not depriving the child of their personal autonomy
and do not directly impinge upon the child’s psyche. In general, they can be said to represent, to a certain extent, socially adequate behavior in that they are only indirectly impacting upon the child’s consent. In the same way as a child
can accept or refuse kisses and caresses already as a baby,
they can accept or deny to engage in any nonviolent sexual
activity, and this regardless of age.
The burden of proof should be with consultants for the
fact that, in the particular case, the child did not consent to
the sexual activity when prima facie such consent was given.
It is equally on consultants to prove that the child exceptionally lacked the capacity to estimate what they consented
to. If the defendant did not know about the child’s state of
incapacity to consent, the consent of the child should legally
be deemed to be valid. Such a provision is pertinent for the
rather exceptional cases where the child was willing and consenting but mentally retarded without appearing to be retarded, or in any other way in a state of mental or emotional
confusion or incapacity to consent, while however appearing
to be normal.
It should be presumed by the statute that children do not
consent to violent physical or sexual interactions. The burden
of proof should be on the defendant for the fact that, be-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 326

yond reasonable doubt, the child consented to the activity
despite its violent character.
To summarize, what I suggest as a drafting technique for
any future bill that sets out to unify the social fight against
physical and sexual violence against children, commonly
called ‘physical and sexual abuse,’ is to follow the principles
of drafting statutes established for common law jurisdictions,
as they are valid, still today, not only in the United States and
the United Kingdom, but also in former members of the British Commonwealth called common law jurisdictions such as,
for example, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa,
India, Pakistan, Burma, Singapore or Sri Lanka.
Such an approach would be in accordance with my initial
proposal to decriminalize sexual behavior for all members of
society, and establish a consulting service composed of
trained and experienced psychological, psychiatric and sexological advisors to deal with these matters as legally empowered professionals working for the public good and in
execution of governmental duties and responsibilities.

CHAPTER ELEVEN
The Roots of Violence

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 327

Violence Begins Inside
All violence begins inside. This is an insight that is above
all others. It is a way to solve the violence trap that has been
overlooked by both science and religion. It is the insight that
violence is a projection of inner processes.
My hypothesis is that all violence we see in the world is
but our inner violence projected outside. Violence is an attitude to escape from facing life, from facing conflicts, contradictions, oppositions and all we do not really understand.
Religions and ideologies of whatever kind have gradually
but decidedly got us on the wrong path. They have alienated
us from our own inner wisdom which is understanding life in
its complexity. This understanding is based upon holistic
perception, a form of knowledge gathering that is characterized by our two brain hemispheres working in sync.
What happened was that humanity hypertrophied the left
brain hemisphere, yang qualities, logical thought, reasoning
and deductive processes, neglecting, downplaying or shunning the yin qualities of the right brain, associative thought,
fantasy and inductive processes.
More and more alienated from their inner selves, humans
began to search for outside sense-givers in the form of organized religion and ideologies. These organizations have in
common that they claim authority to judge what is right and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 328

wrong. They replaced natural self-regulation by moralistic
behavior norms. They repressed the individual and blessed
the group and group pressure.
Individual wisdom became marginalized and even persecuted. They established schools, engaged in mass alphabetization and missionarism, gradually undermining parental
authority and more or less totally disregarding the individual
creative continuum of each and every child.
Then, they began to slaughter those who knew better,
the native populations and ethnic minorities who, through
their historic struggle have gained more wisdom than most
dominator societies.
They created the hero cult, a single male god they called
Yahweh, patriarchy, male dominance and all the rest of it.
This happened long before the division of the three religions Judaism, Islam and Christianity. It is part of our cultural
heritage. This culture cannot help us find peace because it
has never practiced peace. It has systematically bred violence through an obsession for control that is the result of its
disregard for pleasure and permissiveness and its insane rejection of the female principle.
Peace comes with dialogue and understanding, not
through persecution and control, with respecting nature and
not through violating nature, with accepting differences, not

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 329

through holy wars that are out to bring more standards, more
uniformity and more stupidity for all.
What we really need cannot be brought about through
outside action or revolution, but only, as Krishnamurti has
clearly shown, through a ‘psychological revolution’ from inside.
All violence begins inside and is first of all a lack of inner
communication, of inner dialogue. Self-knowledge comes
once we acknowledge the truth that all sense-givers, authority and powers cannot reveal us our inner nature and cannot
change our inner landscape. It comes through abandoning
all attachment to those outside authorities, through building
trust in the self-regulating wisdom of nature, the wisdom of
all-that-is.
As all violence is first of all inner violence, all world peace
is created by inner peace that is gradually projected outward, in the form of wistful action, fruitful cooperation, healing and respectful dialogue.
This, in turn, brings about real solutions, true solutions,
not the fake solutions that are brought about through socalled political action that is cunning and deceitful.
Once we see that evolution comes from inside, we might
open up to relearn the vocabulary of love instead of engaging in the next holy state war against drugs, pedophiles, ter-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 330

rorists or other social poison containers and scapegoat
groups.
It is through seeing our own self-delusions, our own antisocial desires and hangups and our own inner violence that
we gradually begin to clean up the mess inside and begin to
understand life through understanding our opposites. This
understanding might be painful once we abandon our inner
drug addictions which are our thousand beliefs in technological progress, machismo, physical prowess, racial superiority and all of I-am-better-than-you philosophies.
This painful awakening is the beginning of wisdom, and
the journey into a new and peaceful lifestyle. It is what brings
about humility.
This attitude listens to our opponents instead of shouting
or shooting them down, knowing that we have got a part of
their worldview in us and that, thus, we can empathetically
understand their inner and outer tragedies. And then,
change can come about, also outside, peacefully and totally
uncontrolled.
Love and Morality
The reason why I entitled this sub-chapter ‘Love and Morality’ is that I am forever convinced that love is the original
thing and that compulsive sex morality in the form of moralism is a perversion of love; it is the corruption of natural love

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 331

into artificial morality that has got us on the violence trap, in
the first place. Once you see that, you will agree that the discussion of patriarchy-matriarchy is absolutely random. The
root of violence is denial of nature however we may call this
denial.
Alienation from nature and natural functions comes about
through a hypertrophy of the intellect, the new brain, the rational mind, the left brain and language. It is equally random
if this happened, on a timeline, five thousand or twelve thousand years ago or if it happened, as some meteorologists
believe, through a climatic shift that led to a desertification
of those regions in the Middle East where we know patriarchy first originated from. All these phenomena are secondary; they are effects, and not causes.
It is of little ontological value to know why and how people turned away from nature, most of them not being conscious of their bias against nature. Compared to the amount
of research spent on such scarcely relevant issues, it is in my
view of paramount importance to know what turning away
from nature exactly results in and what it costs us, in terms of
organically grown networks destroyed, human life destroyed,
animal life destroyed and plant life destroyed, and what it
costs us in terms of planetary ecology.
It will then be seen that all religions and political ideologies that are nature-hostile will have to restitute to humanity

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 332

the high price we are paying, as a human race, for the immense destruction their misled policies and beliefs have
caused collectively! Indeed, I believe they have to be made
responsible for the destruction of human potential and the
many possibilities of human realization they have destroyed.
And if they do not act upon this insight, there is only one solution: they have to be disposed of, and as soon as possible,
and as completely as possible, not as a matter of iconoclasm,
but as a measure of world-political sanity!
When we begin to think functionally, holistically and systemically, and in the way nature ‘thinks,’ we will see that we
need neither religions nor political salvation in any form to
expand human potential in hitherto unforeseen ways. We will
then comprehend that being united with nature and its wisdom implies a natural and free spirituality that is based upon
knowledge, and not belief, and that needs no gods nor saviors because it is naturally complete and whole.
When love is again love and not a split concept that came
about by a schizoid thought structure, violence will by itself
disappear, without grandiose international efforts to counter
it, and without billions spent on prevention that are better
spent to feed the millions of hungry children worldwide who
are left at stake by our well-fed, well-groomed and wellchurched politicians.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 333

The present state of violence is the result of wrong relationships! Extensive research on the roots of violence has
been undertaken and yet, it seems to me, one factor in the
etiology of violence remains overlooked by most researchers.
I contend that violence begins inside, in the sense that when
our inner team is in conflict, we are torn apart and begin to
project the schizoid split upon our outside reality; the deficient, distorted or totally lacking relationship of the inner
parts of the psyche to each other brings about strife and
conflict equally in our outward relationships.
Abuse is the result of a power vacuum that comes about
through a fixation or complex within the lower self and that
acts as a compensation to suffering early in life. People who
are in touch with their inner truth and who are liberated of
culturally created fear blockages are able to realize greater
personal and collective happiness than they could hitherto
opt for. More and more, it should be possible to make responsible love choices for relations that are unusual or even
tabooed by former moral laws that belonged to the collective supremacy of the Pisces era.
The slogan ‘Live Your Love’ that I have coined as a viable
new love paradigm is deliberately contrasting with nonsensical ideological and religious doctrines. It is these doctrines
and their coercive dogmatism that have heavily contributed
to bring about the chaotic state of violence that we face to-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 334

day almost everywhere in the world. Overcoming the violence trap means people have to relearn getting in touch
with their inner truth so that they are again able to realize
their greater vision of happiness: this includes to relearn
making love choices in accordance with a higher form of
wisdom that cares about synergy, and mutual positive development, and that is little concerned, for example, with the
age of the partners involved in the relation.
One of the main objectives I gained from thirty years of
research is the urgent need to redefine natural sexuality for
all ages both on an individual level, through healing abuse,
and on a collective level, through social reform. Part of this
endeavor is to unveil the roots of violence and abuse, on
both a personal and a collective level.
Among the main reasons for violence being the repression of natural body pleasure and free love between people
of all ages in general, and the child’s free sexual life in particular, my task was to retrace the wrong turn that humanity
has taken since prehistory and to embed this truth in a crosscultural perspective that is focused upon the importance of
love as a major factor of human evolution, and against compulsive sex morality which is the major factor of human devolution in general, and the debasement of human sexuality, in
particular.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 335

The pioneering work of Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) in this
field of research is of paramount importance, which is why I
am going to shortly recapitulate and explain the findings of
Dr. Wilhelm Reich and the science of orgonomy he created.
Furthermore, it will be shown in my research that the findings
of Wilhelm Reich only update for the ignorant West a science
tradition in the East that knows since millennia the details
about what Reich called orgonomy.
The essential truth gained from years of research on the
functional processes of life is that all parts of the psyche must
be given a voice so that a constructive inner dialogue can be
set up. I favor an integrated approach to the problem that
has seven complementary perspectives:
—A psychological perspective;
—A historical perspective;
—An artistic perspective;
—A pedagogical perspective;
—A political perspective;
—A humanitarian perspective; and
—A spiritual perspective.
Part of this task was to show the role of erotic attraction
to children as an important manifestation of human love as it

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 336

develops naturally as a compensation for lacking child-child
sexual contact in our society and the general widespread
emotional abuse of the child in the patriarchal and feelhostile culture. It is to be shown that the repression of those
compensatory love functions disturbs the natural love orgonomy and creates violence and abuse.
My research showed that child abuse and violence
against children is not brought about by so-called ‘pedophilia’ but in the contrary through the repression of our natural pedoemotions.
Abuse is ill-defined in our culture. It only considers the
victim and not the abuser. However, the abuser is a victim in
as much as the person he has victimized. For truly, nobody
can be victimized who has not previously chosen to act as
victim in a given situation. The abuser is trapped by the victim’s paradigm in as much as the victim is trapped by the
abuser’s power problem or hangup. Both attract each other
and there is no abuse without mutual implicit consent about
acting out the two sides of abuse, the active and the passive
one.
Fighting abuse is therefore not a moral cause but must
start from a rational, functional and two-sided view of the
problem as an entanglement situation that is karmic and inherent in both parties’ life matrixes.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 337

Moral wars, by contrast, lead to more confusion, more
destruction and more abuse. For they do not tackle the roots
of abuse that are the same roots as the roots of violence and
of incest, but only are concerned with the reflects that such
shortcomings produce on the surface of society. They are for
that reason entirely ineffective and superficial.
A viable solution can only come from tedious study and
observation of all the factors involved in abuse and those
factors are for the most part unconscious entanglement patterns hidden in the psyches of both abusers and abused, energetic blockages that have locked the stream of life in one
or the other way so that parasitic energy patterns came
about.
There is an urgent need to change the reigning love-andabuse paradigm so as to combat violence and bring about
positive change for constructive new relationships that are
based upon the golden rule of conduct as it is taught by
sages since times immemorial, and that are respected by
most peaceful native cultures. It is to be seen in what horrendous ways both clerical and politically fascist movements
and leaders have since centuries tried to veil this essential
truth and thus spread the emotional plague all over the
globe.
After extensive research on mythology, particularly the
writings of Joseph Campbell, I gradually figured how the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 338

present love-killing paradigm came about us from ancient
times. I namely had asked the question how it was possible
that the former love-based world order was completely overthrown and violently eradicated by a new world order that
has replaced love by morality and natural care by obligatory
and largely standardized family relations?
Historically, the transition from peaceful and life-affirming
matriarchal fishing-farming cultures to violent and lifedenying hunting-killing patriarchal cultures is of particular
importance for the understanding of the present hero culture
with its strongly ‘Puritan’ life denial, its obsessive focus on
child protection and its repression of natural emotions.
There are important political consequences of my research. The corner stones of my social reform strategy and
legal policy are the implementation of permissive education
together with the complete abandonment of all age-ofconsent laws and their replacement by emosexual counseling for all ages, effected by trusted experts, while the police
completely retreats from interfering in human love and intimacy, whatever the age of the mates, as long as mating is
consenting and nonviolent.
These policy changes would without further do for complete change in all our thinking, living and behaving; wars
and massacres would cease; slavery, in which form ever
would naturally cease when people’s emotions are in bal-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 339

ance, and all efforts for countering sexual pathologies and
perversions would focus on prevention, instead of punishment; related problems would be handled in a no-nonsense,
peaceful, professional and non-punitive manner that is effective socially and that involves therapeutic and love-based
spontaneous help, instead of police intervention and the disruption of family bonds.
Most of these problems originate in system-prone dysfunctions that in the present legal system are inflated, like
the disappearance of the extended family and the widespread acceptance of a neurotic, dysfunctional and insane
family concept known as the ‘nuclear family.’
I believe that there are important humanitarian consequences of my research. Special care must be bestowed
upon children who can still be reformed and healed from
biopathic deformations and characterological armors. There
are millions of orphans to be found in state institutions all
over the world. If only a small percentage could be taken
care of in collaborating with responsible institutions that understand and support the need for permissiveness in education and the intelligent understanding of human emotions,
humanity would be helped as a whole and true evolution
would be possible.
The spiritual or religious impact of my concept of social
and legal reform is obvious. It would lead humanity back to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 340

divine origins, through reconnecting us with our higher self.
As long as humans are ruthlessly conditioned to comply with
the often unreasonable and irrational demands of religions
and ideologies, they cannot connect with their higher selves
because they are torn up by either-or choices and by an unruly inner controller that drives them into restless and rushy
behavior, which is shallow and superficial, keeping them in a
state of constant aloofness that results form their alienation
from natural inner guidance.
This is true for all involved, the children, the educators
and all those who help building this new educational system.
Negatively put, any attempt to change the dysfunctions and
reduce violence in any given society without attempting to
change the educational system will always be a ridiculous
fake-solution that is based upon eye-wiping and ‘quick fix’
thinking.
Our educational system needs urgent and thorough reform and the relationships collective-individual, and stateindividual need to be redefined; these areas have to be freed
from the moralistic roof structure that keeps these vital areas
of human living in a state of dysfunctionality and stagnation,
which is in no way justifiable by any true and genuine morality.
In the contrary, true morality goes along with responsibility, and to deny or obstruct change in the present cata-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 341

strophic state of the world means to contribute to the rise of
evil through the denial of responsibility, individual and collective.
The Value of Permissiveness
My hypothesis is that the destructiveness of civilization is
the result of the repression of the natural emotions of the
child and the building of a moralistic roof structure that
gradually replaced the primary self-regulatory processes that
nature has coded into the growth of all living.
Violence and destruction that characterize human history
have their roots not in a biological or genetic error, but in the
failure of civilization to keep in touch with nature’s wisdom;
this is mainly done by perverting children into obedient robots who have repressed their feelings in order to survive
and to be accepted. To express it in a slogan, not civilization
is wrong, but a civilization that civilizes against nature!
As examples to the contrary, I shall have a regard on tribal
cultures, the prepatriarchal high cultures of Antiquity and
some cultures that survived until today, as for example the
Balinese culture, and where people are emotionally balanced, happy and productive, loyal and intelligent.
I already mentioned the highly developed Minoan Civilization with its natural focus on art, the senses and beauty,
free sexuality and a matriarchal worldview that respected the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 342

female. This culture excelled with a low crime rate, absence
of slavery, equality of women, a goddess cult and low level of
violence. I also mentioned that crime rates in those cultures,
if we take only the Balinese culture as an example, are relatively low, and violent crime such as murder and rape, abduction, rape and killing of children, is as good as non-existing.
Marriages are long-lasting and divorce rates are considerably
lower than in modern industrial cultures. These native cultures are more matriarchal in character than our highly violent modern civilizations which are predominantly patriarchal.
History reveals that already the first highly developed cultures, such as ancient Sumer, Babylon and the Maya and the
Inca civilizations were belonging to the ‘solar’ patriarchal system. With patriarchy began the oppression of women and
children and the reduction of sexuality toward certain sexual
‘acts’ that were allowed and certain other sexual ‘acts’ that
were prohibited. With the increase of power for the patriarchal system, repression, denunciation, intolerance and structural, political, collective, domestic and intimacy violence
began to reign where before freedom, peace, sexual permissiveness and tolerance were blooming. An important factor
within this process that keeps worsening until today is the
repression of the child’s natural emotions and sexual life.
As early as in 1929, Bronislaw Malinowski, a renowned anthropologist, published his report on the sexual life of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 343

Trobriands in which he draws the reader’s attention particularly to the sexual life of children and adolescents.
—See Bronislaw Malinowski, Sex and Repression in Savage Society
(1927) and The Sexual Life of Savages in North West Melanesia
(1929).

Malinowski found high sexual permissiveness toward
children’s free sexual play. More generally, he noted the total
absence of a morality that condemns sexuality in children.
—Bronislaw Malinowski, Sex and Repression in Savage Society
(1927), 76.

Malinowski observed that children engage in free sexual
play from early age through a peculiar social institution. In
fact, Malinowski found Trobriands maintain special houses
for children and the youth, where the children, from age
three, spend their nights, and where they are gradually initiated by older children in all forms of sex play and later also
coitus. Upon further inquiry, Malinowski learnt that the relations children maintain in these houses are meant to be
promiscuous. He was told that Trobriands think that children
should live out their inborn sexual drive in promiscuity in order to be able, after puberty, to form steady and stable relationships with a partner for marriage.
— See Bronislaw Malinowski, Sex and Repression in Savage Society
(1927) and The Sexual Life of Savages in North West Melanesia

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 344

(1929) as well as Margaret Mead, Sex and Temperament in Three
Primitive Society (1935).

Notably, initiatory rites are absent with the Trobriands
since children are initiated from about three years onwards,
generally by older children, in all forms of sexual play. Interestingly, the Trobriand culture thus differs from most other
tribal cultures in that there is very little stress upon the importance of adolescence or initiation rites for growing into
adulthood.
With the Trobriands, who probably have the phylogenetically more archaic social system compared to most other
tribal societies, adolescence is smooth and gradual, without
any kind of revolt.
The only marked difference of adolescence compared to
childhood, in Trobriand is, as Malinowski reported, that
originally promiscuous sexual behavior gradually transforms,
during adolescence, into stable and non-promiscuous love
relations, that seemingly prepare the young boys and girls
for their later monogamous marriage.
The most interesting finding for Malinowski was that in
Trobriand culture violence is as good as non-existing and
that there are no sexual dysfunctions. To say, Trobriands were
found to be almost ideal marriage partners and divorce was
statistically under five percent, and thus a rare exception.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 345

Violent crimes are virtually non-existent and incest is tabooed and inhibited by social norms.
In his book The Invasion of Compulsory Sex-Morality
(1932/1971), Wilhelm Reich quoted extensively from Malinowski’s field studies and used them for corroborating his
own sex-economic theories. Other researchers found a similar social setup with the Muria in South India where children
stay until their maturity in so-called ghotuls where they live
their sexuality freely and in utter promiscuity, and where
older children initiate younger ones progressively into sexual
play.
—V. Elwin, The Muria and their Ghotul (1947), Richard L. Currier, Juvenile Sexuality in Global Perspective (1981).

These researchers found that after a phase of total promiscuity, the children, from the moment of sexual maturity, begin to form strong, stable and rather lasting bonds and partnerships which are based not on a desire for sexual adventure, but on love, and care. Research further found that these
first steady relationships form the basis for later marriages
that, regularly, last lifelong. (Id.)
Cultures with a matrilineal setup raise children within their
natural continuum balance whereas patrilineal cultures tend
to condition children according to firm cultural or ideological
values and a rigid morality codex. This ideological and religious conditioning that alienates the child from nature and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 346

from the natural functions of their body is primarily effected
through indoctrination and through gradually alienating children from their bodies. The most effective way used to indoctrinate children with cultural prohibitions and taboos
proceeds by implanting early in them a deeply rooted doubt
about who they are! This doubt which creates a vacuum will
then be filled with magic formulas such as ‘Be not what you
are!’ The next step is to force the child to play roles in order
to please their parents. The main role in this drama which is
the Drama of the Gifted Child, as Alice Miller called it, is the
role of the child as father or mother of his own narcissistic
parents.
— Alice Miller, The Drama of the Gifted Child (1996).

This education that I describe with the formula ‘rearing
narcissistic comedians’ is very common in our postmodern
industrial culture. This is why narcissism, a serious emotional
affliction, is rampant in all our modern democracies.
However, few researchers are able to look through the
cultural veil and see the roots of narcissism where they are,
namely in our child-rearing paradigm. Those who do, such as
Alice Miller or Alexander Lowen are not representing mainstream psychiatry, despite the brilliance of their work.
— See, for example, Alice Miller, Thou Shalt Not Be Aware (1998),
Alexander Lowen, Narcissism (1997).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 347

They have found that education that typically leads to
narcissism is rich in inventing and executing several other
magic formulas that are given to the child as ‘hypnotic
spells.’ Some of these are:
—Be adaptable and flexible until self-alienation;
—Never be yourself in front of your parents;
—Be not child-like;
—Be mature in immaturity;
—Understand what your parents don’t understand;
—Be logical and uncomplicated;
—Respect your parents while disregarding yourself;
—Mistrust your intuition;
—Follow authority without questioning;
Many parents who educate their children in a systemconform manner are not conscious of the fact that they act as
the long arm of political systems and ideologies subtly hypnotizing their children with the concepts they have themselves been fed with.
Education toward autonomy is based upon the unique
truth of every single child, also and especially if this individual truth is contrary to the reigning sociopolitical ideologies.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 348

It is disturbing for industrial culture that the child be a
complete sexual being from birth, and that, as a result, children have a birthright to have their emotions and their sexual
feelings respected. Françoise Dolto wrote in her book La
Cause des Enfants (1985) that it scandalizes adults that a
child be their equal and that, therefore, most parents raise
their children as formerly princes ruled their kingdoms.
The sociopolitical reasons why this is so are obvious: a
body-oriented child is not a consumer of toys and a thousand devices artificially created by industrial culture. For
those who object this view, I recall that the repression of the
child’s sexuality has started precisely with the onset of the
Western industrial bourgeoisie, at the end of the 17th century.
—Françoise Dolto, La Cause des Enfants (1985), 28-29.

Historical studies about child rearing practices in Europe
stress the fact that still during the Renaissance the sexuality
of the child was not interfered with, and that, back in the
Middle-Ages, apart from Christian circles, it was completely
free.
Consumerist industrialization brought the societal replacement of body pleasure or a state of To Be by ersatz
body pleasure, or a state of To Have, to quote Erich Fromm’s
terminology.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 349

—Erich Fromm, To Have or To Be (1976/1996).

Ersatz body pleasure is the pleasure that replaces original
body pleasure; thus first of all the toy. Not the self-made toy
that still has some connection with the body, but the industrially produced toy that is completely alien to the child’s
body. Typically this toy—which in the meantime is produced
by a gigantic worldwide industry—consists of materials not
akin to the human body, such as plastic and metal.
Both materials have in common that they are cold and
rigid while the body is warm and pliable. Unconsciously children are conditioned upon the characteristics of the toys
they is playing with. ‘Be plastic!’ translates into ‘Be without
feelings, artificial.’ ‘Be metal!’ translates into ‘Be hard and
mechanical. These are the characteristics of the culture you
are growing into. So mold yourself accordingly!’
In addition, techniques of confusion are used in education to gradually alienate the child from their own truth —
which is their body continuum. The child namely thinks from
the body toward the mind, and thus inductively while the
conditioned adult thinks from the mind toward the body, that
is deductively. This means that the child’s truth is defined and
experienced as the truth of their body. Every truth that disregards this body or tries to set it aside will not be regarded by
the child as truth.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 350

It is for this reason that children cannot comprehend morality and moralistic educational concepts as those concepts
deny the body and are to be understood only by the rational
mind. The result are water-headed giant babies, adults who
have never made the cut with their childhood and that remain erotically immature. True virgins.
But life has not made us to remain virgins, but to leave
virginity and grow into loving copulation—otherwise life
could not continue.
Pleasure Defeats Violence
Herbert James Campbell, a renowned English neurologist, found in two decades of research a universal principle
which controls our brain and that he called the pleasure principle. His book The Pleasure Areas (1973) provides a summary of many years of neurological research.
Campbell shows in his extensive study that our entire
thinking and living is primarily motivated by pleasure, pleasure not only as tactile, sensuous or sexual sensation, but also
as non-sensuous, intellectual or spiritual pleasure.
With these findings, the old theoretical controversy if man
was primarily a biological or a spiritual being, became obsolete; it is our striving for pleasure that induces certain interests in us, that drives us to certain actions and that lets us
choose certain ways.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 351

During childhood and depending on the outside stimuli,
certain preferred pathways are traced in our brain, which
means that specific neural connections are established that
serve the information flow. The number of those connections
is namely an indicator for intelligence. The more preferred
pathways exist in the brain of a person, the more lively appears the person, the more interested she will be in different
things, and the quicker she will achieve integrating new
knowledge into existing memory.
High memorization ability, Campbell found, is namely
depending on how easily new information can be added to
existing pathways of information. Logically, the more of those
pathways there are in the brain, the better! Many preferred
pathways make for high flexibility and the capacity to adapt
easily to new circumstances.
Campbell’s research indicates that the repression of
pleasure that is since centuries part of our Judeo-Christian
culture, has strongly impeded evolution and impaired the
integrity of the human psyche and health. This is exactly what
Wilhelm Reich found—without having at his disposition
Campbell’s new neurological findings. But not only neurologists such as Campbell have nowadays thought about the
basic functions of life and living, but also people who were
formerly active in totally different fields of science.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 352

The American scientists Ashley Montagu and James W.
Prescott had very different points of departure for their extensive research. Montagu wanted to know why in animal
experiments small rhesus apes died when they were deprived from their mother while they survived when a simple
felt mat was put in the cage as surrogate of motherly tactile
affection.
Prescott researched the origins of violence, and the relationship between pleasure and violence. He was from the
start skeptical regarding the age-old myth that man was per
se a violent creature even though human history, or what historians saw of it, seemed to prove this assumption. Both scientists came to basically the same results, namely that tactile
stimulation of the infant as a main source of early pleasure
gratification is the primary condition for human health, for
harmony, and for world peace.
Ashley Montagu’s research developed quickly a specific
focus on the importance of the human skin as a prime pleasure provider. Grant’s Method of Anatomy defines the skin as
the most extended and the most varied of our sensory organs.
— Grant’s Method of Anatomy (1980), 61.

Ashley Montagu’s study Touching: The Human Significance of the Skin (1971) is the final result of decades of skin

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 353

research, not only Montagu’s, but of many other researchers
whose findings Montagu summarizes and evaluates in his extensive study. His research elucidates the importance of tactile stimulation in early childhood.
Montagu’s specific focus in his research was upon the
mammal mothers’ licking the young. He found astonishing
unanimity in zoologists’ opinions as to the importance of
motherly licking for the survival of the young. Montagu
namely discovered that it is in the first place the perineal
zone, the region between anus and genitals, of the young
animals that the mother preferably and repeatedly licks.
Experiments in which mammal mothers were impeded
from licking this zone of the young resulted in functional disturbances or even chronic sickness of the genito-urinary tract
of the young animals. Montagu concluded from his research
that the licking did not serve hygienic purposes only, but was
intended to provide a tactile stimulation for the organs that
were underlying the part of the skin that was licked.
—Ashley Montagu, Touching (1971), 15 ff.

Montagu further concluded that licking rarely happens in
the mother-child relationship with primates or humans. (Id.,
18) Most researchers found that during evolution, licking was
gradually replaced by eye or skin contact between mother
and child. The tactile needs of the small child correspond to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 354

the desire of the parents to express love through tactile affection such as kissing or fondling, pressing the child’s naked
body against one’s own during play hour, and the naked cosleeping of parents and children, which is something very
common with Eskimos and other tribal cultures.
In the run of industrial civilization, however, this changed
fundamentally. Modern pediatrics recommends parents to
put their children in separate rooms and beds with the result
that parents and children are physically separated. The civilized child gets much less tactile stimulation in early childhood than children from most tribal cultures, a fact that was
observed even by casual observants of native lifestyle, such
as Jean Liedloff, a cinematographer and author of a revealing study on the tactile needs of infants. Liedloff also is credited with having coined the expression Continuum Concept,
title of her book, that has been accepted by most of postmodern anthropological and psychological research on early
tactile deprivation.
— Jean Liedloff, The Continuum Concept (1977).

Ashley Montagu and James W. Prescott, coming from different scientific angles, concluded as to the importance of
early tactile stimulation for the psychic and physical health of
the child. A direct relationship was discovered by both between early tactile stimulation and the functioning of the
immune system of the child. The relationship was corrobo-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 355

rated by France’s first and foremost obstetricians, Frederick
Leboyer and Michel Odent. As Michel Odent writes in his
book La Santé Primale (1986):
—It is not yet completely understood that sensorial perceptions at
the beginning of life can be a way to stimulate the ‘primary brain,’
at a time when the ‘system of primary adaptation’ is not yet grown
to maturity. More specifically, this signifies for example that, if one
fondles a human baby or an animal baby, one also stimulates his
immune system. (Michel Odent, La Santé Primale (1986), 24, Translation mine).

Montagu states in his book that love was once defined as
the ‘harmony of two souls and the contact of two epidermises.’ In this sense the peau à peau that is now recommended to mothers by their pediatricians, is indeed a primary condition for the healthy growing up of children, the
good functioning of their immune system and, last not least,
the early creation of preferred pathways in their brains.
Abundant skin contact thus favors high intelligence!
In his research with rhesus, Montagu came to astonishing
findings. When he deprived the newborns of their mother
and put them in a ‘naked’ cage, they died. When he did the
same, but put a kind of felt mat in the cage, they survived,
although they carried away some brain damage from the
deprivation of the mother. However, it was a fact that the ‘felt
mat’ assured their survival.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 356

How could that be? Montagu went one step further. He
replaced the mother through a ‘felt mother’ that was hung in
the cage. Now the young did not only survive but they also
had almost no more brain damage. It was especially the first
part of the experiment that intrigued Montagu, that the
young survived simply by the fact that a felt mat was put in
the cage. Further observations led Montagu to see that the
young rhesus used the ‘carpet’ creatively for giving to their
bodies tactile stimulation, which obviously served as a compensate for the tactile stimulation they normally got from
their mother in the form of licking.
The interesting thing about this experiment is that it was
not the milk of the mother nor her care that was essential for
the young’s survival, but exclusively her providing some form
of tactile pleasure. The felt of the carpet was similar to the
mother’s fur and therefore acceptable for the young as a
mother surrogate. This research amply demonstrates the importance of tactile stimulation with all mammals, and so
much the more with humans where primary symbiosis is even
more prolonged!
Already in the 1930s Wilhelm Reich disproved the widespread misconception that sadistic and destructive tendencies were part of human nature. He namely opposed Sigmund Freud and his theory of a death instinct, demonstrating through biogenic research that those assumed destruc-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 357

tive instincts are but secondary drives, a direct consequence
of the cultural repression of the natural sexual instinct which
had brought about a collective neurosis in the human animal.
Reich’s insights that at his lifetime were violently opposed by
the majority of his scientific colleagues, now are confirmed
by Prescott’s findings which bring statistic evidence as to the
malleability of the human individual through his early tactile
experiences or the absence of such experiences. Prescott,
using R.B. Textor’s supra-cultural statistics to scientifically
prove his highly explosive political conclusions, writes:
—Unless the causes of violence are isolated and treated, we will
continue to live in a world of fear and apprehension. Unfortunately,
violence is often offered as a solution to violence. Many law enforcement officials advocate 'get tough' policies as the best method
to reduce crime. Imprisoning people, our usual way of dealing with
crime, will not solve the problem, because the causes of violence lie
in our basic values and the way in which we bring up our children
and youth. Physical punishment, violent films and TV programs
teach our children that physical violence is normal. (…) Recent research supports the point of view that the deprivation of physical
pleasure is a major ingredient in the expression of physical violence.
The common association of sex with violence provides a clue to understanding physical violence in terms of deprivation of physical
pleasure. (...) Although physical pleasure and physical violence seem
worlds apart, there seems to be a subtle and intimate connection
between the two. Until the relationship between pleasure and violence is understood, violence will continue to escalate. (James W.
Prescott, Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence, Bulletin of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 358

Atomic Scientists, 10-20 (1975), partly reprinted in: The Futurist,
April, 1975, pp. 10-11)

Prescott thus fully confirmed Reich’s earlier research and
corroborated his socioeconomic and sex-economic findings.
More specifically, he found a remarkable relationship between pleasure and violence. Referring to laboratory experiments with animals, Prescott could detect a sort of reciprocal relationship between pleasure and violence, that is the
presence of pleasure inhibits violence – and vice versa.
Furthermore, Prescott found a direct relationship between the child rearing methods of a given culture, and the
degree of violence that reigns in that culture. In particular, he
found that societies that tend to rear children in a rather
Spartan way, hostile to pleasure and with little or no tactile
stimulation, commit in their value system to various forms of
violence, do warfare, torture their enemies, practice slavery
and progeny and concede to women and children a rather
low social status; these societies also exhibit a high crime
rate. (Id., 12)
Another violence-indicating parameter in a society, Prescott found, is physical violence towards children in form of
corporal punishment. (Id.)
Furthermore, repression or tolerance of children’s sexual
life plays a decisive role in the assessment if a given society
has a high or low violence potential. Prescott elucidates:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 359

—Thus, we seem to have a firmly based principle: Physically affectionate human societies are highly unlikely to be physically violent.
Accordingly, when physical affection and pleasure during adolescence as well as infancy are related to measures of violence, we find
direct evidence of a significant relationship between the punishment of premarital sex behaviors and various measures of crime and
violence. (Id., 13)

As a result of his extensive research, Dr. Prescott advocates the abolition of corporal punishment of children, a
definite social and legal rise of the social status of women,
the reinstitution of the extended family, the reintegration of
the elder and a the active participation of men with child
rearing and the granting of physical affection to children in
their role as fathers or educators.
— See James W. Prescott, Deprivation of Physical Affection as a
Primary Process in the Development of Physical Violence (1979), 77,
78.

I discovered the writings of James W. Prescott in the
1980s, at a time when I was doing research on Ashley Montagu, Frederick Leboyer, Michel Odent, Alexander Lowen,
Bronislaw Malinowski, and Margaret Mead. The two major
articles written by Dr. Prescott were coming to me like a revelation to a question I had asked since more than a decade:
‘What are the roots of violence?’
Knowing from anthropological, ethnological, and sociological studies as well as from neuropsychology and from

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 360

spiritual work that violence is not the natural condition for
humanity, but a sort of emotional and cultural perversion that
results from deep hurts early in childhood, and probably also
from scars that go back to former lives, I was grateful to have
found at last conclusive research that not only analyzed our
condition, but also pointed to viable long-term solutions for
creating a more peaceful society of the future.
Prescott’s research also integrates findings by lesser
known researchers as Dr. Harlow who have focused on the
brain development of rhesus, and who found revealing evidence for the fact that among all the factors that make a
mammal infant survive without the mother, the one single
essential factor is the availability of a ‘touchable’ object that
provides tactile stimulation.
For example, in a widely documented experiment, two
mother surrogates were hung in the cage, one serving as a
milk provider, the other being a soft doll made from linen.
The surprising thing was that all rhesus infants preferred the
cloth mother over the milk-giving mother, thereby signaling
that tactile stimulation was the most important in their parenting needs, not the secondary availability of mother milk.
Today, this research has been corroborated by newer brain
research, conducted by a variety of researchers starting with
Herbert James Campbell in the 1970s, and with James W.
Prescott as the expert who shows in a number of publica-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 361

tions that tacile stimulation of infants together with breastfeeding and baby-carrying are the most important factors for
building nonviolent, socially positive and non-abusive behaviors.
To repeat it, the solutions that James W. Prescott suggests are long-overdue changes in the process of childbirth
and our educational system, permissive and nonviolent childrearing together with greater social permissiveness for premarital sex and a definite legal prohibition of physical punishment of children in both the home and school together
with effective government collaboration for fighting domestic, educational and sexual violence. Regarding infant care,
Prescott stresses the importance of the primary symbiosis
between mother and infant during the first 18 months of the
infant, abundant tactile stimulation of infants and babies, using techniques of child massage, as well as co-sleeping between parents and small children. Another important field of
research that could be classified under the header of ‘ritual
violence’ is both male circumcision and the widespread genital mutilation of female infants, girls and women, which is
now discussed under the header of ‘female genital cutting’
or FGC. James W. Prescott advocates the complete abandonment of such practices that I heard about first in 1984,
when doing a legal research on the matter for Edmond Kaiser, founder of Terre des Hommes in Lausanne, Switzerland.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 362

At the time I thought these violent practices were limited
to some communities in Somalia, Sudan and other African
countries, but fact is that it’s a worldwide problem. The
American Academy of Pediatrics writes in their policy statement that it was estimated that ‘at least 100 million women
have undergone FGC and that between 4 and 5 million procedures are performed annually on female infants and children, with the most severe types performed in Somalian and
Sudanese populations.’
In addition, what is lesser known is the fact, reported by
the American Academy of Pediatrics that these practices are
not limited to Muslim populations but are known also from
orthodox circles among Christians and Jews.
—American Academy of Pediatrics, Policy Statement: Ritual Genital
Cutting of Female Minors,
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/125/5/1088

The perhaps most important research topic where James
W. Prescott is widely recognized as an expert is violence prevention. He particularly stresses the importance of
breastfeeding-bonding for 2.5 years or longer. He emphasizes that nonviolent behaviors develop as a result of cognitive affectional bonding between mother and infant. Together with a number of other researchers, he documented
and published scientific evidence that shows that the human
brain develops differently in humans who as infants have en-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 363

joyed prolonged breastfeeding, and in those who have not.
It is interesting to note that the suggestions that James W.
Prescott comes up with from his perspective as a peace researcher are very much in accordance with those suggested
by Jean Liedloff, in her book The Continuum Concept, from
her perspective of the lifestyle of native peoples. Also, there
is a striking similarity of solutions offered for the same questions by Ashley Montagu, as a result of skin research, and by
the French obstetricians Michel Odent and Frederick Leboyer who have looked beyond the fence of obstetrics and
into what Odent called Primal Health, which is a holistic concept of health and wellbeing.
In my perspective and the overview I had over Prescott’s
research, it seems to me that the central focus is the preparation of far-reaching policy changes for the political agenda
that are backed up by hard scientific data. In so far, I consider
Prescott as a researcher more important than many others
who are perhaps more published and more in the public focus than him. In fact, the importance of his research can
hardly be underestimated. We are living wrongly as a society
and the violence we face is not hazard, nor a ‘biological mistake’ but the precise result of our living against the wisdom
of nature.
Research in neuroscience delivers the clear-cut evidence
that touch is paramount for the development of nonviolent

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 364

and socially positive behaviors. Dr. Prescott shows that sensory deprivation results in behavioral abnormalities such as
depression, impulse dyscontrol, violence, substance abuse,
and in impaired immunological functioning in mother deprived infants. He demonstrated through a research with 49
native cultures that there are precise correlations between
low affectionate cultures, insufficient mother-infant bonding,
patrilinearity, polygeny, warfare, slavery, torture of enemies,
sexual repression, child abuse, violence and monotheism, on
the one hand, and high affectionate cultures, nurturant
mother-infant bonding, matrilinearity, low polygeny rate, absence of warfare, no slavery and no torture, sexual permissiveness, high infant indulgence, peaceful coexistence and
polytheism.
To summarize, Prescott’s research sees the primary problem in the etiology of violence in failed bonding in the
mother-infant relationship and so-called somato-sensory affectional deprivation (S-SAD), as such deprivation causes developmental brain abnormalities. The brain that results from
this abnormal upbringing is the NeuroDissociative Brain.
It is related to pain, theistic religions, gender inequality,
sexual puritanism, addictive synthetic drugs, authoritarian
control, depression, violence, warfare, a biomedical health
model, and politics of betrayal. The healthy brain, also called
the NeuroIntegrative Brain, which develops when affectional

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 365

cognitive bonding between mother and infant was nurturant
and adequate, is able to experience pleasure. It is related to
earth religions, is matrilineal and favors gender equality, sexual liberty, natural botanical drugs, egalitarian freedom, a
biobehavioral health model and politics of trust.
It is important to realize that we have not one single factor here, but a whole pattern of factors that belong as it were
together. This is exactly what I emphasized in my own research on the Eight Dynamic Patterns of Living where I show
that most native cultures that are allowing to build the
limbic-subcortical emotional brain through adequate parenting are favoring eight patterns of living in their overall lifestyle, which are autonomy, ecstasy, energy, language, love,
pleasure, self-regulation and touch.
Breaking the Vicious Circle
The research outlined here so far should suffice for a first
assessment of the ‘impossible human’ that governments
around the world, and their police forces, target for ‘improvement,’ and ‘socializing education.’ Their attempts are
obviously fighting violence with violence, evil with evil, and
socially sanctified schizophrenia with legalized paranoia.
When many researchers, from very different scientific angles, come to the result that not the human is bad, but how
the human is educated and distorted in early childhood, and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 366

how natural love is thwarted through the rather perverse idea
of compulsive morality, then we have to question the base
assumption behind our whole legally incensed altar of violent moralism!
The base assumption in this system namely is that the
human is originally bad and corrupt, or has been rendered so
by ‘original sin’ or its worldly correlate, the so-called ‘hereditary hangup.’ The first idea, favored by our major monotheistic religions, says that the ‘Human is born evil but can be redeemed by our Great Religion,’ the second variant, now
fashionable in the ‘science society’ says ‘Human is born with
hereditary defect and can be repaired by our Great Psychiatry.’ It’s exactly the same mechanistic and nonsensical idea,
only that the vocabulary changed.
Neither our great religions nor our great psychiatry obviously have understood that the human being is without fault,
but that the mold the human is baked in roots out the last
little rest of good, by distorting our perception early in life,
and by blocking our natural emotional flow through the
worldwide plague of moralism, that is the blasphemic and
deeply nature-hostile idea that there was something fundamentally wrong with the human setup.
What is wrong here is that our worldwide religious and
political power conglomerates have an interest in upholding
the myth of the ‘impossible human’ for their politics of divide

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 367

et impera, their relentless flow of income from all wars, civil
wars and rampant genocide of tribal populations, and their
dominion over the world banking system.
It is easy, when you are a doctor, telling your patients how
sick they are, to inflate your doctor’s bills. It is easy when you
are a pharmacist, telling your clients how bad their doctor is,
to inflate your pharmacist’s bills. It is easy when you are a
psychiatrist, to tell your clients how insignificant the body is,
and that’s the human mind that is the big culprit in human
history, to inflate your psychiatrist’s bills. It is easy, when you
are a lawyer, to tell your clients how helpless doctors, pharmacists and psychiatrists are in the face of the single valid
reality that every human is a criminal by birth, to inflate your
lawyer’s bills. It is easy, when you are a politician, to tell your
voters that doctors, pharmacists, psychiatrists and lawyers
are all bad advisors as only politics can change the impossible human in the long run, to inflate your politician’s budget.
It is easy when you are a holy man, to tell your disciples how
ignorant doctors, pharmacists, psychiatrists, lawyers and politicians are of spiritual reality, to inflate your good karma.
All these people have an interest to tell you how bad you
are, what a bad karma you have, what a bad karma your society has or your nation, and how hopeless the overall situation is for our planet to survive global warming and all the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 368

rest of cataclysms that are going to rain upon us and plague
us like the proverbial Pandorabox!
Are you not bombarded every day with catastrophic messages that are not per se catastrophic but become so because they are inflated by the modern mass media and the
fact that all is networked for telling you that on the other side
of the globe a woman was raped, a child was abused and a
man had sex with his small daughter, while the world
strangely enough is not networked for telling you what improvements were made, and how happy people are in their
families, compared to the misery of togetherness you are in
since twenty-five years and that you call ‘my marriage?’
And what you are never told is how abysmal the situation
is in your glorious democracy for those who are unable to
handle the bioenergy contained in their emotions, and who
are jailed for years, if not for decades, for having taken socalled drugs, engaged in the wrong kind of sex with the
wrong kind of person or killed a neurotic, dominant, oppressive or abusive mother or spouse!?
This reality is carefully veiled from you so that you continue to believe how well off you are in your particular reality
soup that is largely brewed not by yourself, but by those on
top of the media hierarchy.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 369

Have you ever seen how a prison cell looks from inside,
and how cruelly children are beaten in so-called ‘correction
homes’ which are jails for children for which your government, in whatever country you live, has till this day not enacted the anti-torture conventions and human rights precepts because they are valid only for adults, and for prisons
that keep adults.
Children, sorry, are not legally valid consumers, which is
shown very clearly by the fact that their consent to sexual
embrace with adults is ‘deemed legally invalid.’ So if these
young members of our society are jailed, they can be treated
in any possible way because nobody will feel responsible,
their parents having been discredited as ‘abusers’ or otherwise declared unable for caretaking, and the government
doing what is prescribed by the laws. And the laws, sorry,
have forgotten to enact any of our glorious human rights
protection instruments and conventions for our smallest
members; and our child protection laws target abusive parents and of course the proverbial stranger-rapist, but not
abusive governments!
This is a little snapshot from the behind-the-stage of your
magnificent democracy, but you prefer to read what’s hot in
your news, right? And you think that on top of this mess of
brutality, ignorance, and confusion of values, you are going
to establish world peace?

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 370

One must be struck with debility to believe that, really.
So, when you see that, you see all, namely the fact that
before we can even think of peace for this globe, we have to
clean up the mess inside of our minds and behind-the-stage.
The truth is that you are not born in sin, that you are not
born in destructive karma as a predestined fate, that you do
not need to be ‘professionally’ treated for being acceptable
for society, nor ‘religiously’ treated for being acceptable to
the otherworld. The truth is that you are a complete god
when, and as long as, you are a complete human!
You don’t need to imitate heroes and avatars, for they
were and are just that, complete humans. The hero is like
you, only that their message and expression are tailored to
their individual mission. There is no high and low among
humans. You have all within you that you see in your favorite
heroes but god manifests through you in a different way than
the supreme spirit manifests through this or that hero, and
that is why you are important for creation.
If you were like the heroes you admire, the supreme
highest spirit could not manifest through you because you
are created for manifesting a particular Gestalt of spiritual
truth, which is expressing itself through your particular life’s
mission. Therefore, you are important as you are and you are
less important as long as you feel compelled to imitate oth-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 371

ers. In fact, if you mold yourself into the image of your cherished hero, you are useless for the universal mind to manifest
spiritual truth through you. Affirm this truth over and over,
using this simple psycholinguistic method that is in the Bible
called ‘decreeing.’
Affirmation
Infinite Spirit in its Wisdom opens up the Gateway for My True Expression in Life and Guides Me Every Day in Perfect Health, Happiness and Prosperity!

You don’t need doctors, spiritual advisors, gurus or healers. You can heal yourself. There is a simple method to heal
early trauma; you don’t need self-hypnosis, and expensive
therapies. You have the gift of expressing yourself through
writing. Write the simple truth.
The simple truth is how you have lived your childhood,
how you have experienced your early life. You do this without
judging, without positive or negative, without inflicting a
good-or-bad judgment on each episode, anecdote or experience in your childhood. You simply say and write how you
felt it. This is how you are going to heal your inner wounds,
namely through seeing yourself, and your life, objectively,
without adding on and without leaving out details. This selfhealing is part of your spiritual perfection as a complete human.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 372

Breaking the vicious circle of violence, there is only one
way, focus upon love, undivided, unspoiled, unconditional
love, which is not passion, not desire, not entanglement, but
freedom and respect of the other as a god-manifesting creature, just as yourself.
When you realize this, you see that violence in the world
is the violence in us projected upon the world, and that for
fighting violence, we have to find a way to end our inner violence, our inner strife and turmoil, which is brought about
through the many contradictions we are in, and through the
oppression inflicted upon us by a society that hasn’t really
done an evolution since the last five thousand years, in that it
remained stuck in insignificant technological progress while
psychologically being on the level of the primal horde.
The Tactile Imperative
In this present sub-chapter I direct my focus upon the real
and possible human; we have seen that projecting upon the
human being what in fact belongs to our cultural confusion is
not a smart way to bring about a future nonviolent society.
We have the whole of written human history on the table
to prove that doing this does not bring about peace, but war
and destruction and largescale misery. I would even go as far
as saying that the problem perceived with ‘sexual aggression’ as one of the typical traits attributed to the ‘impossible

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 373

human’ is contained in the very term ‘sex,’ with its inherent
confusion of sexual mating with sensuality and tactile stimulation.
The fact of a terminological split between love and sex
implies the possibility of a splitting off the sexual function
from a loving give-and-take, so that love remains a kind of
residual concept of ‘pure caring and affection’ which, of
course, is sheer nonsense as it does not exist in life.
This form of reductionism is one of the ways that because
of losing the original joy of living, the human began to intellectualize love, instead of living love. This cultural schizoid
split between ‘love and sex’ makes for a lot of damage in our
striving for unity, coherence and harmony in relationships.
The reader may object that it often happens that sexuality is lived in its cold form, deprived of love, as mere satisfaction of desire and rather brutally, and that some people even
experience more intense sexual feelings when they can encounter sex without being obliged to fake tenderness or caring.
This may be true. The ego trip may give you a strong discharge, but this proves only to what point you have been
‘charged’ prior to it, to what point you have been tense! In
fact, research has shown that sex which is experienced connected with love, and where the sexual activity was moti-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 374

vated by love, not by an instinct for dominating and ‘stabbing’ the other sexually, engenders a higher level of lasting
feelings of happiness and joy than sex that is acted out in the
form of an ego-trip.
Whatever your personal opinion on this matter may be
like, there is no doubt about the fact that sexuality in every
form is focused upon our skin as the main sexual organ!
It seems, however, that sexology has only hesitantly taken
the turn to consider the importance of skin contact in the
give and take of body pleasure. As we have seen, deprivation of tactile pleasure creates a nasty misbalance in the psychosomatic setup of the child. Besides, licking, fondling and
caressing all genital parts of the child’s body with the lips and
the tongue is a positive means of communicating to the child
the importance of validating these erotic body parts as essentially sweet and beautiful.
This describes just one attitude of what today in alternative circles is called sensuous parenting, and that I consider
as progressive and erotically intelligent. It is one expression
of how the possible human can live and act in alignment with
nature, instead of fighting against nature.
The skin is our primary sexual organ. All erotic stimulation
of sexual organs is effected through the stimulation of the
skin that surrounds them. Needless to add that this is not a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 375

cultural novelty, but is widely practiced in cultures like India,
where mothers use to massage their infants, toddlers and
children, which includes the gentle massage of their genital
parts, as Frederick Leboyer reports it in his book Loving
Hands, The Traditional Art of Baby Massage (1977).
However, Sigmund Freud defined sexuality as any behavior that has a physical connotation to the sexual organs and
that is focused on receiving pleasure. And here is where the
cultural confusion starts.
Why should we qualify caring parental behavior as ‘sexual’ only because it focuses on the child’s genitals? When
your son has a phimosis, and you gently massage the penis
every day with body lotion to liberate the tight foreskin and
render it smoother for helping your child to avoid painful
surgery, have you engaged in ‘sex’ with your child, have you
been incestuous, have you ‘abused’ your child?
The very fact that I need to ask these questions shows to
what point we are ‘culturally confused’ and how much Freudian ‘psychoanalysis’ confused us further.
Should we not ask if body pleasure must be concentrated
on the sexual organs so that we can qualify it as sexual?
It is certainly also a form of body pleasure to drink a fresh
beer or to eat one’s favorite dish. However, this kind of
pleasure would more appropriately be called oral or nutritive

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 376

pleasure. Hardly anyone would go as far as qualifying it as
sexual. But how is it with caressing our loved one’s chest or
bottom? Is it sexual or not? Does it depend on the way we
caress that it is sexual or merely affectionate, or does it depend on the intention? Or is the decisive factor which body
zone is caressed? Or does it depend on the fact that the one
who caresses is sexually aroused by the activity—or not?
Still during the Renaissance it was common in Europe
that all members of the family slept naked in one bed, as today it still is practiced with the Eskimo and many other native
populations. The bodily touch or casual caresses that happened during the night were generally not considered as
sexual or sexually intended.
Today, in our culture, many people would find it unusual
to let sleep their children naked in one bed or that parents
would sleep naked with their children in one bed. This is
quite astonishing since the majority of scientists and psychologists are now outspoken about children’s need for direct body contact, warmth, togetherness, tenderness, nudity—and this independently of age or gender!
Many scientists have researched the consequences of a
deprivation of love nutrition in the form of lacking tactile
pleasure, and got alarming results. After the publication of
volumes if not entire libraries of results of this research, now
almost all specialists in early child care agree that children

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 377

raised deprived of love, tenderness and caring body touch
face greater adaptation problems later in life, frequently
show learning difficulties and tend to be more rigid in experiencing joy and pleasure than children who grew up with
love and body touch.
The first group of children exhibits symptoms such as
restlessness or hyperactivity; in school they often have drawbacks because of their low attention span and concentration
ability. In the group, they are seen as rather isolationist and
uncooperative. They are easily pushed aside as ‘difficult,’ and
once this happens, the symptoms aggravate, sometimes
dramatically. Most children in institutions for so-called ‘delinquent youth’ have been deprived of basic body touch and
stimulation of their emotional intelligence; often an intolerant and punitive attitude from the side of the environment
made them turn away from sociability and into marginality.
What is specifically pathological in their behavior and in the
circumstances that have contributed to form it? How does it
impact on children if in their family tenderness and care was
replaced by violence and brutality? Research on domestic
violence has shown that healthy forms of body touch and
body pleasure do virtually not exist in such families! If there
is touch at all, it is one that hurts, violates, humiliates and
degrades.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 378

There is unanimity among scientists and healthcare professionals that for the small child tactile stimulation is essential for their healthy psychosomatic growth. It has been
shown that close and long-term body contact between the
child and their mother or father, or other nutritive caretakers
decisively strengthens the child’s immune system and improves their health. One could conclude that these findings
are not only valid for small children but also children between the age of six until puberty, and even adolescents, for
what could be called skin erotics seems to be a lifeenhancing and health-strengthening factor in all living.
In fact, in India, as Frederick Leboyer reports, where it is a
common tradition to massage babies with warm oil, there
are many mothers who continue massaging their children,
which always includes gently massaging their genitals, until
adolescence. It is believed in India that massaging children’s
genitals will enhance their procreative ability, sexual potency
and resistance against illness. Such tactile forms of childcare
are however by no means associated in India with incest or
pedophilia simply because they are not considered as sexual. They are instead regarded as a natural and necessary attribute to essentially nurturant parental care.
The Birth of Functional Thinking
The possible human can only come about in alignment
with nature, not against nature. And therefore, the possible

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 379

human can only be a functional thinker; the impossible human was a dysfunctional thinker, as long namely as he was a
moralist.
Nature is basically functional. There is no morality in nature and no need to establish one on top of nature. Life is
good as it is. It’s the plague of moralism that over centuries if
not millennia has distorted human thinking into a mess of
guilt-related and shame-based convolutions and inner contradictions that eventually brought about that amount of inner violence that we see projected upon life and that created
all our wars and civil wars over the course of human history.
Moralistic thinking never is functional; the advocates of
child protection cunningly veil this fact by drafting an agenda
of social and political issues around The Child as a cult object, a fetish and an embodiment of puppet-values.
Functional thinking follows nature’s inherent logic; it fosters and supports growth, and uses Occam’s Razor, applying
the least of effort to bring about a maximum effect.
All of nature is functional, and the beauty we intuitively
perceive in all natural processes, or by contemplating the
imperfect perfection of a flower, is the beauty of functional
design.
The avatars of child protection, conscious of the fact that
morality in its old definition is outmoded, put up a ‘new mo-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 380

rality’ that is sold as functionality and that ultimately has little
to do with morality, but much with economics. An alienated
child is a better consumer! A child who is early put in daycare
profits the economy. And mothers in the work cycle are welcome tax payers!
In addition, child protection favors the dominion of the
modern state over the family, the primary breeding cell of
the citizen, and the quest of the postmodern state to reign
into each and every family. We have to see that this quest is
intrinsically political, and must be understood as political and
not as moral. Morality in our modern times serves almost
everywhere in global culture a pretext function; it is used for
manipulating public opinion. Of course, to make their business more effective, the members of the international child
protection league have done their best for being backed up
by system-conform child care and health professionals, and
their publications, so as to let appear the cause of child protection ‘a professional necessity.’
This new morality, then, sounds suspiciously similar to the
notion of New World Order propagated by the Bush administration and comes in a garment that hides its basic irrationality and its fascist, retrograde and paternalistic attitude.
In declaring the child to be an asexual being, the cause of
child protection shows that it is basically growth-hostile. In its
overall purpose to extend childhood and thus commercial

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 381

benefits derived from commercializing the child consumer,
child protection interferes with children’s healthy growth, and
especially their emotional and sexual growth.
Child protection fosters not natural growth, but cancerous growth, the growth namely of the infantilization of the
child, and even of their parents that the cause of professional
child protection declares as ‘potentially inadequate’ to ensure the total protection of the child. Parents’ intuitive and
intuitively balanced attitude is generally overruled, if not ridiculed and belittled by the professionals who are signed up
with child protection, thereby creating guilt and helplessness
in them.
It is easy then to inflict upon both parents and their children the often extremist if not tyrannical measures that enslave the consumer child in a tight corset of state supervision
and control. Child protection is potentially the starting hole
of a future cause of ‘Orwellian’ total control, and this danger
is so much the more real as apparently nobody but a select
few have kept a critical attitude toward this modern form of
absolutism and totalitarian control of the citizen.
As the fake arguments of child protection are easy to unveil, simply because in dozens of countries where children
are not under constant supervision and where they enjoy
relative freedom to lovingly copulate with partners outside of
the family, child-related crime is a fraction of what it is in Un-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 382

cle Sam’s child protective haven, the purely ideological if not
bluntly mercantile root intention of child protection becomes
obvious, thereby emasculating its pretended functionality.
Morality has never solved any problems! And child protection is not going to solve the problem of violence against
children either, and in the contrary will lead to more childrelated crime, and sexual crime! All research on violence and
abuse converges in the insight that abusive relationships are
fostered by irresponsibility, infantile attitudes, lack of knowledge, lacking social frameworks for open dialogue and exchange, and by authoritarian forms of control and government. To put it positively, it has been demonstrated time and
again that permissiveness, open exchange, empowerment
and consciousness-based forms of education and religion
foster nonviolence and peaceful dialogue between all members of society.
Hence, for turning down violence and child-related crime,
child protection is about the worst and the least effective
one could possibly come up with. The truth is that it does
not bring a real protection of the child from both violent sex
crime in the form of child abduction, child rape and child
murder, and domestic violence in the form of forced sexual
incest, as the statistics show by themselves.
The Injury Center of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention publishes on their web presence the 2003 statis-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 383

tics for youth violence. In 2003, 5,570 young people ages 10
to 24 were murdered, an average of 15 each day. In 2004,
more than 750,000 young people ages 10 to 24 were treated
in emergency departments for injuries sustained due to violence.
(See Statistics Table on the next page)

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 384
The Facts on Children and Domestic Violence
Women who are battered often go to extreme and courageous lengths to protect their children from an abusive
partner. In fact, research has shown that the non-abusing parent is often the strongest protective factor in the
lives of children who are exposed to domestic violence. However, growing up in a violent home may be a
terrifying and traumatic experience that can affect every aspect of a child’s life, growth, and development. In
spite of this, we know that when properly identified and addressed, the effects of domestic violence on children
can be mitigated.

! The U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse suggests that domestic violence may be the single
major precursor to child abuse and neglect fatalities in this country.i

! Studies suggest that between 3.3 and 10 million children are exposed to domestic violence
annually.ii

! In a national survey of more than 6,000 American families, 50 percent of the men who
frequently assaulted their wives also frequently abused their children.iii

! Slightly more than half of female victims of intimate violence live in households with children
under age 12.iv

! Men who as children were exposed to their parents' domestic violence are twice as likely to
abuse their own wives than sons of nonviolent parents.v

! One study of 2,245 children and teenagers found that recent exposure to violence in the home
was a significant factor in predicting a child’s violent behavior.vi

! Children who are exposed to domestic violence are more likely to exhibit behavioral and

physical health problems including depression, anxiety, and violence towards peers.vii They
are also more likely to attempt suicide, abuse drugs and alcohol, run away from home, engage
in teenage prostitution, and commit sexual assault crimes. viii

! A recent study of low-income pre-school children in Michigan found that nearly half (46.7
percent) of the children in the study had been exposed to at least one incident of mild or severe
violence in the family. Children who had been exposed to violence suffered symptoms of
post-traumatic stress disorder, such as bed-wetting or nightmares, and were at greater risk than
their peers of having allergies, asthma, gastrointestinal problems, headaches and flu.ix
Pregnancy and Domestic Violence

! Each year about 324,000 pregnant women in the U.S. are battered by the men in their lives.x
! Complications of pregnancy, including low weight gain, anemia, infections, and first and

second trimester bleeding are significantly higher for abused women xi, xii, as are maternal rates
of depression, suicide attempts, tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drug use.xiii

i

U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, A Nation’s Shame: Fatal
Child Abuse and Neglect in the United States: Fifth Report, 1995
Carlson, Bonnie E. (1984). Children's observations of interpersonal violence. Pp. 147-167 in A.R. Roberts (Ed.) Battered
women and their families (pp. 147-167). NY: Springer. Straus, M.A. (1992). Children as witnesses to marital violence: A risk
factor for lifelong problems among a nationally representative sample of American men and women. Report of the TwentyThird Ross Roundtable. Columbus, OH: Ross Laboratories.
iii
Strauss, Murray A., Gelles Richard J., and Smith, Christine. 1990. Physical Violence in American Families; Risk Factors and
Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
iv
U.S. Department of Justice, Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends,
and Girlfriends, March 1998
v
Strauss, Murray A., Gelles Richard J., and Smith, Christine. 1990. Physical Violence in American Families; Risk Factors and
Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
vi
Singer, M.I., Miller, D.B., Guo, S., Slovak, K & Frieson, T. 1998. “The Mental Health Consequences of Children’s
Exposure to Violence.” Cleveland, OH: Cuyahoga County Community Health Research Institute, Mandel School of Applied
Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.
vii
Jaffe, P. and Sudermann, M., “Child Witness of Women Abuse: Research and Community Responses,” in Stith, S. and
Straus, M., Understanding Partner Violence: Prevalence, Causes, Consequences, and Solutions. Families in Focus Services,
Vol. II. Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations, 1995.
viii
Wolfe, D.A., Wekerle, C., Reitzel, D. and Gough, R., “Strategies to Address Violence in the Lives of High Risk Youth.” In
Peled, E., Jaffe, P.G. and Edleson, J.L. (eds.), Ending the Cycle of Violence: Community Responses to Children of Battered
Women. New York: Sage Publications. 1995.
ix
Graham-Bermann, Sandra A and Julie Seng. 2005. “Violence Exposure and Traumatic Stress Symptoms as Additional
Predictors of Health Problems in High-Risk Children.” Journal of Pediatrics. 146(3):309-10.
x
Gazmararian JA, Petersen R, Spitz AM, Goodwin MM, Saltzman LE, Marks JS. 2000. “Violence and Reproductive Health:
Current Knowledge and Future Research Directions.” Maternal and Child Health Journal. 4(2):79-84.
xi
Parker, B., McFarlane, J., & Soeken, K. 1994. “Abuse During Pregnancy: Effects on Maternal Complications and Infant
Birthweight in Adult and Teen Women.” Obstetrics & Gynecology. 841: 323-328.
xii
McFarlane, J. Parker B., & Soeken, K. 1996. “Abuse during Pregnancy: Association with Maternal Health and Infant
Birthweight.” Nursing Research. 45:32-37.
xiii
McFarlane, J., Parker, B., & Soeken, K. 1996. “Physical Abuse, Smoking and Substance Abuse During Pregnancy:
Prevalence, Interrelationships and Effects on Birthweight.” Journal of Obstetrical Gynecological and Neonatal Nursing. 25:
313-320.
ii

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 385

Source: Family Violence Prevention Fund.

The Importance of Sensuality
One of the greatest pitfalls in the media debate about
‘normalizing pedophilia’ is the more or less deliberate confusion between shared sensual love as part of a friendship
bond between an adult and a child, on one hand, and sexual
violence in the form of a genital assault on a child by either a
stranger or a family friend, on the other.
The two entirely different situational, sexual and cognitive
experiences are thrown in one meltpot of irrational and most
of the time polemic debate that is manipulatory rather than
informational in that it intends to backbone the state-funded
enslavement of the consumer child!
Such an attitude and polemics is a signal for the depravation and decadence of Western society to have arrived at this
point of confusion and betrayal of true love. The current
trend toward a new era of fascism is one direct result of this
life denial; while the trend is especially visible in the United
States and France, it is something that has affected all Western nations, and the majority of all nations on earth today,
who insanely follow the madness and millenary perversion of
patriarchy as a movement against nature.
This trend favors and purports information filtering, the
denial of complexity, and the resurgence of intolerance and

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 386

rampant irrationality, political hegemony and international
neocolonialism, together with the rampant turndown of
democratic values that started with the 1990s; it is characterized by an obsessional public focus on so-called ‘perverse
sexuality.’ This is not as surprising as it seems on first sight; in
fact, it can be shown historically that in periods of ideological
fundamentalism, political tyranny and religious oppression,
all natural expressions like emotions and sexuality are feared
and demonized, while at the same time truly perverse forms
of sexuality, that is coercive and violent sex, as well as sexual
torture, are secretly practiced by juntas, militia and extremists of all kinds.
As a general rule, all what is loudly and polemically attacked and rejected as ‘abject and perverse’ in any given society is what is secretly practiced and what that society is at
pains with! It’s the shadow that invariably comes about
through denial.
And there is more shadow even when there is an abundance of light, as it is typically in societies that adhere to
what Joseph Campbell termed the ‘solar worldview.’ All, in
these societies, officially is light and sunshine as it were, and
there is a strong emphasis on ‘doing good,’ so-called ‘values,’ and political leadership tends to be joyfully conservative, simple-minded, dogmatic, and brutal-righteous in an
almost archaic sense. What by far dominates the scene in the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 387

daily media is how tough and mighty police, security and
military forces are, how well they protect the populace and
how brilliantly they operate!
That these are but paper values, and that behind the
sunny boy faces of those politicians and the sunshine smile
of the all-present big brother, there is rampant misery both
socially and in relationships, social injustice, brutality, power
abuse and insecurity, only a select few grasp it, and dare to
acknowledge it in public.
In such a climate, real dialogue and exchange is as good
as impossible, especially when complex issues are debated
that cannot be tackled by applying mechanistic and simplistic strategies and methods.
Violence is exactly such a highly complex and difficult-tograsp topic, and it has penetrated psychology only quite recently, In fact, one of the major insights this research brought
about was that without understanding the flowing, electric
and ethereal nature of human emotions and the importance
of sensuality and sane irrationality, violence cannot be creatively understood.
Violence truly is the antithesis to sensuality.
A human being can be violent only after a more or less
prolonged period of sensual starving that usually begins in
early childhood or even as early as in infancy. Violence has no

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 388

roots in the human setup. It is a conditioned response, not a
natural one.
Wilhelm Reich’s early sex research found in addition that
even basically nonviolent people’s sexual response gets
more violent after a prolonged period of sexual starving,
which typically also means sensual starving because of the
lack of tactile contact!
This manifests often in an outbreak of what later is qualified as domestic violence but was in fact a foreplay for the
sexual mating between the partners, only that the male who
was sensually starved, needed to beat his partner before
touching her sexually!
Beating has been seen as frequent by Reich in all of his
patients who went through periods of sensual starving, both
in sex fantasies and as a stimulant during actual mating.
What is interesting about these findings is that they were
not only assessed with generally violent persons nor with
persons who experienced sensual deprivation during their
childhood, but with people who were psychiatrically assessed as being ‘normal and adequate.’ What can also be
observed in this context is that the beating will occur as an
accompanying behavior only during the first mating after the
prolonged sensual starvation, and not subsequently with the
same partner.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 389

This is an additional signal for the fact that the violent response was triggered through the starvation and is not, as
could be wrongly assumed, a generally sadistic form of sexual response with these persons!
Sexual sadism as a relative perversion of the sexual response can be affirmed only in case the person cannot reach
a sexual orgasm without the additional violent behavior during the sexual mating. Here the violence inflicted on the
partner is a condition for the person being orgasmic in the
sexual game.
The same is valid, vice versa, for the masochistic person,
who needs to experience sexual encounters spiced in specific ways through violent behavior suffered. Here too, the
overall orgasmic response is conditioned upon the reception
of these specific forms of violence—not any kind of violence.
I must probably make it clear that I do not talk about Sadomasochism (SM) when I am talking about sexual violence. I
do not find it problematic when two adults agree to have violent sex, on either side of the game table, so to speak. This
can be a problem for moralists only but sociopolitically, and
as a matter of policy making, sadomasochism is not a problem, neither ethically nor for society as a whole. It’s however
an interesting research topic because we are not born as sadists and masochists, and the research why persons are sensitive and receptive for certain forms of sexual violence, or

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 390

for violence that is in itself non-sexual but that accompanies
the mating game, can be highly revealing; it will show in
every individual case story why the person has been conditioned to the specific forms of violence that trigger in them
the orgasmic response.
This is so because the violent behavior has become sexualized. Most often, physical and humiliating, and somehow
also sexually tinted physical punishment inflicted by parents
or a tutelary adult was the trigger. Thus most of these case
stories show that the affliction has its roots in childhood and
adolescence.
Social Policy Considerations
What imports me to convey in this context is the much
more general problem of sensual love being seen on the
same line of reasoning in policy making as sexual violence.
One must be really schizoid to not make a distinction here,
but it seems that in our Western nations today the majority is
indeed to that point schizophrenic because the confusion
between sensual love and sexual violence is so pronounced
in the media, the anti-pornography debate, the child pornography and child abuse debate and the completely distorted debate, if there is any at all, about ‘missing children.’
Hence, there is really a need to put the finger on the wound
and separate apples from pears!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 391

When an adult and a child caress each other because
there is love, erotic attraction, care and sensual excitation on
both sides, no line can be drawn that says ‘until such and
such point, the behavior is to be considered as the normal
and sensual care-giving of a caretaker for a child;’ and ‘from
such and such point, the behavior of the adult is to be considered as child abuse because (s)he got sexually aroused
and in addition touched certain private parts of the child.’
Let me start with the analysis of a borderline case because it is especially these cases that show the perversity and
madness the public discussion of these matters is pervaded
with. Once the public has lost its reasoning mind, we can’t
expect it to reason more sanely, then, in cases that seem to
be clear-cut, when it’s namely question of full sexual penetration and aggravated cases where the copulation was forced,
or even where the child was murdered either during or after
the intercourse.
What I am saying is that the mainstream way of reasoning
shows with much evidence that no real difference is made
between sensual love and sexual violence because the difference is simply not understood, or it is well understood but
not socially and legally cognized and recognized!
I will show further down that in the United States most
sex laws do not make a big difference in punishing a true
lover of a child, who had a sensual, loving and consenting

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 392

relation with the child and where no penetration was attempted, and somebody who violently assaulted a child
sexually, penetrated the child and inflicted great harm on the
child. The punishment for both types of offenders is approximately twenty years of prison, and experience with the
situation of law enforcement in Britain and the United States
has shown the striking perversity that the nonviolent and
caregiving childlover will in prison be exposed to much
greater violence, and also sexual violence, from the side of
inmates than the violent sex offender who assaulted a child,
if he did not outright murder the child.
— See, for example, A.J. Davis, Sexual Assaults in the Philadelphia
Prison System and Sheriff's Van (1968), A.M. Scarro Jr. (ed.), Male
Rape (1982). See also Interview with Brett Portman in P. A. N. 15, 2939 (1983) and Edward Brongersma, Aggression against Pedophiles,
7 International Journal of Law & Psychiatry 82 (1984), with further
references. More spectacular even is the decision of the Supreme
Court of Sweden who, in 1980, refused to extradite to the USA a
Kentucky physician who got a prison sentence of 59 years for harmless play with boys. The long sentence and the inhuman conditions
in American prisons were given as reasons for the refusal to extradite. According to Alvin Bronstein, Director of the NPP for the
American Civil Liberties Union, this was the first time that a foreign
nation has refused to extradite a person to the US in a non-political
case because of American prison conditions (PAN 4, 6 (1980), citing
The Hapotoc Collective, Amsterdam, NL, as reporting source).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 393

In addition, it is established in forensic psychiatry that the
nonviolent pedophile and the child-assaulting and childmurdering offender are two entirely different personalities,
and that their forensic history and etiology is equally different.
Child rapists and murderers are most often not pedophiles and do not label themselves as such; they also show in
their sexual history typically a pattern of more or less violent
heterosexuality with singular or repeated incidence of rape,
before they began to assault children sexually. Or they have
been sexual virgins prior to assaulting a child sexually, and in
these cases the incidence of murder is especially high!
Many of those, on the other hand, who are in for nonviolent erotic relations with children are teachers, nurses or doctors and have had no criminal record prior to the incidence.
Many of them are academics, with sometimes a high level of
academic achievement.
Another social group frequently involved with these kind
of trials nowadays are priests. The sexual details of these
cases are quite uniform in that there is hardly an incidence of
penetration, but generally fondling, caressing, kissing, licking, and masturbation, often accompanied by photographing the nude child or both partners during their loving embrace.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 394

At a time when it was unknown how important sensuality
is in nutritive child-rearing, it is no wonder that sex laws were
drafted that punished people for being naturally sensual with
a child, or for giving a child tactile stimulation in the form of
caresses, kisses, tender fondling and by licking the child’s
skin.
But this fundamentally changed since the 1960s and 70s,
when neurology, anthropology and skin research coincided
in showing that one of the surest factors in the etiology of
violence is emotional and tactile deprivation of infants, children and adolescents through insufficient or inadequate
nursing.
By the time of finalizing this book, it is established doctrine in psychology, education and the mental health professions that tactile stimulation and emotionally abundant and
empathetic parenting is one of the ways to reduce violence
both domestically and structurally.
These strategies are now also supported and encouraged
by most governments around the world, and the United Nations and UNICEF.
It has been demonstrated that modern attitudes such as
mechanistic and hospital-based childbirth and many modern
child-rearing practices were not conducive to the healthy
growth of children, and solutions were found in old tradi-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 395

tions, and through the reintegration of methods practiced at
the time of our grandparents. Obstetrics and a large part of
pediatrics were revolutionized through these new insights or
because knowledge our grandparents already had was eventually acknowledged by official pediatrics; as a result, many
of the truly harmful practices were disfavored and abandoned, such as the nonsensical separation of mother and infant subsequent to birth, or the obsessive habit to put children to bed at well-defined sleeping hours instead of letting
them go to bed when they are naturally tired.
Thus, today we can say that we know as a society how
important it is to touch children, to give them abundant
emotional and sensual nutrition, and to raise them in a climate of tolerance and acceptance that is widely free of taboos. We also know today that most children who suicide
themselves do so because of emotional, tactile, sensual and/
or sexual starvation suffered in a milieu that does not foster
dialogue, that is fundamentalist, moralistic and cold.
It has been found with quite a surprise that, on the other
hand, children who suffer even long-term abuse but are
touched, while not touched in a friendly and respectful manner, but are touched anyway, that is in the form of beating
and caning, are less likely to run away from home or commit
suicide. It has been found invariably and repeatedly that the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 396

most harmful form of child abuse simply is ignorance and
child neglect as a result of a sheer disinterest in the child.
When we apply this knowledge to our initial question or
definition of the problem of distinguishing sensual love from
sexual assault, we see that sensual love can only be qualified
as harmless in the sense of non-harmful to the child, and that
it is even conducive to foster abundant emotional and tactile
care for the child!
On the other hand, in violent sexual assault of a child, all
these care-giving qualities are absent, and obviously so, because the intention of the offender is not caring for another,
but aggressing another for whatever purpose, be it easy sexual satisfaction, be it a sadistic acting-out of violence suffered as an act of projective retaliation, be it as a compensation for abuse suffered early in childhood, be it as an act of
retaliation against society as a whole by victimizing a beautiful little girl or boy, because the child is considered as the
most cherished symbol of beauty and happiness in modern
democratic society.
As already mentioned, it has been found through forensic
research that the brutal child kidnapper, rapist and killer not
seldom has a hidden agenda against the whole of society
and that the criminal act is intended ‘as a matter of revenge,’
where retaliation is put on stage in a drama enacted with the
deliberate intent to inflict harm not only on the child victim

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 397

himself or herself, but on a whole range of potentially affected people, if not society as a whole.
In such cases, to repeat it, the abduction and rape of the
child, and often also subsequent murder of the victim are
steps in a process of emotional abreaction where the offender seeks a compensatory satisfaction for hurt suffered
earlier in their own life. That this satisfaction is an illusion and
that in the contrary the hurt will be greatly aggravated
through the hurt done to not only the child but to many
other suffering agents, such as the child’s parents and teachers, social workers, nurses, doctors, police agents and all
those involved in such dramatic cases, these offenders usually do not see and can probably not see because of their
specific affliction and the distortion of their perception,
which is part of their sexual and nonsexual sadism pattern.
Sadism leads to a gradual but fatal desensibilization and desensitization on all levels of the personality, and it also negatively affects cognitive abilities.
This does not mean that these offenders are mentally ill
or have to be exempted from law enforcement because of
mental disturbance that affected their insight in right or
wrong; but it means that they have developed a level of
general brutality prior to the offense that has its roots in extended periods of emotional, tactile, sensual and often also
sexual starvation suffered earlier in their lives.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 398

Quest for a Distinction
These explanations that I forward here based upon my
knowledge and experience as a lawyer, forensic researcher
and consultant, suffice to illustrate my point that violent sexual assault on children cannot be put in one pot with sensual
and nonviolent love with a child only because in the latter
relationship some or the other erotically tinted exchange has
taken place, if this exchange is to be legally defined as ‘sexual’ or not.
Sexuality does not alter its generally healthy and growthfostering character when it’s an exchange between loving
and consenting people, only because on one side of the
game table is a child. To see this requires one to be free of
sexual anxiety; to have had traumatic sexual experiences,
early or later in life, and feeling ‘as a victim’ as a result is not
an excuse for damaging children through child-rearing attitudes that are based upon tactile, sensual and sexual deprivation.
To put it in simpler terms: sex is healthy food for all
members of society, not just for grown-ups, if our laws accept
this truth in the present moment or not is not the question.
Once the difference between sensual love and violent
sexual assault has been cognized, it will be evident that nonviolent, sensual and consenting encounters between adults
and children where sexual caresses have been exchanged,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 399

cannot be reasonably subjected, within a democratic society,
to criminal law, but have to be considered not only by informed experts, but by the legislator as adequate and socially acceptable social conduct.
The quintessence of all research on the relationship between pleasure and violence is the thesis that cultures that
continue to be highly repressive regarding the emotional
and tactile needs of small children and that, in addition, prohibit premarital sex, will end in a chaos of violence and destruction that has not seen an equal in human history!
Violence, as Dr. James W. Prescott states authoritatively,
and with abundant evidence, is a compensation reaction of
the human brain for the deprivation of tactile pleasure.
Prescott identifies our present confusion between sex
and sensuality in the Biblical and Jewish traditions that are
the foundation of American or, more generally, Western society. The logical conclusions of this interconnectedness are:
—the more a person has received tactile nutrition during
her early years, the more she has known body pleasure from
childhood, the more her pleasure areas will be activated and,
as a result, the more her violence areas will be inhibited; as a
result, such a person will be generally peaceful and peaceloving;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 400

—the more a person was deprived of tactile pleasure during childhood, the more her desire for body pleasure was repressed or body pleasure experienced as a guilt-producing
activity, the more the person’s pleasure areas will be inhibited
and, as a result, the more her violence areas will be active; as
a result, such a person will be generally violent and will tend
to justify social, structural, educational violence or violence
as part of law enforcement.
Interestingly, this research gave rise to the insight that
tactile deprivation in early childhood does not automatically
lead to a violent character. There are namely factors that
compensate for early tactile deprivation, the most decisive of
those factors being premarital sex. In this point resides the
specific appeal for a peace-oriented future national and international policy on fighting violence. Such policies must
include, according to Prescott, the recognition of children’s
rights, by law, for a reasonably unregulated emotional and
sexual life.
I would add here that this right also encompasses free
choice relations for children and the freedom for the child to
build and pursue friendships with peers and adults that are
based upon mutual erotic attraction.
The recognition of tactile sexuality, which is sexuality
without penetration, today stands out as the antithesis to the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 401

act-based sexual approach of the Church’s law givers and
mechanistic sexology that we are presently transcending.
Today even conservatives begin to consider a traditional
act-centered view of sexuality as outmoded; however, the
ethical consequences of this profound paradigm change are
often not seen or are not acknowledged. The present public
discussion about sex is rigid and impregnated with various
fears and taboos. The mythic image of the ‘sexual perpetrator’ if not sexual terminator is haunting present-day American talk shows and general information about sexuality often
portrays sexual behavior in a rush with misunderstood Darwinism as innately predatory, especially with the male.
For the Child’s Best?
Morality has always been held to play an important role in
the education of children, in our patriarchal tradition and history. And it is morality that is generally advanced to justify
educational violence.
I will take reference in the present chapter to the astounding Declaration of the United Nations’ General Assembly from 29 August 2006 that bears the signature of
Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Secretary-General of the United Nations. The declaration is an important additional backup research for the International Convention on the Rights of the
Child, UNICEF, 1989.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 402

— The Convention entered into force September 2, 1990. It is officially published here: http://www.unicef.org/crc/

In the brilliantly researched paper at the basis of the declaration, there are a number of painful facts that are worth
mentioning in some length because the mass media in most
countries try to hide them as good as they can.
One reason for what Alice Miller called society’s betrayal
of the child is that any public criticism on how children are
mistreated ‘in the name of their own best’ would inevitably
reflect back on the mainstream paradigm of lawful educational violence.
— See Alice Miller, Thou Shalt Not Be Aware (1998).

This is so because the only rationale for cruelty inflicted
upon children in the name of the child’s welfare is morality.
From a rational perspective, there is no reason why violence, which has after long research found to be damaging
for all members of society, should exceptionally be harmless
and beneficial when inflicted upon children as its weakest
members.
What angers me is that most national governmental departments never mention the fact that all cruelty inflicted
upon children as educational measures are imbedded in the
age-old belief that children had to be bettered through morality. But the expert consultants of the United Nations have

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 403

done here a research that stands out by its objectiveness and
the clear standing up against morality in its constant and
consistent detriment of the child, throughout human history,
and in all jurisdictions of the world.
The very idea of finding nature inadequate and faulty,
and the hubris to thus ‘better nature’ through the intellectual, emotional, cognitive and sexual manipulation of children is a religious perversion, and it was practiced, as I already mentioned, by Calvinism, a form of religious fanatism
that indulged in unmatched brutality against children.
Another author who has brilliantly analyzed the educational brutality against children under patriarchy, and its psychological reasons, is Riane Eisler, already mentioned. In her
book The Chalice and the Blade (1995), she retraces the
process of what she calls the ‘truncation of civilization,’ the
rise of patriarchy in all its forms, and its present-day dominance in Western society, but also the signals for its current
and future transformation.
While Riane Eisler is outspoken and explicit, in her second book Sacred Pleasure (1996), with regard to our individual and collective need for eroticism and a culture that integrates the beauty and strength of natural sexuality, she never
with one word mentions children’s right for sexual freedom in
the sense not just of auto-eroticism, but as the right to build

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 404

and pursue erotic friendships with peers and adults outside
of the family!
The reasons for this silence are obvious to me; in a climate of bewilderment, confusion and persecution that is one
result of many in what I came to call the ‘abuse-centered culture,’ a really open and public debate about the question of
children’s sexual life has been rendered impossible by the
prevailing sociopolitical forces.
I know from my own publishing experience that any
author who even slightly advocates a liberalization of children’s freedom and erotic autonomy suffers the inevitable
fate of being rejected by mainstream publishing and thus is
relegated to self-publishing.
Besides that, authors who tread this daring path, including myself, are academically discredited, if they are not simply labeled as child abusers. And yet, I find it outright coward
from the side of most professional authors to shut up in the
face of the obvious bias of the current media debate on child
abuse and child sexuality, while knowing better than the
mass public and their polemic press and slaughterpoliticians.
The persistent coward muteness of those who have the
authority to shift the trend in another direction is a sign of
moral and social corruption after all, and a signal that we are

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 405

not far from gliding into another abyss of fascist control and
tyranny in a near future.
In addition, international organizations have since long
practiced a politics of extreme conservatism in this respect,
and their publications generally do all but criticize morality as
the ultimate culprit behind the plague of violence.
The Turndown of International Adoption
I remember having had several talks in the UNICEF
headquarters in Geneva, back in 1984, about the starting
turndown of international adoption. The director in that office and active purporter of that policy was a woman who
said to have been abused early in her life; she saw in adoption only that: abuse. For her, an emotionally frigid character
very similar to Amanda in the film What the Bleep Do We
Know!? abuse was the rule and adoption was but an open
door toward rampant abuse. Hence, adoption had to be
turned down! I have seen the follow-up of this policy in the
upcoming years.
In 1986, I met a family in Switzerland who had adopted an
infant in Bogotá, Colombia. The Swiss government allowed
them to take the baby on an interim status, while the final
decision was said to take one to two years. After one year,
the decision was made and the adoption was declined—with
the result that the family had to render the baby back into

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 406

poverty and despair in Colombia. The reason was purely
administrative as the couple went through all psychological
tests fully approved and also had the financial means to support the child.
And I remembered that administrative figure I had met in
UNICEF headquarters just two years prior to this incident
and her bursting out in: ‘Pedophiles have to be stopped buying babies in Bogotá!’
In 1997, Vietnam changed their government policy on
adoption, applying under the pressure of UNICEF much
stricter rules for adoption, which in most cases turns out for
the applicant to being obliged to make actually two full
adoptions, the first one in their home country, the second
one in Vietnam. The previous procedure, which had been a
question of months, was then becoming a matter of one or
two years and endless administrative hurdles.
In 2004, I have seen adoption turned down completely in
Cambodia for both the United States and France. Upon my
inquiry with the Ministry of Education and Social Affairs in
Phnom Penh, I was informed that in the case of France,
Cambodia had turned down adoption for reasons not given,
and in the case of the United States, adoption was said to
have been turned down by the American government.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 407

In the months to follow, I have seen an American woman
arrested, who was famed worldwide for her facilitating adoption in Cambodia. She was lodged in the exclusive Raffles
Royal Hotel in Phnom Penh and operated from her office
suite in that hotel for almost twenty years. She had facilitated
adoption from Cambodia for thousands of American parents.
The information I received from her showed that she was
particularly severe in screening applicants, more even than
most governments, that the medical and mental health precautions were particularly tight with her procedure, and that
also a quite considerable financial hurdle was built in the
whole procedure: the price was around eleven thousand dollars for adopting one single child. The headquarters of her
organization had been in the United States.
Her sudden arrest was a shock for the intelligentsia in
Phnom Penh, so much the more as the true reasons for the
arrest never having penetrated the media. This rendered the
incident even more mysterious. All had the appearance of a
scapegoat affair that was put on stage as a signal for a political policy change on highest level.
When you consider that this woman had been operating
even before the Pol Pot era and had been evacuated back to
the States during the political tyranny, for coming back to
Cambodia after the war and operated all through the years,
in full public presence, with all papers in order, and in coop-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 408

erating on a daily basis with both Cambodian and American
governmental authorities, the story really sounds unbelievable!
In 2006, India changed their policy on adoption, a trend
that began first in the Christian-dominated (!) province of
Kerala and from there was promoted nationwide. The measure was explained to me in an interview with by the Head of
Social Affairs of Kerala in Trivandrum, in December 2006, with
the words: ‘India will foster adoption henceforth only for its
own nationals, not for foreigners anymore.’
A further reason was not given, except the remark that
the change of the government policy on adoption had been
taken on highest level and was ‘in accordance with international regulations, especially those promoted by UNICEF
and the United Nations’. That explained it all.
In June 2007, China radically changed their policy on
adoption. It was argued that adoption as practiced in China
had been criticized since long by Western-driven NGOs and
especially UNICEF. It had been considered as ‘too liberal’,
which is why the Chinese government had restricted it. The
controls and screening of applicants had been raised to a
level unprecedented in Chinese history.
One example penetrated into the media just prior to the
enactment of the new policy, in May 2007, the case of an

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 409

American social worker in her forties, whose body weight
was one hundred fifty kilograms.
The Chinese government bluntly declared such an applicant as unfit for adoption and wrote to her in the refusal of
adoption something like ‘as she was not even able to cope
with her obesity, how would she think she could cope with
the difficulties of raising an adoptive child from China?’
The decision was felt like an insult and the American government tried to conciliate because the affair had been mediatized a lot, and not for the best of everybody involved.
This is exactly what the former adoption policy that has
been abandoned now by most governments tried to avoid:
the more or less arbitrary reject of an applicant for reasons
either faked, or never told, or because not pleasing enough
to the decision-makers on adoption!
The new policy that was coined and promoted since the
beginning of the 1980s by UNICEF opens the door to all
kinds of abuse and thought control from the side of governments for rejecting an applicant. This is how UNICEF and
most other international organizations and NGOs are working for the best of the child!
I spare any further comment and will instead get into details of the before-mentioned Declaration on the Rights of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 410

the Child, and the extensive research that it contains and
references.
As a general remark, from the side of an international
lawyer, I join those who openly declared that after the unprecedented invasion of Iraq by the United States against
the Veto of the United Nations, the UN has lost its mandate
and has no more significance in easing and regulating international relations and in facilitating world peace. I know that
the same is true for UNICEF, and especially for UNICEF.
The United States do since many years not pay their contribution to this organization they are a member of, for the
reason of criticizing some bad budgetary operations of UNICEF. Needless to add that this is not allowed by the UN
Charter and is violating international law.
Back in 1985, I met a French ambassador in Lausanne,
Switzerland who founded a number of orphanages in Khartoum, Sudan. He said the French government never gave a
single penny for this humanitarian endeavor and that all the
money received was from private donators. He explained
that all his efforts were constantly meeting with opposition
from the side of UNICEF and that they had absolutely no intention for improving the desperate situation of orphans in
Sudan, who are full orphans, with no parent or relative left,
because of rampant genocide practiced in some regions in
Sudan.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 411

This is typically presented in a distorted manner in the
mass media anywhere in the world. I had my reasons to
never join an international organization while I am fully qualified for such a position as an international lawyer and doctor
of law with a specialization on public international law. That is
also the reason that I do not honestly believe that the declaration on children’s rights or any other child-related policy
making from the side of old-fashioned international organizations will bring any real change in the world. All these organizations were established by Colonial powers and were
never really accepted by the majority of countries, which
namely formerly were subjected to the Colonial regime of
exactly the powers that founded the new organizations in
order to ‘protect the losers from losing more.’
There is no morality in international politics and the social
traffic of nations! Decisions are made for obvious reasons
that regard the vital interests of the nation states themselves,
and not for any other reasons. If children are concerned or
soldiers, weapons or drugs, it makes no difference. Morality
is a fictitious and highly effective tool for controlling the mass
mind, but it has nothing ever to do with goodness, good actions, or anything related to decency or harmonious human
affairs.
The reason why moralistic arguments are used as the
number one rhetoric tool in all humanitarian debates, espe-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 412

cially those that regard children, is that it’s the easiest way to
lie, and to betray the public about the true motivations of
national and international policy making.
Child Play vs. Morality
After this foreplay, I shall now discuss some revealing details from the research done at the basis of the Declaration
on the Rights of the Child that was adopted by the UN’s
General Assembly in August 2006.
In fact, already the very first sentence voiced in the declaration emphasizes the universality of the problem of violence
against children, and there are no exceptions made for countries like the United States, who notoriously are about to see
the problem with others, diligently denying it for their own
nation.
—No violence against children is justifiable; all violence against
children is preventable. Yet the in-depth study on violence against
children (the Study) confirms that such violence exists in every country of the world, cutting across culture, class, education, income and
ethnic origin. In every region, in contradiction to human rights obligations and children’s developmental needs, violence against children is socially approved, and is frequently legal and Stateauthorized. (UN-Doc. A/61/299 of August 29, 2006, A, I, 1, p. 5.)

What is unique in this study, and different from the current child sexuality policy, children themselves were heard by

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 413

the expert group and could voice their suggestions for better protection from violence (A, I, 4).
It is also significant that the experts were not lured in the
old morality debate that justifies violence against children
with the typical arguments forwarded by paternalistic society:
tradition and discipline. (A, I, 2).
Eventually, the expert group also emphasizes what I
pointed out in this study and other books of mine, that is,
violence ‘is multidimensional and calls for a multifaceted response’ (A, I, 5).
A particularly important sector of violence against children is education and the so-called reeducation of delinquent children and adolescents. Here, the report is particularly honest and revealing and truly has merit. As an introduction to this complex of questions, the report states:
—Societal acceptance of violence is also an important factor: both
children and perpetrators may accept physical, sexual and psychological violence as inevitable and normal. Discipline through physical and humiliating punishment, bullying and sexual harassment are
frequently perceived as normal, particularly when no visible or lasting physical injury results. The lack of an explicit legal prohibition of
corporal punishment reflects this. According to the Global Initiative
to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, at least 106 countries
do not prohibit the use of corporal punishment in schools, 147
countries do not prohibit it within alternative care settings, and as

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 414

yet only 16 countries have prohibited its use in the home. (UN-Doc.
A/61/299 of August 29, 2006, I, A, 26, p. 9.)

The report summarizes the emerging picture in part II, B,
28, in six points:
—WHO has estimated, through the use of limited country-level
data, that almost 53,000 children died worldwide in 2002 as a result
of homicide.
—Studies from many countries in all regions of the world suggest
that up to 80 to 98 per cent of children suffer physical punishment in
their homes, with a third or more experiencing severe physical punishment resulting from the use of implements.
—Reporting on a wide range of developing countries, the Global
School-based Health Survey recently found that between 20 and 65
per cent of school-aged children reported having been verbally or
physically bullied in the past 30 days. Bullying is also frequent in
industrialized countries.
—WHO estimates that 150 million girls and 73 million boys under 18
experienced forced sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual violence during 2002.
—According to a WHO estimate, between 100 and 140 million girls
and women in the world have undergone some form of female
genital mutilation/cutting. Estimates from UNICEF published in
2005 suggest that in sub-Saharan Africa, Egypt and the Sudan, 3
million girls and women are subjected to genital mutilation/cutting
every year.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 415

—Recent ILO estimates indicate that, in 2004, 218 million children
were involved in child labour, of whom 126 million were in hazardous work. Estimates from 2000 suggest that 5.7 million were in
forced or bonded labour, 1.8 million in prostitution and pornography, and 1.2 million were victims of trafficking. However, compared
with estimates published in 2002, the incidence of child labour has
diminished by 11 per cent and 25 per cent fewer children were
found working in hazardous occupations. (Id., 9-10, references omitted).

What is interesting in the report is that sexual violence is
cited here in the explicit formulation as forced sexual intercourse and other forms of sexual violence. No allusion was
made as to sexual mating between children and adults that
took place in a setting where the child consented, even
though that consent may not be deemed valid by the laws of
the place, but where the child explicitly or implicitly expressed a willingness for sexual interaction with the adult.
If the report left that open to further study or if it does not
consider it, in accordance with my own distinction, as sexual
violence, is open to further discussion. But as an intermediary conclusion it is certainly important to note that the study
did not expressly subsume nonviolent and consenting erotic
encounters between adults and children as sexual violence
inflicted upon a child.
And here it stands out against what the most fanatic avatars in the international league of child protection today pur-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 416

port and practice, in that for them it all boils down to the
same because they consider sex to be the damaging factor,
and not violence.
In the contrary, the study clearly emphasizes the devastating effects of violence, and also of physical, educational violence that hitherto most government reports try to belittle or
play down. The report states:
41. Violence against children in the family may frequently take place
in the context of discipline and takes the form of physical, cruel or
humiliating punishment. Harsh treatment and punishment in the
family are common in both industrialized and developing countries.
Children, as reported in studies and speaking for themselves during
the study’s regional consultations, highlighted the physical and psychological hurt they suffer as a result of these forms of treatment
and proposed positive and effective alternative forms of discipline.
42. Physical violence is often accompanied by psychological violence. Insults, name-calling, isolation, rejection, threats, emotional
indifference and belittling are all forms of violence that can be detrimental to a child’s psychological development and wellbeing—especially when it comes from a respected adult such as a
parent. It is of critical importance that parents be encouraged to
employ exclusively nonviolent methods of discipline.

Further down, the report focuses on the aggravating circumstance that the child is female, as more violence has
been seen to occur against female children compared to violence suffered by male children.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 417

What is important to note here is that the report emphasizes as a potential risk in child marriage the danger for the
girl to suffer coercive sex, not just marital sex in the ordinary
understanding of the word. Second, it is interesting that
some Western countries are mentioned in the report regarding traditional practices of female genital mutilation that in
the mass media of those countries, and here especially the
United States, are almost always attributed to African or Arabic populations, and often in an implicitly defamatory way
attributed to Islam or Islamic minorities such as the Taliban:
45. Absence of legally established minimum ages for sexual consent
and marriage in some countries may expose children to partner violence. Eighty-two million girls are estimated to marry before age 18.
A significant number are married at much younger ages, frequently
coercively, and face a high risk of violence, including forced sex.
46. Harmful traditional practices affect children disproportionately
and are generally imposed on them at an early age by their parents
or community leaders. According to the Special Rapporteur on traditional practices affecting the health of women and the girl child,
female genital mutilation, which, according to WHO, is carried out
on increasingly younger girls, is prevalent in Africa, and also occurs
in some parts of Asia and within immigrant communities in Europe,
Australia, Canada and the United States of America.

Other harmful traditional practices affecting children include binding, scarring, burning, branding, violent initiation

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 418

rites, fattening, forced marriage, so-called honour crimes and
dowry-related violence, exorcism, or witchcraft.
The perhaps most important part of the report is ‘Violence in care and justice systems.’
Before quoting the most relevant passages from the report below, let me emphasize as an international lawyer that
until today, no human rights protection has been enforced
for juvenile offenders and delinquents for protecting them
against abuses suffered in correctional institutions, while for
adult offenders such protection is assured in most countries,
and for ordinary and partly also for political prisoners.
This is by itself a revolting fact that to my knowledge
many people simply ignore, or not even bother about, while
they may on the other hand be on the side of the most fanatic child protectors when it concerns the slightest experience of a child with sex. There is about no topic of public
discussion that is to that point distorted and actually borders
ridicule! It simply cannot be taken serious, and solutions, socially and legally, should therefore be worked out by experts,
without asking the moron populace about their anyway
completely manipulated opinions.
53. Millions of children, particularly boys, spend substantial periods
of their lives under the control and supervision of care authorities or
justice systems, and in institutions such as orphanages, children’s
homes, care homes, police lock-ups, prisons, juvenile detention fa-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 419

cilities and reform schools. These children are at risk of violence
from staff and officials responsible for their well-being. Corporal
punishment in institutions is not explicitly prohibited in a majority of
countries.
54. Overcrowding and squalid conditions, societal stigmatization
and discrimination, and poorly trained staff heighten the risk of violence. Effective complaints, monitoring and inspection mechanisms,
and adequate government regulation and oversight are frequently
absent. Not all perpetrators are held accountable, creating a culture
of impunity and tolerance of violence against children. The impact
of institutionalization goes beyond the experience by children of
violence. Long-term effects can include severe developmental delays, disability, irreversible psychological damage, and increased
rates of suicide and recidivism.
55. As many as 8 million of the world’s children are in residential
care. Relatively few are in such care because they have no parents,
but most are in care because of disability, family disintegration, violence in the home, and social and economic conditions, including
poverty.
56. Violence by institutional staff, for the purpose of disciplining
children, includes beatings with hands, sticks and hoses, and hitting
children’s heads against the wall, restraining children in cloth sacks,
tethering them to furniture, locking them in freezing rooms for days
at a time and leaving them to lie in their own excrement.
61. Despite the obligation to ensure that the detention of children
shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest
appropriate period of time contained in article 37 of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child, it was estimated in 1999 that 1 million

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 420

children are deprived of their liberty. Most of these are charged with
minor or petty crimes, and are first-time offenders. Many are detained because of truancy, vagrancy or homelessness. In some
countries, the majority of children in detention have not been convicted of a crime, but are awaiting trial.
62. Children in detention are frequently subjected to violence by
staff, including as a form of control or punishment, often for minor
infractions. In at least 77 countries corporal and other violent punishments are accepted as legal disciplinary measures in penal institutions. Children may be beaten, caned, painfully restrained, and
subjected to humiliating treatment such as being stripped naked
and caned in front of other detainees. Girls in detention facilities are
at particular risk of physical and sexual abuse, mainly when supervised by male staff.

The details of this report on children subjected to all
kinds of torture once they are labeled by society as ‘juvenile
offenders’ may be shocking for many people. By the way the
expression juvenile offenders and even juvenile perpetrators,
that sounds even more debasing was coined, not surprisingly
so, by United States law enforcement terminology. And it is
among all industrialized Western nations the United States of
America that violates most flagrantly the rights of the child in
their brutal inhuman and completely paranoid pursuit of
punishing children in almost the same ways as they punish
adults for simply being natural. This shows, once for all, and
visible for all, that the glorious nation does not respect the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 421

child and that all their rhetoric on child protection is what it
is, empty rhetoric!
The solutions, in my personal view, for a change of such
social, legal and political madness for the better will probably come from a joint effort of both international and national expert groups empowered for new policy making, and
an effort for open dialogue across the borders of political divergence and cultural diversity.
The Love Continuum
Who ever thought that problems could be solved by love
instead of being well administered by law? Logically so, poets, and lovers, and in a few cases also, lawyers. Very rarely,
politicians. Never, the common man.
Love is not a word. It’s a universal vibration and energy
that is endowed with an intrinsic power! However, most people on this planet do not know love, otherwise we wouldn’t
suffocate in violence at the four corners of the globe! They
may know a shallow concept or concepts they call parental
love, passionate love, sexual love or brotherly love, but they
don’t know love.
Love is not the concept called love. The finger pointing
to the moon is not the moon.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 422

We spontaneously communicate love through body
touch and skin contact, through smile, fondling and caressing, and through abundant eye contact. This is human. Parents fondle and kiss their baby. Lovers embrace each other.
Children like to cuddle into their parents’ bed and siblings
naturally share the same bed until a certain age. Attitudes
here vary from one society and one continent to the other,
but they vary only a little. There is no educated and emotionally sane human on the globe who would affirm that love
can be communicated verbally in any way, or, worse, that
love could be defined by language.
Krishnamurti comprehensively explained that love can
only be approached negatively, by inquiring in what is not
love, thereby freeing the mind of the limiting conceptual corset.
Historically, body touch was considered natural; hence it
was not reflected upon. And more importantly, it was in no
way associated with sexual corruption as it is today in international consumer culture, when a person touches another’s
naked skin, or an adult a child, or when the two people are
co-sleeping naked. When white Americans, Germans, Austrians or French come to visit Latino or Hispanic cultures, they
always wonder how freely in these countries adults touch
children. This was observed already in the 1960s when Germans began to visit Italy for holidays, and it has been an on-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 423

going experience since then. And myself being German, I
know that Germans have changed, not only their cuisine, but
also their way to relate to their children because of exposure
to emotionally intelligent cultures.
In olden times, as I know from my mother and grandmother, Germans as good as never touched their children,
except for cleaning them or beating them. And when Germans began to travel to Italy, Spain or Greece, they saw that
these people abundantly touched their children for pleasure;
they saw that both parents and children, most often during
dinner time and later in the evening used to be close to each
other, the children often sitting on the lap of a parent at dinner, at least for a moment, and that kissing was very much
indulged in. I know that formerly in France and Belgium fathers frequently wet-kissed their prepubescent daughters,
while this usually stopped when the girl entered puberty.
As for mother-son closeness, the privileged moment in
these countries is bedtime, when the mother kisses her son
on the mouth, and also frequently her daughter, for saying
good night. As long as the children are below the school
age, parents in these cultures also indulge in taking baths
with the children, and nudity may be prolonged for sensuous
cuddling in bed or on the sofa for a moment.
During the summer, open-air nudity was common still
during my student years in most Mediterranean countries,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 424

and even in the French part of Switzerland, between parents
and children, and often also when close friends were invited.
In Greece and Italy, sensuality assumed always a positive
value, and was never depreciated in the way it is in the
Anglo-Saxon culture.
In Spain there is lesser body touch than in Italy and
Greece. Greece knows since olden times perhaps the most
sensual parenting among industrialized nations, and even
educators in this country use to touch, fondle and kiss children, except in the upper class.
With the emergence of American-style worldwide television cables to be common in these countries, since about
the 1980s, this situation that was very beneficial for emotional intelligence to grow high in children, rapidly decreased and almost disappeared in urban areas. I have observed over the last twenty years in most of Europe, except
perhaps Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia and Russia drastic
changes in parents relating to their children under the influence of the insane international media culture that is dominated by the touch-hostile and paranoid Anglo-American
tradition and their life-denying Puritanism.
Interestingly, in Germany, much of the opposite trend has
been noticed. As Germans come themselves from an even
more touch-denying tradition than Anglo-Saxons, and because they travel so much, and most of the time to Southern

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 425

Europe, they have adopted much of the sensual attitudes of
Italian and Greek parents in relating to their children. In addition, the German media and popular psychology have been
outspoken about the damages done to children through
early tactile deprivation.
Germans have been more resistant to the touch-hostile
messages received during recent years from American-style
television series. This led to the result that Germany is by far
ahead, compared to Anglo-Saxon countries, when it’s about
transiting toward the new educational paradigm of sensual
and permissive parenting!
And as an international lawyer, I may speculate that the
recent and somehow increasingly stringent political controversy between Germany and the United States on the political arena may have its deeper roots in a cultural alienation
between Europe and the United States. This really is a matter
that concerns values, not just political or economical choices.
And when I say values, I mean first of all the base values of a
culture, such as their educational paradigm, their tolerating,
or not, premarital sex, their gender relations, their sex laws,
their laws with regard to remuneration at the workplace, and
last not least ecological values and environmental sensitivity.
Here, the gap between Europe and the United States
widens with every year. No politician is politician all the time,
no economist looks at their family through the tables of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 426

stock market, and no psychiatrist is looking at their children
through the glasses of psychiatry when it’s time for cuddling
and kissing.
When it’s family time, the European parent, at least within
the educated strata, and here particularly the male, behaves
in a quite different manner than his British or American counterpart. To say it in a somehow simplified manner—as it’s of
course a very complex matter—I would say that it all boils
down to Europe going for less morality and more love, while
the United States, Britain, Australia and most of the other
Anglo-Saxon countries going for more morality, and less
love. And here I am not talking about traditional roles, but
about a modern trend, a trend that was to be seen over the
last two decades, not earlier. And this despite the Americadriven international media culture that is very popular in
Germany, France, Italy, Spain or Greece and that may affect
the young generations, while in conscious and educated individuals of my generation, there is rather a growing opposition to this kind of highly perverse media culture that focuses
only on two topics: money-making and violence!
It is easy to mount a brilliant culture when it’s all fake,
easy to open a brilliant business when it’s all fake. And narcissistic America is the easy show-runner, the fake-of-all-fake
specialist. And it’s easy to talk in the most eloquent way
about love when it’s all fake.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 427

In shining America, where all is sunlight and where no
shadows are admitted, love and morality are no opposites.
For in American culture, love really is morality! And here is
where they are with one foot in the grave, or in the MiddleAges. And, by the same token, here is where they have lost
any authority, if they ever had any in the first place, to talk
about love and abuse or rather what they think is love and
what they think is abuse! For its really a matter of thinking,
and not of knowing. Those who know what love is do not talk
about it, but they live their love and stay away from the very
idea to define love, or put love in moralistic schemes, or
schemes of good behavior, decency, and all the rest of it.
Those who understood the love continuum since times
immemorial are the natives. And that is why, as a psychological necessity, they attracted the deadly hate of the sadists,
the armored Puritans, the righteous crusaders with their
phallic rapist’s blade. Compulsive sex morality as a concept
or lifestyle is unknown to most natives, and it was indeed
even unknown to the ancient Chinese sages. It is the bastard
of fundamentalism and religious perversion in the form of
monotheistic organized religious worship!
Lao-tzu wrote in the Tao Te Ching that ‘when love is lost,
there remains justice, and when justice is lost, there remains
ritual’—and I would add, when even rituals are lost, what remains are senseless draconian laws.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 428

In the 42nd verse, Lao-tzu writes that ‘sensation bears
memory,’ which has been confirmed nowadays by neurolinguistic research; hence the importance of sensuality from
early in life. In the same verse, Lao-tzu writes ‘who loses harmony opposes nature,’ and this really is written for the neocolonial arrogant nations of our modern times.
And verse 57 bears the solution:
57. Conquer with Inaction
The more morals and taboos there are,
The more cruelty afflicts people;
The more guns and knives there are,
The more factions divide people;
The more arts and skills there are,
The more change obsoletes people;
The more laws and taxes there are,
The more theft corrupts people.
Moralism really is the upside-down movement in life,
which transforms the exuberant living structure into dead
matter, both outside in the world, and inside, in our bioenergetic setup. Systemically speaking, this is brought about
through the psychological effect of repression, which is the
immediate response of our biosystem to the prohibition of
desire. Repression has several inevitable consequences.
These consequences are:

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 429

1) Regression
Regression into more archaic forms of realization of the
particular desire that is repressed takes place; this means
that for example when sex with children is tabooed and repressed, the normal tender and soft mating game of an adult
with a child will be largely replaced by archaic and chaotic
forms of sexual conduct, such as violent coercive sex that often is preceded by the secret abduction of the child and that
sadly ends in many cases with the murder of the victim;
2) Retrogradation
Retrogradation of the bioenergetic flux, that is, the vital
energy contained in the desire will change its polarity from
positive to negative; this means that the hot and melting
sexual feelings will be transformed into bursting urges that
need to be abreacted in a more or less explosive manner, or
the person will turn into depression and attract psychosomatic disease; in addition, the positive joyful emotions that
accompany sexual mating are transformed into fear, hate and
feelings of revenge that, to stay with the example, may be
abreacted through a lust for beating the child before raping
her, or for torturing the victim during the intercourse;
3) Projection
Projection, that is what has been repressed and thus was
blinded out from consciousness is projected on others as

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 430

scapegoats to be punished as a compensation for the forbidden desire. The practical example here is the notorious
lynching and the rape and murder of offenders who are labeled pedophiles, child molesters, baby fuckers, honey fuckers, etc.
It is obvious, while it is often overlooked in psychological
publications that repression directly affects consciousness,
and that it is actually a shrinking of consciousness brought
about by the morality overlay.
I can’t imagine something stupider and more conducive
to chaos and emotional turmoil than repression. For the
modern policy maker, repression as a tool simply is nosolution; the whole of human history shows with much evidence where it leads.
To stay with our example, it is interesting in this context
to note that in former epochs, when sex laws were either
non-existent or not harshly enforced, there was a much
higher occurrence of adult-child sexual interaction than today in modern nations, but the number of children being
abducted and murdered for sexual reasons was relatively
low, if not nonexistent. And we have proof to the contrary
during epochs that were even more repressive as our present
day Anglo-Saxon countries, that is the period of early Puritanism in England and the era of Calvinism in the Suisse Romande, especially Lausanne and Geneva, which were infa-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 431

mous for their high incidence of both ‘educational’ child assault, torture and murder, and for their high incidence of violent child rape and murder. What we can learn from these
historical examples is that repression does not serve a rational goal in that it does not prevent crime, but in the contrary leads to more crime.
Other notorious examples for the counterproductive and
chaotic effects of repression are the Prohibition in the United
States, Russia and the more spectacular death toll during the
alcohol prohibition in Iran during the regime of the Ayatollah
Khomeini.
Repression leads to compensatory satisfactions, which
are always bad solutions. The high death toll especially during the enforced alcohol prohibition in Iran was due to the
high amounts of methanol (airplane fuel) consumed as a replacement for the forbidden alcoholic beverage.
Regarding the repression of sexual desire it is since long
known that one of the most frequent compensatory reactions
for forbidden pleasure is violence, most often in the form of
beatings given to the sexual mate either before mating or
during the mating game, or both. It has been found that the
serial child murderer Jürgen Bartsch admitted in one of his
journals that originally he did not want to murder children,
but desired them sexually. This was back in his adolescence.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 432

As Bartsch was an orphan and grew up in an extremely
repressive host family, and was frequently beaten by the
couple who adopted him, he thought that ‘nobody could
love him’ while he reported one incidence of a little boy kissing him on the mouth when he met with the boy in a forest, a
fact Bartsch could not believe. At that time, Bartsch’s activities with smaller boys were a ritual in which Bartsch would
undress the boy and then give him a beating on the naked
bottom. It was during this ritual that the boy kissed him and
thus signaled him his love and devotion.
But Bartsch could not believe anybody in the world could
love him, as his selflove was virtually nonexistent. As a result,
his sexual perversion took on more violent forms once he
was grown up, and the sexual torture he was then inflicting
upon male children he met led to the death of several boys.
This does not seem surprising after all, from an energy
point of view of view. The energies we disown turn against
us. There is about no better evidence for the fact that repressing child-adult sexual interaction leads to more sexual
crime against children! And yet, in a society that has lost its
natural love continuum what is the natural solution seems
anathema to the policy makers. In fact, sex has many healing
properties, as wine does.
And there is a natural correlation of the repression of sex
and the repression of wine. Wine was a wisdom drink since

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 433

times immemorial. The ancient Greek immortalized wine by
assigning a God to wine, Dionysus, who was the god of ebriety that the Romans later called Bacchus.
Already long before, the ancient Chinese and the Tibetans sanctified ebriety as a godly quality, similar to the state
right after orgasm, which is considered in many polytheistic
religions as a purely religious state. Many of the old traditional poems of ancient China and Tibet were written by
their poets in a state of ebriety that was inspired and that
was considered a privilege for the sage, while ebriety with
ordinary people was considered a sign of vulgarity.
To throw wine in one pot with all strong alcohol and talk
about ‘alcoholic beverages’ only betrays the ignorance of
the culture that throws such misnomers around in the public
health discussion.
Back in 2004, in France, a scientific study was undertaken
that showed the many healing properties of wine, which was
of course only published in France and met only mute silence in all Anglo-Saxon countries. The same is true for sex.
Sigmund Freud, during the first years of the 20th century,
showed the sexual etiology of all neuroses, and this is now
established psychiatric knowledge, and was largely confirmed and expanded by Wilhelm Reich, Alexander Lowen,
and others.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 434

This means in clear text that the natural streaming of sexual energy heals neurosis. Even before Reich, this was known
to bioenergy researchers such as Paracelsus and Mesmer.
Beyond this, alternative psychiatrists such as Ronald David
Laing, one of the founders of antipsychiatry in England,
found that when schizophrenic youngsters are led to experience sex without anxiety and repression, their schizophrenia
vanishes in a period ranging from several weeks to several
months.
This is so much the more surprising as schizophrenia was
held by mainstream psychiatry as absolutely incurable for
centuries in a row, a view that was first questioned and invalidated by Carl Jung, but only proven clinically by Wilhelm
Reich.

CHAPTER TWELVE
The 12 Angular Points of Social Justice and Peace
Author’s Note
The present text is the revised version of a 270-pages
book published back in 2010 under the title ‘Toward Social
Change.’ The book was dedicated to Barack Obama and a
copy was sent to the White House. There was no reaction
from the side of the Obama administration.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 435

The Agenda
01/12 — Harmless Wrongdoing
The ‘Making’ of Crime fosters Social Conflict.
Decriminalizing Harmless Human Behavior Fosters Social
Peace.
02/12 — The Possible Human
Possible Humans are the Rule.
Impossible Citizens are the Exceptions from the Rule.
03/12 — Fostering Public Sanity
Public Sanity is Public Mental Hygiene.
Republic Insanity is Absence of Governmental Hygiene.
04/12 — Respecting Natural Intimacy
Natural Intimacy is Conducive to Peace.
Governmental Intimidation is Conducive to Civil War.
05/12 — Serving Children
From Protecting Children to Serving Children.
Free Choice Relations for Children.
06/12 — More Public Education
More Public Education Makes for Less Crime.
More Prison Miles Make for More Crime.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 436

07/12 — Free Education
Free Education Serves the Child.
Funded Disinformation Serves State Control Over the Child.
08/12 — Politically Neutral Science
Politically Neutral Science Promotes Truth.
Politically Correct Science Promotes Ideology.
09/12 — Humanism and Realism
Humanism and Realism is Objective Perception.
Idealism and Ideology is Distorted Perception.
10/12 — Promoting Pleasure-Seeking Behaviors
Promoting Pleasure as a Positive Life Function Reduces Violence.
Condemning Pleasure as Negative Morality Raises Violence.
11/12 — Male Affection as a Peace Conductor
Homoemotional Affection gets Males into Balance.
Homosexual Attraction gets Males out of Balance.
12/12 — Fostering Permissive Education
Promoting the Cause of the Sexual Child is not Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is Not a Social Cause but a Psychosexual Hangup.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 437

The 12 Points
01/12 — Harmless Wrongdoing
The ‘Making’ of Crime fosters Social Conflict.
Decriminalizing Harmless Human Behavior Fosters Social Peace.
It has become almost a fashion among governments
around the world to legally declare as ‘criminal’ forms of behavior that are simply natural and that typically were unregulated as long as human habitat was closer to nature, and less
technologized.
— See, for example, Joel Feinberg, Harmless Wrongdoing: The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law (1990).
This trend that after all must be seen as a form of legislative perversion started in the 1970s and 80s with declaring
the ingestion of certain plants illegal, such as hemp (cannabis), psychedelic mushrooms and shrubs, and else substances that, while artificially produced, such as LSD, were
conducive to alter states of consciousness, and that were
widely used in psychiatry and transformative psychology.
— See, for example, Richard Schultes, et. al, Plants of the Gods
(2002), Albert Hofmann, LSD, My Problem Child (1980/2009), Michael Harner, Ways of the Shaman (1980/1982), Holger Kalweit,
Shamans, Healers and Medicine Men ((1987/2000), Jeremy Narby,
The Cosmic Serpent (1999), Terence McKenna, Food of the Gods
(1992), Stanislav Grof, LSD: Doorway to the Numinous (1975/2009)
and The Cosmic Game (1998), as well as Rick Strassman, DMT, The

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 438

Spirit Molecule (2001). See also Ralph Metzner (Ed.), Ayahuasca
(1999), Robert Forte (Ed.), Entheogens and the Future of Religion
(1997) and Charles T. Tart (Ed.), Altered States of Consciousness
(1969).

Albert Hofmann, from Sandoz Laboratories, Switzerland,
and discoverer of LSD, wrote in his book LSD: My Problem
Child (1979/2009), p. 15:
—LSD researchers responded in different ways to the legal and political sanctions against psychedelics. Some of them grudgingly accepted them and reluctantly returned to mainstream therapeutic
practices, which now seemed to them boring and painfully ineffective. A few of us attempted to develop non-drug methods for inducing non-ordinary states of consciousness with the experiential spectrum and healing potential comparable to psychedelics. There were
also those who saw the extraordinary benefits of LSD psychotherapy
and decided not to sacrifice the wellbeing of their clients to irrational and scientifically unsubstantiated legislation, and continued
their work in secret. In addition to the therapeutic value of psychedelics, many of these professionals were also aware of the entheogenic potential of these substances. For this reason, they understood their work with LSD to be not only therapeutic practice, but
also religious activity in the best sense of the word. From this perspective, the legal sanctions against psychedelics appeared to be
not only unfounded and misguided, but represented a serious infringement of religious freedom guaranteed by the American Constitution.

Stanislav Grof, M.D., certainly the most experienced psychiatrist and maverick researcher on LSD psychotherapy,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 439

writes in LSD: Doorway to the Numinous (1975/2009), Preface, p. xxv. on the therapeutic value of LSD:
—The unique property of psychedelics makes it possible to study
psychological undercurrents that govern our experiences and behaviors to a depth that cannot be matched by any other method or
tool available in mainstream psychiatry and psychology. In addition,
it offers unique opportunities for healing of emotional and psychosomatic disorders, for positive personality transformation, and for
consciousness evolution.

Ralph Metzner writes in the introduction to his bestselling
Ayahuasca Reader (1999), p. 3 that those plants ‘are referred
to as medicines, a term that means more than a drug: something like a healing power or energy that can be associated
with a plant, a person, an animal, even a place, and that
[t]hey are also referred to as plant teachers.’
Lester Grinspoon, M.D. reports in his well-researched
book Marihuana: The Forbidden Medicine (1997), 3, that
back in 1621, the English clergyman Robert Burton, in his reputed workbook The Anatomy of Melancholy, ‘suggested
the use of cannabis in the treatment of depression.’
He also notes that once Marihuana had become ‘the forbidden medicine’, ‘[m]ore than a thousand people die from
aspirin-induced bleeding each year in the United States, and
barbiturates are, of course, far more dangerous’.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 440

As Terence McKenna once observed, declaring nature
illegal is not only perverse, but borders mental and governmental insanity!
This trend was then expanding to declare natural child
sexuality a form of criminal behavior, with the result that children and adolescents from the age of twelve who engage in
sexual behavior with peers are labeled as sex offenders and
are convicted and registered on public sex offender registries.
This may result in their later careers being jeopardized, if
they do not suffer one or the other form of lynch justice! To
get there legally despite paying lip service to child protection was possible only by once again declaring nature insane
and culture sane, namely by legally forging the concept of
child sexual abuse and simply expanding the concept of sex
offender from applying it to adults, to applying it equally to
youngsters and children.
It is really demonic as a governmental behavior, and social and legal policy making, to get to this point of legislative
perversion when you figure that the concept of ‘child sexual
abuse’ was forged for protecting children from abuse, not for
declaring children themselves as abusers.
The rationale behind this policy making is that there is no
rationale, but an irrationale. The irrational and mythic delu-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 441

sion behind this behavior is a blunt imitation of Church Rules
during the Middle-Ages where suspiciously so, the abuse victim was always blamed for having let it happen, and typically,
the Church was burning the raped child together with the
rapist, on one and the same stake!
Hence, these new social and legal policies that label children as sex offenders are by no means forms of rational social and legal policy making, and besides, they are simply
unconstitutional, and against all human rights conventions.
They could be considered as a form of torture under the
United Nations Conventions Against Torture.
Crime prevention is much more important than criminal
prosecution. In a sense, prosecution is always too late, just as
sex education of children is always too late. In this sense and
under such circumstances, prosecution actually becomes
persecution! The state is wise that knows how to prevent
crime and not the state that has crime happening all over the
place and always comes as it were in the last minute to make
undone what has been done, and to console and comfort
the victims.
Countless prison miles are not a solution, human potential lost by incarcerating people for decades is not a solution,
it is a fake solution!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 442

Why? It is no solution because nobody is served. People
are destroyed and the tax payer pays the bill for this destruction of human potential; the state is not served either because of the expenses for an enormously complex administration apparatus which entails a blown-up budget for law
enforcement.
Nor is the community served by losing so much accumulated human potential! And what about the victims in all the
cases the state was too late to prevent the crime? Another
casualty?
To ask such a question sounds like cynicism, but is not. It
is a matter-of-fact assessment. We really must find effective
solutions for crime prevention that are based on the understanding of human nature, and the true understanding of
human emotions, the sexual function, and the dynamics in
human relationships. We cannot make effective laws when
we disregard psychology; if we do that, we get what we have
now, a blown-up apparatus that looks like a huge state bulldog that has the intelligence of a Neanderthal brain.
The real solution is crime prevention through smart social
policy making. I mean by this not just legal policy making,
not just lawmaking but changing social structures long-term,
and guiding citizens to constructive forms of behavior. We
cannot effectively reduce psychopathological and antisocial
behaviors by punishing those behaviors. The system of ‘pun-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 443

ishment and reward’ simply doesn’t work with humans, while
it may work with dogs and monkeys.
The patriarchal way doesn’t work either. It has disqualified
itself over the last five thousand years of total madness!
Changing behaviors is a long-term endeavor and it can
only succeed when it is based upon a correct assessment of
the human nature.
This is the crucial point, as I show it in all my publications.
We need to get away from century-old projections upon the
human nature to really finding out about new solutions by
observing living systems and through understanding the dynamics of human communication.
To give an example, when we ponder how to bring about
positive, non-harmful and constructive sexual behaviors, we
need to study the nature of human sexuality. When we apply
the reductionist, mechanistic view of sexology, we learn that
there are sexual drives, and that people are conditioned in
childhood to follow certain sexual attractions; there is a theory that goes from an ideal scenario saying ‘this is the way it
should,’ and then derives conclusions from this assumption
for all the cases that are not going ‘as it should,’ that is,
paraphilias and perversions.
But sexology and depth psychology to this day have not
proven the assumption what actually is ‘normal sexual behav-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 444

ior’ except there is one striking element in normalcy, in all
normal sexual behaviors: it is the sharing of pleasure. Pathological sexual behavior by contrast is characterized by shared
pleasure being replaced by one-sided pleasure that is inflicted on the mate, and that uses violent means to achieve
satisfaction, virtually ‘on the back’ of the mate.
Now, my long-term research on human sexual behavior,
human emotions and sexual paraphilias shows that prior to
the sexual response, there is an emotional bonding, which is
based on what I call ‘emotional predilection.’
I mean that sexual mating is not random with human beings, but typically a result of emotional bonding which follows certain emotional patterns.
People are attracted to certain groups of potential mates,
such as partners of the opposite sex of a certain age group,
partners of same-sex of a certain age group or younger partners of a certain age group. Hence, emotional patterning is
depending on emotional identity, which is part of general
identity. People tend to identify themselves with their emotional patterns, their emotional predilections.
Let us now have a look how sexual behaviors can occur
that fall outside of the socially accepted schema. Why does a
man or woman want to work with children and become an
educator? Because they feel emotionally attracted to chil-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 445

dren. Why does a man or a woman want to work for the elderly? Because they are emotionally attracted to elders. Now,
in one or the other case, with one or the other person, we
have incidents of such kind of professionals having sexual
relations with some of the children or elders they care for.
What is interesting in these cases is that their pedophilic or
gerontophilic emotions turned sexual.
While for a majority of those workers, it did not happen, it
happened with them. And while even for them, they did not
feel such kind of erotic attraction to all children or elders,
they felt it for some of them.
How can that happen? My hypothesis is that the children
or the elders gave the signal for the relationship, as unusual
as it may sound, given the fact that educational and therapeutic relations are deemed to be nonsexual, and that the
worker could not cope with that projection and accordingly
was trapped without actually cognizing the entanglement — 
until it was too late!
Now, if we register this and accept this to happen, because moralizing would sidetrack us in our rational analysis of
such happenings, what comes next? We should wonder why
we are not giving some kind of preparative training to workers to anticipate such kind of accidents?

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 446

This has to my knowledge never been done and that is
why I suggest to set this up, as a special branch of vocational
training. The answer to this question is that we did not know
that the etiology of sexual attraction is not sexual, but emotional. That is why we thought that when such a case occurred, the worker in question was ‘premeditating’ a sexual
attack long before and staged everything for the purpose of
an ‘intended abuse’.
Such is the official rhetoric, such is the cunning ways our
legal system rules out any other etiology, because the ‘premeditation theory’ simply fits ideally into the ‘abusecentered culture’ with its simplistic scheme of predators and
victims.
And of course, interrogations are led with the ‘perpetrators’ by police and judges in a way to confirm that the plot
was ‘premeditated long in advance.’
That things are not that way in most cases doesn’t interest anybody, because everybody makes money in such affairs 
— except those who are trapped by them, the workers and
educators, and of course the children and their parents.
Here are the steps to be taken to change this legal and
social paradigm:
Decriminalize nonviolent consenting adult-child relations.
Abolish all and every sex laws for they do not fit into a mod-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 447

ern legal system and are more abusive than all the abuses
they are intend to punish;
Treat dependency and tutelary relations basically on the
same level, but embed educational relations into the ethical
code of the particular organization;
Outsource children who have physically or sexually abusive parents instead of segregating them out from their families; give them appropriate shelter and education but allow
them to see their parents at regular intervals if they wish to,
and do not prohibit parents to visit the children in the shelter,
thereby respecting the internal bond that despite abuse
needs continuity for the child to develop his or her psychosexual growth.
In addition, there are manifest constitutional reasons for a
change of this situation, which is simply shameful for any nation that says it follows the rule of law and is democratic. Fact
is that in most cases involving child sexual abuse, the rule in
the United States of America and most other Western nations today is that prosecution proceeds on mere hearsay for
arresting suspects without any evidence, and with the additional right of the state to take children out of their families,
and put them in state custody.
Evidence if at all present in these cases, is not primary
evidence, but secondary evidence, that is hearsay or mere

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 448

suspicion, or the vague allegations of neighbors about ‘suspicious behavior,’ which in most cases is so general that virtually everything can be subsumed under it.
Even the Magna Carta of 1215 was more liberal and
granted more protection for the individual, hundreds of
years ago, than today’s American criminal justice. Hence, in
most of these cases we have a flagrant violation of the constitutional principle of nulla poena sine lege or due process.
Nulla Poena Sine Lege is a a supreme constitutional principle, which says that ‘nobody can be subjected to a criminal
trial without there existing a written law in precise wording
prior to the act committed, and under which the behavior in
question can be subsumed. In the United States, this principle is widely termed due process. Due process and other
constitutional rights have been written in the constitution of
the United States by the United States Bill or Rights, which
has actually been added to the constitution in the form of
the Ten Amendments.
It’s a superior principle in a democracy for in totalitarian
regimes typically people are condemned by laws that either
do not exist or that are applied against their precise wording,
or by extending their wording, so as to have people disappear from the political agenda.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 449

If a democracy is genuine, there typically is a Constitutional Court to monitor the legal system for making sure that
constitutional guarantees be applied and safeguarded by all
involved in the law profession, including the lawmaker. In the
United States, for example, this court is the United States
Supreme Court. In Germany, this court is called Bundesverfassungsgericht, translated as German Constitutional Court.
This highest and most respected court has the power to invalidate laws by force of its adjudicative power. It has in continued jurisprudence, since its creation in 1942, emphasized
the principle of nulla poena as a primal constitutional right of
the citizen that the state has to comply with by drafting precise criminal laws, those namely that are worded in a way to
be unambiguous and verifiable.
For example, if rape is defined as the ‘penetration of the
female sexual organ by the male sexual organ’ and in the
case at court, the accused penetrated the vagina of the victim by means of a vibrator, the judge in that case would not
be allowed to admit rape, because ‘vibrator’ is not ‘male
sexual organ’ and in criminal law, precisely because of the
principle of nulla poena, an interpretation and extension of
the statute is not allowed!
The German Constitutional Court has repeatedly invalidated, and thus rendered null und nichtig (legally void) legal

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 450

bills that had passed the Bundestag (German Parliament)
and that were thus declared to be invalid laws.
Because these criminal laws were too general in their
wording and not precise enough, they violated the principle
of nulla poena sine lege that is according to the German
Constitutional Court not just a matter of law history, as it was
already contained in the Magna Carta, but has immediate
constitutional validity.
As a result, the laws have been nullified by the court and
the persons condemned under these laws were at once liberated from prison and financially compensated for the injustice done to them. In addition, it has to be seen that the
principle of nulla poena bears high political and social explosiveness in the application and extensive interpretation of socalled sex laws.
These sex laws, however, are for the most part very vague
and contain chewing-gum clauses such as, for example, the
term ‘public morals.’
It is for this and other reasons that they have been found
by many constitutional lawyers to violate constitutional law.
In addition, their extensive interpretation by criminal jurisprudence in the United States and other jurisdictions
makes decidedly for the unconstitutionality of these laws, as I
have shown in several of my publications and audio books.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 451

I am saying that if the human being today is rampantly
engaging in destructive behaviors, the culprit for this fact is
exactly governments that form wrong social policies, such as
tolerating outdated ‘sex laws’ that bring only evil results,
while they are very little effective in a positive sense, that is,
in the sense they are deemed to be made for.
But they are in fact not made for functioning in our society for they were made by the Church in times of the ‘dark
age,’ as a means of tightly oppressing the population, as a
means of control and religious tyranny. It is irresponsible for
any modern government to uphold these laws, and it is naive
to think they were doing any good in the sense of positive
child protection. They don’t, and the evidence is on the table!
Proposal 1/12
My suggestion is to decriminalize behavior as much as
possible. LSD should be made available for research as it was
effected in 2007, in Switzerland. Marihuana is not a ‘hard
drug’ and its effects are lesser harmful than the effects of alcoholic beverage.
In Holland and Spain every citizen is allowed to have a
maximum of four Cannabis plants. Legalizing drugs leads to
the eradication of black markets and reduces crime that is
related to those markets. Marihuana is smoked by monks in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 452

Nepal for religious purposes. Hemp was used since centuries
for healing, especially when brewed as a tea.
— See Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana: The Forbidden Medicine
(1997).

The abolishment of all age of consent laws and other ‘sex
laws’ is a matter of rational and responsible policymaking.
Human sexuality is not damaging anybody, except perhaps the ‘morals’ of sexually incompetent people whose
mindset is pervaded by myths, by fear, and by what I call ‘religious perversion,’ which is a thinking where all in life, and
especially all the vital life functions, are seen through
‘upside-down’ glasses.
Such a policy change would give tremendous trust to
humans to not being sexually abusive but live their sexual
relations in a responsible manner that does no harm.
The present laws do not make a significant distinction, in
their punishing sexual abuse of a child, between violent and
nonviolent sex with a child. This is so because the fines for
violence used are not significantly higher than those for nonviolent sexual play with a child.
That means there is no stimulus from such laws for humans to be nonviolent; in the contrary, those laws make for
more violence. Without such laws there would be a tremen-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 453

dous stimulus to seek out consenting relations with all members of the community.
At the same time children should be empowered to live
their sex lives with peers or adults other than their parents, as
their free choice, and without being emotionally manipulated
as it is the case under the present situation of the law and
‘social morality.’
Besides that, these laws are outdated and irrational as
they are the successors of the Church’s Canon Law, a body of
ecclesiastical rules not to be considered by the modern legislator as rational and democratic lawmaking.
Thus, there are several heavy reasons for a future legislator to eventually abandon these ungainly laws altogether,
and to replace them by a form of competent and responsible
social consultancy that is carried out, as a state function, by
state-trusted consultancy agencies.
02/12 — The Possible Human
Possible Humans are the Rule.
Impossible Citizens are the Exceptions from the Rule.
The general trend in the Aquarius Age will be away from
collectivism and toward individualism, away from standard
opinions and rules toward more freedom for setting and liv-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 454

ing our own personalized standards and ways of life. The regard of the state upon the citizen will largely shift.
While within the authoritarian if not totalitarian state of
the Pisces Age, the citizen was a subject, for the democratic
Aquarian state, the citizen is a customer.
The Aquarius Age shall provide the individual with a
greater sphere of self-expression and more options for associating with peers and groupings that pursue similar goals,
even in the case that those goals may be different from the
opinions or the lifestyle of the average individual, or the majority. There will be definitely more space and recognition for
alternative lifestyles. The influence of social and political
bodies over the individual will decrease and become
smoother.
When we think about the matter, without being blurred
by our great philosophies that more often than not have justified violence and injustice with nice-sounding formulas and
grandiose slogans, we begin to understand that most governments are inspired in their evildoing against their citizens
by something called ‘the human nature.’
Through the terrible mix of religious doctrine, misunderstood for the most part, together with distorted political
ideas, we got nowhere, collectively, in our task for understanding the human being, while there are of course many

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 455

intelligent, wise, far-sighted and integer humans who have
the right vision, and who have written wonderful books.
But collectively, on the government level of our glorious
civilizations, embodied in our nation states, what we see is
the grossest misevaluation of human nature that one can
possibly imagine.
Most governments, in their overall approach toward their
citizens, even today, are taking for granted the Calvinist belief that the ‘human soul is rotten and the flesh weak,’ and
that without ‘punishment and reward,’ humans would behave
in criminal and chaotic ways; this is why, under the header of
moralism, the upside-down concept of genuine morality, so
much violence and oppression are inflicted upon the ‘impossible human.’
The human race was not always violent, and violence is
not something mysterious and fatal we have to accept; much
to the contrary, the roots of violence have been elucidated
by an abundance of research over the last fifty years or so.
We have today massive evidence for the fact that contrary to
the beliefs of fundamentalist religions, homo sapiens is not
violent by nature. Historical and anthropological research
shows that most of the pre-patriarchal cultures were peaceful
and nonviolent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 456

At a time when it was unknown how important sensuality
is in nutritive child-rearing, it is no wonder that so-called sex
laws were drafted that punished people for being naturally
sensual with a child, or for giving a child tactile stimulation in
the form of caresses, kisses, tender fondling and by licking
the child’s skin.
But this fundamentally changed since the 1960s and 70s,
when neurology, anthropology and skin research coincided
in showing that one of the surest factors in the etiology of
violence is emotional and tactile deprivation of infants, children and adolescents through insufficient or inadequate
nursing.
Today, it is without a doubt established doctrine in psychology, education and the mental health professions that
tactile stimulation and emotionally abundant and empathetic
parenting is one of the ways to reduce violence both domestically and structurally. These strategies should be endorsed,
supported and encouraged by governments.
Only very recently there is a fundamental shift to be
noted in a paradigm that lasted over the whole of patriarchy.
This paradigm could be called a negative worldview. This
negative worldview prevailed since the last five thousand
years or so, and was particularly negative regarding nature
and human nature.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 457

This paradigm assumed that the human is a dangerous
mix between some ‘good’ and a lot of ‘bad’ drives or instincts and that those latter instincts had to be kept in check.
There was a particular stress upon morality and education,
for reforming the presumed ‘impossible human’ into something better. As a result, moralism prevailed over most of
human history and was widely justified with the need to
safeguard ‘law and order’ by holding the ‘bad citizen’ in a
tight corset of legal and social prohibitions and taboos.
Proactive policy making means to change the reigning
group fantasy from the ‘impossible’ to the ‘possible’ human.
This implies updating our retarded notion of the human
being as a ‘biologically violent creature’ that was promoted
by decrepit theories like Darwinism and by all our religions
that found never anything good about the human, while they
were and are completely unaware that by doing so they all
are liable of blasphemy.
Religions are thus out of the game, and to be disqualified
for any input in social policy making because they have never
walked their talk. While they praise the Creator, they basically
say that His Creation is faulty and ‘has to be improved,’
thereby arrogating themselves to know better than the Creator. This is simply blasphemic, was it not so ridiculous after
all!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 458

The results of this group fantasy, however, are quite serious, in the form of projections being made upon the human
nature that inherently are not there.
This was done so over the whole course of patriarchy, the
last 5000 years, but it was only detected as fraud or ‘flawed
reasoning’ since about the last two decades, namely with the
advent of systems theory or what Fritjof Capra called the
‘systems view of life.’
— See Fritjof Capra, The Web of Life (1996/1997), The Hidden Connections (2002) and The Systems View of Life (2014).

Policy making should be focused on the following principles, that I may first state in simple language, then in legal
language:
—A child that got lost to their parents in a crowd will in
most cases be taken back to his or her family without being
hurt;
—A person who is endangered to die in flames or
drowned, will most probably be rescued if there are any
other humans around;
—A street peddler sleeping outside in a freezing-cold
winter night will most probably be rescued and taken to a
shelter;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 459

—Most people most likely pay back their debts and also
their taxes;
—A so-called child killer has in most cases no intention to
kill a child he abducts for sex; it is fear of discovery, shame
and bewilderment that induces the impulse to kill; in other
words, this impulse in not naturally there in humans, nor in
humans who are sexually attracted to children; the impulse is
the result of a temporary psychosis that results from the fact
that relationships of this kind are uncoded by society and
therefore surrounded by strong fear, shame and other negative emotions;
—A small helpless child hit by a bomb split may well be
saved in a war by exactly a member of the army responsible
for the bombing; simply because the man was close to that
child in that moment and saw the tragedy, following his heart
instead of following his orders;
There are many examples reported from the sinking of
the legendary Titanic and other liners, where adults wanted
to save children from drowning and thereby drowned themselves;
In the 911 incident a number of fire police were killed because they attempted to rescue or effectively rescued men,
women and children they saw in the flames.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 460

Proposal 2/12
Legal and social policies should take into account the
‘possible’ human, not the ‘impossible’ human. This means in
practice that social policies should be based upon the assumption that humans naturally do what is good for self,
others and the community and naturally avoid what is harmful for self, others and the community.
This simple reorientation at the root level of policy making would already make for much change; it would namely
minimize laws and social policies that are based on a paranoid understanding of the human nature, that is, one that is
pervaded by fear and mistrust in the natural goodness of
human beings.
Suspicion is not a guideline for drafting good policies.
Natural life experience shows that when we give trust to others, we are trusted in return.
Many corporate leaders know this and apply it in their
daily management policy. Governments who trust their citizens are more trusted by them than governments that are
suspicious that the citizen may want to ‘break the rules.’
When citizens feel they are trusted, they become more
trustworthy.
— See, for example, Jean Houston, The Possible Human (1982),
Michael Murphy, The Future of the Body (1992), Robert E. Ornstein,
The Psychology of Consciousness (1972), Abraham Maslow, The

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 461

Farther Reaches of Human Nature (1971), Part V: Society, Ervin
Laszlo, Quantum Shift to the Global Brain (2008) and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent (2002).

Hence, laws should be drafted in alignment with ‘positive’
policy making, and in the conviction that what is preventing
harm is the right policy, not the law. The law should be the
ultima ratio, it should in the ideal case not be broken by anybody. To get there, the stress is to be put not on lawmaking,
as it is now, but on the right kind of policymaking.
Needless to add that it’s much easier to throw a hundred
new laws over the head of the citizen with every year to
come than to subtly influence and change the social field in
order to trigger positive law-abiding behaviors.
In natural systems all nested networks are mutually entangled, and they are co-evolving. Every single change in the
system always comes about from a point of view of ‘total information,’ that is, the knowledge what is positively stimulating the system for growth and expansion.
As a result, any little incremental change within the system is a totally informed one and will lead to growth and expansion of the system, that is, for its overall welfare. The relationships between human beings are no different from these
natural biological processes to be observed in living systems.
They naturally are positive and constructive not only for self
but also for others and the community at large. If humans

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 462

have lost this natural ‘goodness,’ there are precise reasons
why this happened.
These reasons have been investigated by sociological
and anthropological research. They are variations of one single theme, and that theme is conditioning. The strongest
conditioning factors are cultural norms and laws, and social
policies.
03/12 — Fostering Public Sanity
Public Sanity is Public Mental Hygiene.
Republic Insanity is Absence of Governmental Hygiene.
In a world where not only particles on a quantum level,
and not only minds, but also countries and economies are
entangled, nations cannot behave like in the past without
triggering unpredictable chain reactions.
— See for example Amit Goswami, The Self-Aware Universe: How
Consciousness Creates the Material World (1995), Dean Radin, Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality
(2006), Ervin Laszlo

The global landscape has fundamentally changed over
the last decades in that the original hierarchical structure has
been largely replaced by a network structure, with the result
that nations have become interdependent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 463

While there is still a sort of hierarchy in the sense that a
minority of nations is incomparably richer than the majority,
thereby having more economic thrust power, this economic
argument is not forcibly valid on the political arena.
Through international conventions, nations today are
bound to behave in a manner that fosters bilateral and multilateral cooperation and exchange. This means that in the
normal case, there is an equality of nations that more and
more develops into the rule, while in the past it was the exception.
In such a situation, when a country mobilizes exorbitant
resources for national defense, such doing is per se alien to
the idea of international peaceful cooperation.
The military budget of the United States of America is
twice the amount than the cumulated military budgets of
Russia, China, Europe, and the rest of the world. That means
that one nation among two hundred maintains a defense system that is more than two hundred times tougher and more
expensive than the others.
This situation is obviously not balanced. In addition, let
me repeat an old truth. Psychology teaches that safety is not
guaranteed with such kind of behavior, even if the defense
system is the toughest in the world.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 464

It is much more psychologically sane and effective to
have the nation contribute to the welfare and prosperity of
all other nations, thereby securing their friendly attitude and
peaceful exchange, which then can be built upon within a
soundly adjusted concept of global diplomacy.
Every leader knows that only those who walk their talk are
followed, not those who talk their walk, and then don’t walk.
Grandiose promises are not what usually is the recipe for
good leadership, nor is megalomanic propaganda and complacent self-lauding.
It is in the well-understood best of a leader nation to fight
for their ‘vital national interests,’ but the question is how this
is done, and what the strategies are for such a nation to be
respected and acclaimed as a leader.
It seems that there is no fundamental difference between
personal leadership, on one hand, and group or national
leadership, on the other.
What leaders and leading nation states have in common
is that they care for the best of the whole, not just their own
best, and are predictable as to their leadership strategies.
That means that those strategies have to be constantly finetuned in order to be well adjusted to the political, social and
economic realities. Predictability builds trust and trust is
needed for leading others; a leader who is not trusted will

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 465

not be able to be effective in his task to mold a certain pattern for positive behavior and attitude. Individuals and nations are not different psychologically; they follow their trust;
when they are not able to build trust they are reticent to follow the leader.
Some critics have voiced disagreement about how the
United States are behaving in the world, in their role as a
leader nation. Some others say the very idea of leading is
wrong as well, and that in a situation of equality, no nation
state can claim to be a leader.
I would not think that the second alternative should be
ruled out completely, while international law develops toward more equality among nation states today, contrary to
the situation still in the 19th century.
As a matter of fact, it is natural that a very strong, powerful and rich nation assumes a leadership rule. It do not think
there is evil in such a proposition.
However, in the analysis of a respected scholar just as
Noam Chomsky, there is a noted discrepancy between the
moral claims the United States sets in the world as a guideline of behavior and how the nation itself behaves on the international stage.
A nation who feels responsible for the wellbeing of the
globe will lead by example, and implement sustainable

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 466

technologies for the sake of securing the long-term survival
of all species, including the human race.
Such a nation will not only talk about peace and prosperity but practice it by implementing social and legal policies
that foster inner and outer peace and friendly relationships
among nations.
Such a nation will also invest all that is necessary for getting away from outdated fossil-fuel technologies, and build
new ecologically sustainable technologies, be they solar,
wind-driven or based upon alternative scientific concepts. As
much time is needed for testing the new strategies and for
implementing and realizing them commercially, the nation
will carry out this important change in a timely fashion.
The most important for long-term political success and
the collaboration of all people and organizations involved in
the economy is that the government ‘walks its talk’; such display of integrity then creates the momentum that is most
needed in politics, namely in form of predictability, which is
based upon foresight, intelligent and effective planning.
Unfortunately, the ‘hero cult’ that pervades American
media culture has put all social and cultural values upside
down. The hero image depicted by international media and
the video game industry is about the total opposite of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 467

original hero archetype known from mythology, fairy tales
and folk wisdom.
Instead of being a culture-founder, this false or Oedipal
Hero, of modern vintage, is a culture-destroyer. One may ask,
perhaps naively, why a culture chooses a killer character, persecutor and spy as the model brand for its main bulk of
males?
It is notorious that because of America’s peculiar history,
the cultural model of the male is more the outdoor kind of
guy, not the homely partner type like in Europe. It is amazing
to see to what extent that original mold for the male role
model has been preserved over time, despite the structural
changes from an agricultural to a postmodern industrial culture.
Much speaks for the idea that it is the endlessly repeated
stereotype of the male ‘action guy’ in cinema and television
that has contributed to stiffen and uphold the image of the
white male abuser who cares about all but his partner and
children, and who is rough, smelly and intellectually mediocre.
One may ask if a society can be said to be sanely adjusted that choses an abuser type as the cultural blueprint for
husbands and fathers? No other culture has done that in
human history, except the most violent of all there was, the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 468

tribes of Hammurabi who virtually, as it is reported in the Bible, smashed the children of their enemies ‘to the ground
and against walls.’
It is unparalleled in the whole of human history. And yet
modern American culture can be said to be steeped, with
the setup of its senseless draconian laws and the abysmal
violence of its law enforcement system, in Hammurabi’s infamous cultural model.
Here, an introspection about the qualities of true heroes
would be an educational must, and should be written into
the curricula of all educational institutions, in America and
those nations that more or less imitate the American societal
model. Mythology and psychology coincide to depict the
true characteristics of those we call heroes.
True heroes realize, with commitment and consistency,
but without violence, their soul values on the earth plane,
thereby showing that the human potential is infinite and unlimited. We have to see that all violence is weakness, a response that shows the person’s basic immaturity for facing
the complexity of life and their own inner life.
Hence, the terminator kind of guy, the ruthless killer, be
he a killer in the name of the so-called ‘good,’ is in last resort
an adolescent in revolt who has not made the transition to
true adulthood. He or she is always a false hero!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 469

This puer mentality then, that Thomas Moore well observes and analyses in his book Care of the Soul (1994), is
what may be called cultural narcissism, and here the United
States really excel in playing the main role on the stage of
international relations; in fact, the nation plays the role of the
revolted and repressed puer spirit that needs to ‘throw a crisis’ from time to time, to show that he exists and to make
sure he is taken serious.
There is perhaps a time for change in so far as the child
nation may have grown up in the meantime, and as a result
may want to have better relationships in the sandbox of international affairs, without needing to throw sand in the eyes
of another child nation.
If that is the case, it is time to change the hero paradigm
by changing the character of the hero image as the cultural
model for males. The consequences would be entirely beneficial, and they would be seen in decreasing violence, decreasing marriage disasters, and decreasing child abuse.
Proposal 3/12
An equitable state budget needs to be justified to be
supported by all members of the community. It cannot be
just random to fulfill this purpose.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 470

It cannot be just arbitrary. Just because the military is a
strong power factor, and a strong economic factor, a government doesn’t need to run an exorbitant military budget.
The so-called ‘national defense’ is a term without meaning. There is nothing to defend when a nation is doing the
right thing, that is, playing its positive role, instead of being a
ruthless exterminator in the world.
Positive karma is created automatically by good actions.
When a nation over the barely more than two centuries of its
existence has but aggressed, bombed, murdered and genocided millions of people both on its own territory and worldwide, it has surely created bad karma!
Should it then arm itself until it virtually suffocates in all its
accumulated weapons? By no means. The solution is to seek
non-coercive agreement and smooth diplomatic exchanges
with most of the other nations; the solution is to give up fictitious concepts and paranoid ideas, which are based upon
fear and that stand in the way to true and equitable relations
with other nations.
An equitable budget also means to review the current
situation where the education budget is about 1/10 of the
military budget. Even if both budgets would be 50/50, the
situation would still not be equitable. If the military budget
was about 1/10 of the educational budget, I would indeed

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 471

talk about equity, simply because education is more important than weapons. The best defense in any situation of danger is a smart population, not a blown-up military apparatus!
The mercantile cause of international child protection
needs to be replaced by real child protection which is done
through a policy of empowerment, permissiveness and information.
It is done through decriminalizing all sexual behavior and
educating children truthfully, by helping them build autonomy, by respecting their privacy, and intimacy, and by not
manipulating them emotionally and cripple them sexually
through the child sex taboo, as it is the case today. That child
is the most protected that is most empowered and informed
about their body and sexual function, not the child that is ignorant and obedient to their monolithic parents as the pillars
of morality.
That child is the most protected that has the authority to
be himself or herself, and express their full potential both
verbally and nonverbally, and that is allowed to engage in
love relations of their own choice — whatever the age of the
partners, provided they are not the parents of the child.
This policy entails decriminalizing nonviolent sexual behavior and educating children in a way that fosters autonomy,
respect for their privacy, respect for their subjective intimate

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 472

world, whatever this might happen to be, and last not least,
refraining from brainwashing them with sexual taboos.
A state who is interested in bringing about possible humans cannot tolerate a game and television industry that
perverts the masses with productions that are overall perverse, cynical, violent and abysmally ignorant about the real
values that life fosters. Such a state, and their governments
and senators will first of all define what the hero person looks
like, or should look like — and when I use the term ‘hero’ I do
this only because it’s now fashionable. It may translate as ‘the
ideal citizen’ or ‘the citizen we most wish to exist’ or ‘the ultimately responsible, constructive and proactive citizen.’ It is
thus in this sense that I use the term ‘hero’ here.
But how is this term now defined? What we have are serial killers, terminators, and perverse, cynical, and hyperviolent machos who do their sordid business in our media
world, and who ejaculate their poison in the vulnerable belly
of an open society. Is this really a model for our children?
How can we tolerate this as a community, and in a democracy that understands itself as a model for all possible
democracies?
Taken seriously, my argument may shatter one’s ideas,
while I admit that a change here is not easy to bring about.
Why? Because huge industries are involved that cannot be

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 473

changed in one day. By prohibitions and a moralizing approach, nothing can be reached for the result will be revolt,
especially by young people. This then could have negative
repercussions in schools and colleges.
I see a change here only long-term and in case the government assigns an expert group with the task of redefining
the values of male and female citizens as they are ‘desirable,’
based upon a study of the behavior of all living systems.
In living systems there are no ‘judges’, there are no ‘vigilante’ elements, there are no ‘terminators,’ there are no ‘killers’ for justice; the very fact of judging shows that a human
being has understood nothing about true humanity. It shows
only that a person uses only about 1/10 of their brain and 9/
10 of their muscles, while with sane humans, it is the other
way around.
To repeat it, to become judgmental here as a government, and proceed to content censorship and prohibition is
not effective, and besides, it is counterproductive.
For sure, policy changes of that grandeur cannot be
thrown over the head of the citizen, nor the head of corporations. So doing will only create the impression that the government is ‘freedom-hostile.’
The way to go is much more subtle and complex. It is
through changing our primary education; it means that the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 474

values we foster for children to adopt in our day care centers,
pre-schools and primary schools need to be doublechecked, to begin with.
After checking what’s actually going on here (the result
may be shocking for every senator who is really openminded to see the truth!), we need to think deep and long
for changing the structure of primary education so as to implement the values we really foster, and that are operational
and constructive for the cooperative, networked, nonviolent
society we want to build.
04/12 — Respecting Natural Intimacy
Natural Intimacy is Conducive to Peace.
Governmental Intimidation is Conducive to Civil War.
All intimacy, respecting the right of self-determination,
both within and outside the family enjoys constitutional protection. All sensual and sexual behavior is natural and has to
be removed from the criminal code, as a matter of cultural
and human sanity. Our sex laws are insane, they are legally
codified ‘sins,’ religious prohibitions, at best, but not to be
taken as serious and rational lawmaking in a modern democracy.
Sorry, it is not the police’s business to look and smell what
humans, big or small, do under their bedcovers! What peo-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 475

ple do with their bodies is their own intimate business, not a
concern for the state.
The only exception from this rule is where people do
harm to each other, that is, in case they are violent, using
brute force, threat to life or torture to attain sexual fulfillment
at the detriment of the partner.
For these cases, criminal laws may remain in place, but
not for nonviolent sensual and sexual behavior. After all, sexual interaction is human interaction, a form of nonverbal
communication that involves the body; all sexual behavior is
social behavior in the sense that sexual interaction is a form
of social interaction, when it is within the social code. By default, all nonviolent sexual interaction is within the social
code and socially accepted, and acceptable.
Presently still controversial and not socially coded are
adult-child sexual interactions, both within and without the
family. While there is a rationale why parent-child sexual interaction should be restricted, there is none regarding adultchild sexual relations outside of the family web. In the contrary was it shown in alternative child rearing experiments
and the open family of the 1960s and 70s that children develop amazing social skills when they are allowed to be sexual with partners they choose, be those partners their peers
or adults other than their parents.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 476

— See, for example, Larry L. Constantin & Floyd M. Martinson
(Eds.), Children & Sex: New Findings, New Perspectives (1981), Larry
L. Constantine, Treasures of the Islands: Children in Alternative Lifestyles (1976) and Where are the Kids, in: Libby & Whitehurst (Eds.),
Marriage and Alternatives (1977), as well as Open Family: A Lifestyle
for Kids and Other People, 26 Family Coordinator 113–130 (1977).
See also Chelsea Cain & Moon Unit Zappa, Wild Child (1999), Richard Farson, Birthrights: A Bill of Rights for Children (1974) and Stevi
Jackson, Childhood and Sexuality (1982).

It has been noted as well that some children prefer adults
over peers. Giving children the right for free choice relations
of course logically implies to let them choose the partners
they like, be it adults.
— See, for example, Lauretta Bender & Abram Blau, The Reaction
of Children to Sexual Relations with Adults, American J. Orthopsychiatry 7 (1937), 500–518.

When a child chooses an adult partner as his or her love
and sex mate, this is not a case of pedophilia, and it is not a
‘normalization of pedophilia’ in the sense of recognizing the
pedophile movement’s claim for political recognition. It is
instead a child-focused form of permissiveness, that doesn’t
grant extra rights for the adults who are chosen by children
or adolescents as their love mates.
However, for this to happen, the social code must be extended to encompass these relations, to give them social acceptance and latitude; to repeat it, this does not imply that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 477

the lawmaker needs to give any rights to pedophiles or
those who claim political recognition of the pedophile cause.
This is an important distinction to be made, which unfortunately is completely blurred in the present media discussion on the subject of child rights.
It has to be seen that the family and family life are protected by the United States Constitution. Intimacy as an intrinsically human behavior is equally protected by the family,
and while it is tabooed inside of the family, it is well a subject
of protection outside of the family. Intimacy is protected because without protecting intimacy, privacy could not be covered by constitutional rights. Privacy and intimacy are entangled, they go together. In all matters of intimacy, there is a
concern for privacy; the same is not true the other way
around, as there is well concern for privacy, for example in
business transactions, where there is no intimacy involved.
Hence privacy is the overarching notion and needs
stronger protection. However, in the last two decades with
the rise of the child abuse culture, intimate exchange between a trusted professional (doctor or lawyer) and their client, also known as privileged communication, has since been
undermined by criminal jurisprudence.
As mandated by law, clinicians (psychologists or the like),
in particular, are legally obliged to disclose potential child

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 478

abuse to law enforcement whenever they detect it. The client
maybe warned ahead of time by the clinician during the initial interview, that any disclosure of child abuse will result in
reportage to the police.
Unfortunately, this also includes consenting or otherwise
nonviolent sexual interaction. This is why a new social paradigm in needed in order to put an end to the criminalization
of nonviolent or otherwise loving sexual interaction between
children and adults.
If for example a hypnosis treatment reveals that the patient was having sex with underage girls or boys at any time
in the past, the psychiatrist is deemed to report the case to
law enforcement. It should be noted that the defense attorney does not share this burden that the clinician carries on
his back thereby making legal counsel the supreme trusted
professionals for which the notion of privileged communication still is fully honored.
It goes without saying that it is a violation of constitutional rights to strip the mental health profession of their
age-old professional secret, just for complying with the exorbitant needs of specialized police departments for closing
cases ‘successfully’ or generally, having more cases every
year, to prove their right of existence and attract more governmental attention and funding. All systems are self-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 479

perpetuating, which doesn’t mean they are important and
functional; nor does it mean they should exist.
For the reasons I pointed out above, such laws should not
exist because they have no rationale for their existence, except we return to the Middle-Ages, but then our governments should cease to say we are living in a democracy. As
things are presently, we are not yet living in a democracy. A
nation that maintains spy laws of the kind the Church had
under the times of the Inquisition is not a democratic, but a
tyrannical nation. It is not a nation that really protects their
citizens, but rather sacrifices them like scapegoats to a
mythic concept of morality that is after all pure fiction.
Proposal 4/12
While the initial theme is recurring in this proposal, it
really matters to have a close look what havoc our sex laws
and their ruthless enforcement create in people’s lives, in our
families and neighborhoods, in our communities and in society at large.
Things have developed in ways that perhaps were not intended to happen that way two decades ago. We have created a large-scale public hysteria that can only be compared
to the witchhunts under the Inquisition and the Nazi holocaust with its ruthless propaganda.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 480

I may just cite one exemplary case, in addition to the others I cited before. A female university professor photographed her 6-year old masturbating son some years ago,
and posted the photo on her website, with a funny comment.
Only a few days later she was arrested and convicted for
child pornography, child sexual abuse and incest. She really
lost all, the boy was taken into custody, she was dismissed by
her employer and in addition was publicly slandered and
disgraced.
Is that how a ‘democratic government’ treats their smart
people? Is that the way a democratic government protects
the family, while it affirms in its smear polemics virtually every
day how much it loves and fosters the family?
I am saying this. No word is true of this polemic, it is one
big hypocrite smear, for the family is exposed to all kinds of
pranksters who can today get everybody jailed by just a
hearsay evidence produced to any sheriff or police station, to
get the muscled state machinery leashing out brutally on
each and every individual concerned.
That is not a democracy, it is a demotyranny! What is the
solution? There is no solution to paranoia. There is only healing. And the healing must come through deep reflection
about the insanity of the whole of the system!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 481

05/12 — Serving Children
From Protecting Children to Serving Children.
Free Choice Relations for Children.
Let me be very clear about this, child protection doesn’t
serve our children, it serves the industry, and in this case, not
only the industry at large, but the specific branch of industry
that could be called the ‘international child protection industry.’
Honestly, if child protection was not a business, I would
not really be concerned about it. If it was just another paranoid vintage of fundamentalist Christianity, I would not even
look at it as a lawyer and researcher. But it is not just that. It is
so well-funded and makes such huge profits that we can expect it to become more influential upon society at large in
the years to come, and on a global scale. It certainly serves
its business well. The question is, does it serve our children?
In my view, it is as abusive, as a strategy, in its life-denying
influence upon children, as all the abuse it claims to prevent.
Not only that, its influence upon society as a whole is negative and destructive; it has instituted a hate paradigm and
works against any form of permissiveness. And third, it operates against social liberties and infringes upon constitutional
rights.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 482

When a child is taken from their family and put in state
custody, this is a severe infringement not only of constitutional rights but also an act that can traumatize a child for
life.
I think no further explanation is needed to make the
reader understand that such a measure must be seen as an
ultima ratio. It goes without saying that for such a measure to
take, the legal requirements must be fully met, and this in
turn means there must be strong evidence of abuse. That
means the evidence must be primary, not prima facie. The
ultimate burden is on the state to justify the action. When the
burden of proof is on the state, it cannot be met by prima
face evidence, and still less, by hearsay evidence.
Let me report a case here where the scenario was put on
stage from the first to the last scene. An American citizen,
who was married and had a baby boy called a radio station
to say he found out he was a self-declared boylover, while he
was married and had a child; that he sometimes was thinking
of boys for love and that he thought such feelings should be
ultimately respected by society. The radio station called the
police on the spot and the next day the baby was removed
from the family and put in state custody.
The man, an intellectual, sued the government and won
the constitutional action. The social worker who had exe-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 483

cuted the custody was put in jail, and the family received a
compensation for the injury suffered.
Why did the man win the court action? Because the child
was put in custody without any evidence of abuse, upon the
mere ‘danger’ that the father might one day, with his
thoughts for boys, be abusive.
In Germany, we call criminal law that punishes people for
thoughts, Gesinnungsstrafrecht. The term means ‘thoughtpunishing criminal law.’
In Germany, such law, because it was practiced by the
Nazis, is legally prohibited and unconstitutional. It seems
that in the United States of America things are not that clearcut, at least not when ‘child abuse’ is alleged.
But there is another important detail. All measures taken
by the state against the citizen must be equitable so as to
ensure they represent the least-possible-infringement of personal freedom and civil liberties.
Equity is a general principle that reigns and rules the
whole of constitutional law! For example, when a thief is followed up by the police, upon robbing a bank, and the police
can catch the man by merely running faster, or by encircling
him, the police doesn’t have the right to shoot the man, not
even to shoot him in the leg. In such a case, the least possible infringement is to immobilize the man for arrest.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 484

The same principle applies for cases of abuse when the
measure the government wants to take is child custody. In
the normal case, the custody must be pronounced by a
judge except there is immediate danger for the child’s safety.
But even then, the principle of least possible infringement applies, and the child could be taken, for example, in
custody for a few days, until the matter is verified by a judge.
In the case I reported, no such temporary action had been
taken and the matter was not submitted to a judge at all. The
baby had been in custody for more than six months until the
father won the constitutional suit and the child was restituted
to the family. Needless to add that the baby could possibly
have been traumatized for life through the sudden and prolonged separation from the parents. The case thus exemplifies exactly what I am saying here:
— Child protection is no protection!
It is an unbelievable cynicism to talk about child protection, as a government, and then go and arrest children and
label them as sex offenders, for having expressed their love
with their bodies. It says that such a government speaks with
two tongues and values compulsive morality more than lively
healthy children!
Legally speaking, the laws and customs that criminalize
and incriminate children’s physical love are a flagrant viola-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 485

tion of international conventions for the rights of the child.
They have to be abolished.
Habeas corpus was first in history erected in the so-called
Magna Carta (1215). It literally means ‘you have the body’ or
‘you own your body.’
This principle was then set forth, in 1791, in the Bill of
Rights, the Ten Amendments to the United States Constitution. The amendments pertaining to the rights of the person
are the 5th, the 6th and the 8th amendments. It could be argued that registering children on sex offender registries is an
‘unusual punishment’ mentioned in the 8th Amendment and
therefore unconstitutional.
A behavior is socially adequate if a parent doing it would
behave in a socially acceptable manner. For example, when a
man is naked on a bed with a naked child, caressing her
body, kissing her and fondling her without being exclusively
focused on the child’s genitals, nor having the child touch his
genitals in an exclusive manner, the behavior is socially adequate because a parent doing this would act in a socially acceptable manner.
Such behavior simply is of a caring and caretaking nature,
and this is today more acknowledged as ever before since
we know that the strength of the child’s immune system
really depends on abundant tactile stimulation in the form of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 486

stroking, caressing, kissing, licking and massaging the skin of
the naked infant or child.
To construe criminal acts from physically caring behavior,
be it between parents and children, be it between adults and
children outside of the family, is an alarm signal for legislative
perversion.
Hence, physically caring behavior bestowed upon children of any age, and adolescents that is not targeting on exclusive sexual gratification should be entirely removed from
the criminal code.
Proposal 5/12
Serving children implies the setup of preventive social
policies, that is, policies that target at improving children’s
welfare, children’s rights, and children’s career opportunities.
The basic requirement here, before any such endeavor
can bring fruit, is to substantially raise educational budgets,
for all educational cycles, both on the federal and the state
level.
I would argue that the most important area of child education is nursery and pre-school level as psychoanalysis and
neurology tell us that a human brain’s neuronet is basically
setup at the age of 6.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 487

While it is possible to change neuronal structures by
changing behavior later on in life, it is much more difficult.
This means in practice that what a child can learn with relative ease, and in a playful manner, the later adult will learn
only with much more effort, and through the input of relatively more time.
Let me go from the most urgent to the lesser urgent
agenda points. The most urgent agenda point in improving
children’s welfare is to draft valid, proven and functional
measures to dramatically decrease violence against children,
in any form it takes, which means to prevent emotional
abuse, physical abuse and sexual abuse.
To focus on one kind of abuse and belittle the others
would be a myopic approach. To repeat it, this is not done
with ever more toughening criminal laws, as criminology research clearly shows that this kind of policy leads only to
more brutality in those crimes, but not to a reduction of
crime.
A reduction of the incidence of abuse can only be
brought about through social policies that imply the family
network, the community and the collaboration between parents and teachers. It also implies that the vocational training
for child nurses and teachers contains a program that brings
techniques to teachers that foster emotional awareness.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 488

Let me explain. As in real estate the motto is ‘location,
location, location,’ in education the motto is ‘relation, relation, relation.’
This is by no means a new idea or concept. The United
States has until recently practiced a flop-sided approach that
was boosting the child’s intellect while more or less neglecting to care for the child’s healthy emotional growth. However,
more traditional educational concepts always stressed the
‘relational’ aspect in education. This can be traced back to
the 17th century. To mention here are two important philosophers who have written substantially about education,
John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
— See John Locke, Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1690)
and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Émile ou de l’Éducation (1762).

It is proven through research on emotional intelligence
that relationship has an immediate impact on emotional intelligence.
Relationship is a quintessential life function, to be found
in all living systems.
— See Fritjof Capra, The Web of Life (1996), The Hidden Connections (2002) and The Systems View of Life (2014).

Where relationships are good and non-abusive, people
are thriving!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 489

Children need to relate to their educators more than to
their peers. This is important to understand. A peer cannot
give them the emotional backup, the warmth and the feeling
of welcome and protection that a good teacher can bestow.
It is for that reason so important that teachers learn to be
non-abusive in every respect, and for which reason I have
proposed a vocational training for teachers that raises
awareness of possible repressed desires that may disturb the
relationship with the children in their care.
Relationship is something that needs to be learnt or relearnt. It namely needs to be re-learnt when a person has experienced an abusive childhood background. This relearning process is very important and may take from several
months to several years. It is important because the old patterns that were wrong need to be replaced by new relational
patterns and ways of how to engage and maintain relationships. This process may require psychotherapeutic help and
support.
Also for children, the right way of relating to their teachers can be difficult, namely when they are either autistic or
disturbed. Children from abusive homes often show fractured relationship patterns in that they tend to hijack the relationship with a teacher in a way to exclude other children,
and to become ‘clinging’ in order to compensate for their
inner void and feelings of inadequacy. This often presents a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 490

challenge to the teacher and in many cases teachers are actually overwhelmed by these children and unconsciously bestow more affection upon them than they bestow upon the
normal children. This in turn is detrimental for their relationships with the normal children and can thereby lead to fractured group communication.
In these cases as well, support is needed as teachers
normally do not dispose of the psychological training to
handle these situations. This may be either vocational support, that is, training that is deliberately preventive for handling those constellations, or training that is given to teachers ad-hoc, by a psychologist or child psychologist.
To summarize, the relationship aspect cannot be cut away
from the educational relationship without fracturing that relationship in its very essence. This is a truth that needs to be
thoroughly understood by educational policy makers; it
needs to be a part of the general educational approach of a
nation today.
Without the relational aspect, education will inevitably
bring about narcissistic personalities, people who are emotionally withdrawn and who are at pains with relationships as
their relational skills are poor. However, especially today in
our networked societies we need socially highly skilled people, which means that they should be as much as possible

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 491

emotionally mature and autonomous, and unafraid of social
contacts and group interaction.
The next point in my educational agenda is to move from
child protection to serving children. This is best done
through a redefinition of social relations that grants more
autonomy to the child, and from early age. It should not be
left to parents only to define what autonomy means.
Autonomy proves to be a fundamental factor in the process of personal growth and astonishingly, tribal cultures
around the world show that it is well possible to grant children a much greater sphere of autonomy as this is the case
in our civilized world. But children who are tethered to home
and family lack the social skills to really move around with
ease when they have grown up. They have to learn these
skills in childhood, not later on when they are grown up. Relational patterns namely are laid down in the neuronet of our
brain, for they belong to the fundamental ‘preferred pathways’ that neurology has discovered since a few decades.
Hence, governments have a substantial interest in defining, through appropriate social and educational policies,
what autonomy means in the growth process for children and
adolescents. This is so because more our youth develops social skills, the less they will be later dependent on the state
and the more they will have the necessary skills to survive on

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 492

their own and build their social and business relations with
ease and competence.
It is at this point where sexual education comes in which
should not be explicit but so to speak underlying, as a noninterference pattern. In the framework of permissive education, this has been thought through already since decades
but the concept was turned into oblivion through the upcoming of tougher educational concepts that put the stress
upon protection and family enclosure.
In my view, these newer concepts are myopic in that they
overlook the importance of freedom in all human growth.
Children are not different from adults in that they grow better in freedom than in a corset of ‘moral’ duties and prohibitions that curtail down their emotional life. Children need
emotional and sexual freedom and this doesn’t mean they
will behave in tactless or obscene ways. It is often not understood that freedom brings about responsibility, not chaos.
When it brings chaos, it was a misunderstood notion of
freedom. Real freedom brings responsibility and accountability. This is valid for children just as much as for adults. But of
course, it needs political courage in our days to bring such
an agenda through parliament and to convince educational
authorities to apply the concepts that are based on correct
research and rational policy making than to stay with oldfashioned moralistic ideas which bring about the ‘good boys’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 493

and ‘good girls’ that today do not fit any more in an open
society that is basically freedom loving and violence-hostile.
06/12 — More Public Education
More Public Education Makes for Less Crime.
More Prison Miles Make for More Crime.
The United States government increased the budget for
the whole of law enforcement in 2009, and projected $26.5
billion for 2010.
The enacted Justice budget for 2008 was $22.7 billion.
The US Defense budget was $481.4 billion in 2008, a 62percent increase over 2001.
Additionally, $141.7 billion were allocated for fighting ‘the
Global War on Terror.’ Together this is more than half a trillion dollars spent for defense purposes only. The budget on
Education for 2008 was enacted as $57.2 billion, which is
about than one tenth of the military budget.
It is notorious that the North American Natives and other
tribal peoples do not know draconian punishments and believe in natural justice, which is the spiritual law of karma, the
universal law of cause and effect. As a result, they do not imprison people, or if they do, they do it only for deliberate
murder and the fine is one day, twenty-four hours, not more.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 494

This idea is correct because nobody can think more in
twenty-four years than they can think in twenty-four hours.
The natives know that depriving a person from social life and
natural relations with others, which include sexual relations, is
the worst punishment there is. And they also know that the
loss is not only on the side of the person herself, but also on
the side of the community.
Our societies lose out on a gigantic amount of human resources because many highly intelligent and potentially creative people sit for years and some of them for decades in
prisons and jails and are deprived of the basic opportunity
for unfolding their intrinsic gifts and talents; had these persons remained in freedom, their personal unfoldment and
creativity would have substantially enriched society at large,
that is, the cultural soil of the whole metagroup.
Discarding people out from the social group is not an intelligent, nor a human practice. It is really madness, a totally
destructive social policy!
When I say this I do not even talk about the huge amount
of money wasted for criminal justice every year, which could
be used to substantially stock up the educational budget.
It is a destructive paradigm for human creativity and for
humanity in any given society. And the worst is of course to
imprison people for love, for love and sex relations, however

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 495

these relations are to be named and qualified; to imprison
people for love is a cultural and legal perversion.
The modern state’s argument for law enforcement in the
form of deprivation of freedom to be a ‘human’ measure
compared to what was practiced in former centuries is pure
cynicism. And it is simply not true.
Prison fines have been raised constantly over time, and
right now have reached levels that are beyond reasonableness. Let me give an example. In my quality as a coach, I
have supported, over five years, an American citizen who had
sex with the two adolescent boys of his wife. The boys had
been from her former marriage. This went on for several
years until the woman found out about it and called the police.
The man was convicted and received a 135 years jail sentence (in Virginia). The man was a self-declared boylover and
did not contest the allegation in court that he had married
the woman only for gaining access to the boys.
His admittedly ludicrous approach to marriage was
judged as a betrayal; the obvious fact that the boys agreed
to the sexual relations was completely disregarded. The man
was given a rape sentence instead of one for statutory rape.
That was one of the reasons for the high sentence, another

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 496

was the simple fact that he was a poor man and could not
afford a good lawyer.
Whatever one may think about such an admittedly controversial case, to imprison a man for lifetime for love is a legal perversion, and a complete judicial madness altogether.
The man had not been violent in any way, and the boys
clearly testified as to the tenderness of the relations, including the sexual relations, over the whole of the relationship.
The death penalty is practiced by several states of the
United States. From a legal policy point of view, the death
penalty has since long been considered as wrong and inhuman, in that it was seen to have no potential deterrent effect
over other forms of punishment.
In addition, the moral justification of such a measure is
difficult as a state who kills has little or no convincing power
that killing is not right, and must be avoided. Legal policy
analysis has shown over the last decades that what the death
penalty produces is a brutalization of crime, as a psychological defense reaction.
It has clearly been shown, as I myself have studied it at
law school in Germany, that the death penalty brings about
more crime, and other negative side effects than no death
penalty. That is why not only the nation states in Europe, but
also the European Union (EU) have explicitly abolished the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 497

death penalty. No state member of the European Union can
legally institute the death penalty without at once losing its
membership in the Union.
In addition, one of the states practicing the death penalty, Texas, has repeatedly electrocuted to death young boys
of sixteen years, which is to be considered as a governmentally committed crime. The death penalty against children is
violating international conventions for the right and protection of children, as well as the United States Constitution.
When a nation declares it fosters peace and democracy,
and wants to bring these values to the world community,
then it should be taken by its word. In addition, it should be
watched when it has finished preaching its gospel.
What the nation does since 2001 is to increase the military budget and proportionally decrease the educational
budget. Every child understands that raising military budgets
leads to a potentially higher incidence of war; in fact this
truth has been proven over the whole course of human history.
Military budgets are declared as defensive, not offensive,
but they are offensive in every respect. What would you think
if you go in a business meeting and you see that your potential business associate is wearing a weapon attached to his or
her belt? Would this increase, or rather decrease, your trust

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 498

in the person, and your trust in the functionality of your business association? And would you not judge such behavior as
offensive?
With military budgets it’s the same; the psychological effect is exactly the same. Go and ask any small state in the
world if they trust that America, maintaining the highest military budget ever reached in the course of human history is
doing this only for peace purposes, for deterring others from
war, and for protecting its citizens! You will get the reply that
these are nice words and phrases and that the political reality
was ‘unfortunately’ different.
The political reality is that the United States of America
have since their establishment engaged wars with other nations, all around the world, and they have done the first step
to trigger those wars, as they have done it again with Iraq,
just a decade ago. These wars were thus offensive attacks,
and they were led with the tanks, the bombs, and soldiers
that were initially financed for ‘pure defense’ purposes.
This little paragraph should be taken serious especially by
those citizens who still think that what governments say is of
importance.
As an international lawyer I say it is of no importance, because governments tend to say what brings them profit, what

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 499

serves their interest. What governments really think can be
seen in the way they act, and in no other way.
Proposal 6/12
I have already outlined the limits of criminal law, when it
goes against nature and the human nature, by projecting assumptions which are the result of a negative and life-denying
worldview.
To repeat it, from a constitutional perspective, to declare
non-harmful human behavior a crime is problematic, for it is
not the business of the law to restrict human behavior where
it is not doing harm to anybody. A state that practices such
lawmaking must be questioned as to its legitimacy, for the
state acts in a democracy as a representative of the people.
When such representation goes virulently against the interest of the people, it must be questioned and if necessary,
reformed. In other words, a government that uses subtle or
lesser subtle ways of controlling people through the threat of
draconian punishment for any little behavior that is not
‘mainstream’ cannot be called a democratic government. It is
more of a government that systematically terrorizes people
and holds them under an umbrella of hot fear that leads in
the long run to public insanity.
A long-term project to give prisoners access to transcendental meditation has shown surprising results. Where such

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 500

has been done as for example in Switzerland, in India and in
several African nations, the result was that prisoners’ behavior changed positively. In Africa the results were so dramatically positive that within months whole prisons were empty
for the authorities assessed these prisoners after several
months of meditation as ‘completely different persons’ and
they were freed before the end of their fines, and there was
no recidivism of any kind! These results have been published
widely and are available in the public domain.
Hence, it is but a question of political will to implement
strategies of smooth behavior change that are not thrown
over the head of the citizen but proposed, in a human manner, and that are respectful. Jailing people for years and decades is barbarous as a behavior and when states continue
behaving in such a way in our times of change, how can they
expect the citizen to change?
The budget needs to be completely remodeled and priority needs to be given to education, healthcare and humane
strategies for long-term changes in behavior that are beneficial to the community.
All strategies that operate on threat, fear and punishment
have to be definitely abolished for if coercion is used by the
government, it must not wonder why citizens then also use
coercion for achieving their goals.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 501

Only a basically integer and nonviolent government can
build the legitimacy to expect nonviolent behavior from their
citizens. This is not the case in the present situation, as I have
demonstrated above, hence the need for a fundamental
change in policymaking.
07/12 — Free Education
Free Education Serves the Child.
Funded Disinformation Serves State Control Over the Child.
The media world is currently changing. It used to be entirely commercial, and commercialized, especially in the
United States.
I argue that commercial media are not free media. It’s of
course already better than the media in a communist or otherwise totalitarian system where the government controls the
media. It’s well one step ahead to have commercial media,
but another step is needed to have free media.
This step is to have free media in both senses of the
word, free in the sense of freely available at no charge and
free in the sense of non-biased and as much as possible objective.
Both these free media are slowly and gradually emerging
on the cultural scene. Let me give an example, Wikipedia. It’s
freely accessible in all countries except totalitarian Banana

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 502

republics such as Myanmar or North Korea, it’s free of
charge, and its content is, cum grano salis, objective; as humans can never be totally objective, we need to honor the
effort more than the result.
The effort for Wikipedia to become ever more objective
is there, is visible, it is a fact. This fact needs to be seen and
honored, for it’s a good and new beginning. If Wikipedia was
a club that defends certain interests and manipulates the information, this would be found out and certainly infringe
upon the private funding received.
As for now, it can be said that this funding is generous,
coming from all walks of society, which reflects a certain appreciation for this endeavor. Wikipedia can be seen as the
start of a new media paradigm! Much is presently emerging
on this sector, it’s all free, and it’s more or less useful, and
without grayed-out conditions attached to it.
When I say media should be non-commercial, I mean
they should be free of commercials. Media should not be financed through commercials.
When it’s the industry that funds the media, the media
serve the needs of the industry. This, every child understands. How the industry forges the media toward their
needs is a matter a little more subtle to understand, for it
certainly can’t be done by brute force, or in the way Silvio

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 503

Berlusconi used to call up Italian television stations, in the
midst of a talk show or the news, to shout at the presenter
with all his muscle power as Italy’s president.
For example, Wikipedia contains much critical content.
The page on the Coca Cola Company quotes the rumors
and facts to what extend the soft drink may be detrimental
for our health, or the health of our children. If the industry
was the sole funding agent for Wikipedia, through commercials, such content would most likely have been suppressed.
Many ‘free’ radio stations around the world are dependent on money they get through the insertion of commercials.
To speak in these cases of ‘free’ radios is ridiculous in view of
the fact that sponsors do tend to be very sensible to the content they are funding. This means in practice that if the content goes against their commercial interests, they won’t hesitate to cut down the funding.
The only way to get around this hurdle is to receive funding from all parts of society, without any specific target
group, through free donations.
Proposal 7/12
What can the government do in the media world? Should
the government be active at all in the media world? I know
this is a sensible question. The government should per se
not interfere in the media, as a matter of democratic free-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 504

dom, free speech, and thus, stay away as much as possible
from censorship.
About that, we all agree. But what about the commercialization of the media, what about the corporate use of the
media, if not the corporate dominance in the media?
Professor Noam Chomsky showed in one of his productions to what extent the New York Times censors information
out from print, mainly because of corporate or government
interests standing in the way. He reported in this movie that,
for example, the genocide in Cambodia got huge coverage
because if was associated with ‘communism’ while the genocide in East Timor (Indonesia) got as good as no coverage
because it was not associated with ‘communism.’
As I suggest to change the social modeling for the male
in our mainstream media and video game productions, the
question here is one of policy making. What is the way to get
there for the government without censorship of the media?
I think only a change in early education can prepare the
ground for a new paradigm of male self-definition to occur.
Hence, the focus is to be directed on the drafting of educational curricula that foster a male role model that is a bifurcation from the patriarchal view of the male as the hunter and
outdoor kind of guy, and that implements, in the education
of boys values such as acceptance, self-knowledge, positive

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 505

emotionality, intuition, caring and caregiving, sensuality and
humility, and in the education of girls, values such as selfassertion, knowledge, positive rationality, independence,
critical thinking, autonomy and natural pride.
As the young generations today are very much focused
on the role models they receive through video games and
similar productions, it is not by interference in this industry
that the government should proceed. For this would only stir
revolt and bewilderment.
The change will come through a change of the ‘market’
once children are educated with a different set of values, a
set of values namely that is not serving corporate interests
but the true interest of the child to become an autonomous,
self-reliant and emotionally stable person.
08/12 — Politically Neutral Science
Politically Neutral Science Promotes Truth.
Politically Correct Science Promotes Ideology.
More than 70% of American scientists are funded by the
military. They are obviously not neutral.
It goes against common sense to assume that scientists
serve the pure needs of science and are objective in their research when they are in practice government-funded. It is a
fact that more than two thirds of all American scientists are

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 506

funded by the military. It is naive to consider in such a case
the total amount of this accumulated research, every year, as
‘objective.’
I would go as far as saying that in any other country of the
world, except banana republics and undeveloped nations,
research tends to be more objective than in the enlightened
nation.
Now, what I pointed out negatively, can also be put positively. If the wrong research is funded, this is sad enough, but
it is still more devastating when the right research is not
funded at all.
When I say wrong or right, I mean that of course not in a
moral sense, but in the sense of scientifically valid, objective
and verifiable — or not.
In the eyes of politicians, science that is done without regard of the ‘official version’ of things looks nasty and queer.
And yet it is this kind of science that really brings human
progress. I mention only two scientists here, whose names
are famous, but in the ears of many, infamous. They are Wilhelm Reich and Nikola Tesla. Both were not only not funded
by the system, but were met with suspicion and denial if not
outright aggression. Reich died in jail for one of his scientific
discoveries, not for having stolen golden spoons.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 507

That research must obey to ethical rules and laws was not
so obvious until the emergence of genetics and biotechnology. It was more obvious regarding the protection of lab
animals from senseless tortures and death inflicted ‘for scientific observation.’ There are now countless associations for
the protection of animals, targeting ultimately at the emergence of ‘the vegetarian society’ which is certainly a noble
goal.
But it seems to me that the general quest for clear ethical
rules in all scientific research is even a nobler and more important goal, for what is presently happening in genetics is
alarming. Let me report what one of our finest ecologists and
science gurus, Fritjof Capra, has to say about the subject.
Capra writes in The Turning Point (1982/1987):
—Another fallacy of the reductionist approach in genetics is the
belief that the character traits of an organism are uniquely determined by its genetic makeup. This ‘genetic determinism’ is a direct
consequence of regarding living organisms as machines controlled
by linear chains of cause and effect. It ignores the fact that the organisms are multileveled systems, the genes being imbedded in the
chromosomes, the chromosomes functioning within the nuclei of
their cells, the cells incorporated in the tissues, and so on. All these
levels are involved in mutual interactions that influence the organism’s development and result in wide variations of the ‘genetic
blueprint.’ (Id., p. 108)

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 508

—More recently the fallacy of genetic determinism has given rise to
a widely discussed theory known as sociobiology, in which all social
behavior is seen as predetermined by genetic structure. Numerous
critics have pointed out that this view is not only scientifically unsound but also quite dangerous. It encourages pseudoscientific
justifications for racism and sexism by interpreting differences in
human behavior as genetically preprogrammed and unchangeable.
(Id., p. 109)

More specifically on the subject of biotechnology, genetic manipulation, and the devastating consequences of
their unethical maneuvering, Capra writes in his later book
The Hidden Connections (2002):
—Geneticists soon discovered that there is a huge gap between the
ability to identify genes that are involved in the development of
disease and the understanding of their precise function, let alone
their / manipulation to obtain a desired outcome. As we now know,
this gap is a direct consequence of the mismatch between the linear
causal chains of genetic determination and the nonlinear epigenetic
networks of biological reality. (Id., p. 178)
—The reality of genetic engineering is much more messy. At the
current state of the art, geneticists cannot control what happens in
the organism. They can insert a gene into the nucleus of a cell with
the help of a specific gene transfer vector, but they never know
whether the cell will incorporate it into its DNA, nor where the new
gene will be located, nor what effects this will have on the organism.
Thus, genetic engineering proceeds by trial and error in a way that
is extremely wasteful. The average success rate of genetic experiments is only about 1 percent, because the living background of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 509

host organism, which determines the outcome of the experiment,
remains largely inaccessible to the engineering mentality that underlies our current biotechnologies. (Id.)
—The real ethical problems surrounding the current cloning procedure are rooted in the biological developmental problems it generates. They are a consequence of the crucial fact that the manipulated cell from which the embryo grows is a hybrid of cellular components from two different animals. Its nucleus stems from one organism, while the rest of the cell, which contains the entire epigenetic network, stems from another. Because of the enormous complexity of the epigenetic network and its interactions with the genome, the two components will only very rarely be compatible. (Id.,
183)
—With the new chemicals, farming became mechanized and energy
intensive, favoring large corporate farmers with sufficient capital,
and forcing most of the traditional single-family farmers to abandon
their land. All over the world, large numbers of people have left rural areas and joined the masses of urban unemployed as victims of
the Green Revolution. (Id., 186)
—The long-term effects of excessive chemical farming have been
disastrous for the health of the soil and for human health, for our
social relations, and for the entire natural environment on which our
well-being and future survival depends. As the same crops were
planted and fertilized synthetically year after year, the balance of the
ecological processes in the soil was disrupted; the amount of organic matter diminished, and with it the soil’s ability to retain moisture. The resulting changes in soil texture entailed a multitude of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 510

interrelated harmful consequences — loss of humus, dry and sterile
soil, wind and water erosion, and so on. (Id.)
—The ecological imbalance caused by monocultures and excessive
use of chemicals also resulted in enormous increases in pests and
crop diseases, which farmers countered by spraying ever larger
doses of pesticides in vicious cycles of depletion and destruction.
The hazards for / human health increased accordingly as more and
more toxic chemicals seeped through the soil, contaminated the
water table and showed up in our food. (Id., 186–187)
—Through a series of massive mergers and because of the tight
control afforded by genetic technologies, an unprecedented concentration of ownership and control over food production is now
under way. The top ten agrochemical companies control 85 percent
of the global market; the top five control virtually the entire market
for genetically modified (GM) seeds. Monsanto alone bought into
the major seed companies in India and Brazil, in addition to buying
numerous biotech companies, while DuPont bought Pioneer HiBred, the world’s largest seed company. The goal of these corporate giants is to create a single world agricultural system in which
they would be able to control all stages of food production and
manipulate both food supplies and / prices. (Id., 187–188)
—Biotechnology proponents have argued repeatedly that GM
seeds are crucial to feed the world, using the same flawed reasoning that was advanced for decades by the proponents of the Green
Revolution. Conventional food production, they maintain, will not
keep pace with the world population. (Id., 188)

In addition, it should be considered from a police perspective that the principle of peer review as an established

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 511

practice all over the world, is in final account destructive for
the progress of science.
I have myself never found scientific recognition because
of the simple fact that my scientific papers were not subjected to peer review. This started back in the 1980s when my
doctoral thesis in international law was done at the wrong
university in the wrong country, and in the wrong language.
I was awarded two scholarships from Swiss universities,
Lausanne and Geneva, in addition to a Fulbright Travel Grant
for my postgraduate work at the University of Georgia, USA.
Despite having received the latter award, for ethical reasons,
I returned to Switzerland to finalize my thesis. However, as
my research involved an extensive review of Anglo-American
law of evidence, Swiss scholars had no idea what I was talking about in my thesis, at the law faculty of the University of
Geneva. My thesis director openly admitted he was incompetent to evaluate my thesis.
I prided myself writing the thesis in French language,
which was well boosting my skills of the French language,
but not my academic recognition. French and Swiss scholars
did not care a single bit about the importance of the burden
of proof in matters of foreign sovereign immunity litigation,
while many lawyers in the United States and Great Britain are
specialized in this kind of affairs.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 512

As a result, I clearly failed not because of lacking efforts,
or lacking brilliance, but because of being reviewed by incompetent people. For the public presentation of my thesis,
the so-called soutenance, Lady Fox, Q.C. was invited from
London, a leading specialist on foreign sovereign immunity.
Lady Fox gave me summa cum laude and was angered that
the other members of the jury did not follow and gave me
bad notes, doing this, as she openly told me, because ‘they
have not understood a bit of your thesis.’
That is why I can say that the requirement of peer review
is a stumble stone for many brilliant researchers who, like me,
end up in oblivion because their financial situation did not
allow them to pay the tuition of a good university in a country where their work would elicit academic interest.
Unfortunately, I did not listen to advice to stay in the
United States, refusing the offer of becoming professor there
and publish my thesis, as I thought it was unethical to do so
because I got the scholarships from Switzerland.
Destiny showed me that my ethical scruples were misplaced, as in the United States I surely would have got the
peer review of my work that I so badly needed.
Lady Fox had asked me to come to England, but she
could not offer me a scholarship or assistantship which is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 513

why, at that time, I was unable to accept her offer because of
mere financial constraints.
My thesis was not printed either. Printing costs being excessively high in Switzerland, I would have had to invest thirteen thousand Swiss Francs.
The university had offered me a grant of five thousand
Swiss Francs but I did not have the remaining eight thousand
Swiss francs for financing the printing of my thesis. Hence, to
this day, my doctoral thesis, that took me five hard years to
accomplish, is not printed, and not published anywhere.
Eventually, in 2010, I offered an English version of my thesis work it to Oxford University Press (OUP) and they refused
publishing it with the most dubious reasons that one can
come up with. It is really a scandal! I have however finally
published it with amazon.com and feel honored and rewarded about this great opportunity. But it does not sell, and
nobody gives feedback on it!
If this is not a story to consider, I don’t know any that
could be more convincing of the fact that the requirement of
peer review is a guillotine for many brilliant researchers.
Proposal 8/12
The government should develop a functional view of science, not a view that is conditioned by the ‘usefulness’ of

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 514

science for specific agendas, as for example national defense
or child protection, feminism or homosexuality.
These are all partial interests while the overwhelming objective of science is observation of nature and the systematic
cataloguing of data in a comprehensive system which can be
shared among scientists and the public at large because of a
concise scientific terminology.
It has been assessed by erudite researchers on linguistics
such as Professor Noam Chomsky that not only science, but
any kind of information sharing, be it intuitive, can only proceed from a basis of shared terminology, where the term
‘terminology’ has to be seen in its widest sense. This is involved in all human verbal communication. But in science, we
are at a higher level still of such communication, a level
namely where imprecision can be fatal to the scientific system and scientific exchange. Hence the need for a much
more precise terminology than that which is used in daily life.
Let me give an example. Before our science recognized
the field, zero-point field, quantum field, unified field or
quantum vacuum, which was only a recent achievement, this
notion was discussed as an alternative science doctrine under the most various names.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 515

Precisely because the notion was heretic under the
Church’s science codex, the whole of this research had to be
underground, hidden from the mainstream, and secret.
It was among the alchemists that it started, mainly with
Paracelsus (1493–1541), the great natural healer. He called
this subtle energy vis vitalis or mumia. After him, there was
Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772), the great scholar, who
discovered exactly the same and called it spirit energy. The
next was the German doctor Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–
1815) who called the vital energy animal magnetism and was
able to produce spontaneous healing by applying magnets,
only to find out later on that the healing would occur in the
same way without the magnets, as an effect of his own body.
After Mesmer, we got the German chemist and nobleman
Baron Carl Ludwig Freiherr von Reichenbach (1788–1869)
who called the subtle energy Odic Force or simply Od.
The next in line within this alternative science tradition
was Dr. Wilhelm Reich (1897–1957) who called this energy
orgone. His contemporary Georges Lakhovsky (1968–1942), a
Russian electric engineer found the same through experiments with cell resonance and came to call the cosmic radiation universion.
Finally, before the great change to quantum physics,
there was Harold Saxton Burr (1989–1973) who called this

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 516

subtle energy the L-Field. This was the first time that a scientist saw that it’s actually not an energy but a field, a pattern,
and that the term ‘energy’ was misleading because it is confounded with kinetic energy. This energy field has absolutely
nothing to do with kinetic energy, or rather, kinetic energy is
a result of it, as all life is a result of it. This subtle energy field
is, as we know today, the creator force in the universe.
This research showed me that without a consistent terminology science is actually jungle science. I created that terminology while it’s not the one that is now used in quantum
physics. I have created it because it integrates the old traditions while quantum physics and its new vocabulary shuns
the old traditions by denying their very existence, by claiming all of this was a ‘new discovery’, as for example Ervin
Laszlo does in his book Science and the Akashic Field (2004)
where he mentions not with one word all of this research.
This is exactly the deplorable hubris of our modern science, which has its root in government funding and the resulting attitude of funded scientists to produce research results that are ‘politically correct.’ Hence, the need for a
change.
09/12 — Humanism and Realism
Humanism and Realism is Objective Perception.
Idealism and Ideology is Distorted Perception.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 517

J. Krishnamurti has convincingly shown in his talks that
our culture is pervaded with a misplaced idealism that widely
distorts our perception interface and sense of reality.
We by and large divide life in what is and what should be,
thereby putting up a fence between the world and our idealized version of it. This split really is pathological because it
distorts our entire sense of living. It leads straight to fragmentation in that we will be divided in a realist, that is, the
one who sees what is, and an idealist or ideologist who longs
for what should be, ‘if the world was ideal.’
Much blood has been shed for social ideas and ideals
that were asocial in the sense that they were bringing people
up against each other. All bloody revolutions were founded
upon one or the other social ideal. However, it is not with
ideals that we can improve society, our human togetherness,
and our social and legal policies. It’s only possible when we
make the cultural split undone and see the world as a platform of infinite possibilities, as a framework that operates on
a quantum level in realms of pure potentiality.
As all creation is an inside-out movement from the quantum level, the realm of thoughts, the invisible realms of emotion and imagination, toward tangible reality, we are shutting
ourselves off from being creative when we put up ideals. To
be creative means to live without any ideals, and to remain
open for total perception of what is.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 518

This is why change, positive change, for our society can
only start from the moment we are living with what is, discarding all ideas of what should be. This means we build vision instead of daydreaming, we build viable concepts instead of political science fiction.
Social utopias are on the same level as ideals, they are
another vintage of ideals, and as such they are useless in real
and tangible social policy making. They have contributed to
the split paradigm that puts up the ‘negative human’ as a
fact, and the ‘positive human’ as an ideal.
Fact is that the human is perfect, and all true religion recognizes this fact. But our religions are not natural since many
hundreds of years, they are far from the truth, which is why
they project on the human their negative life paradigm, coming up with the false idea that the human being is somehow
corrupt, ‘born in sin,’ imperfect and mean, and needs to be
bettered, reformed, improved and reborn as a ‘spiritual being.’
All this is complete nonsense. The human being is spiritual by nature and doesn’t need to be improved. All creation
is perfect; it needs no improvement. Why things went wrong
over the whole course of patriarchy till today is that human
beings do not consider themselves as what they are, but
have collectively developed a negative life paradigm that

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 519

considers the ‘negative human,’ the impossible human, as
the social reality.
I contend that we have to focus on the positive or possible human, not the impossible or negative human which is a
mere projection.
The real human is the possible human. Only on this basis
can we eventually forge viable, sustainable social and legal
paradigms that are reasonable enough for the whole of society to be accepted, respected, and followed.
What we have right now is a situation that ultimately
leads to hidden rebellion, anarchy, and civil war. Our social
and legal policies, in vital areas of life, regarding our pleasure function, for example, are outdated, irrational, and even
insane, and what they do in the long run is to bring people
up against their government, and against each other.
Thus, they are socially and culturally destructive! The
mass media know to profit from this abysmally ludicrous and
dangerous social situation, by playing on the perverse feelings of many a ‘homo normalis’ who needs to abreact their
silent hate and inner revolt against ‘the system.’
This really leads to more violence, more social dissent,
more upheaval and in last resort, if nothing is done to remedy the wrong policies, to civil war.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 520

The whole of patriarchy was not based upon a rational
and sane assessment of nature, and of human nature. It
could not get there simply because it never wanted to accept nature, which means to accept the female and female
values.
Hence, instead of assessing and integrating nature, it has
projected intellectual assumptions upon nature, thereby distorting human perception to a degree that it resulted in an
upside-down view of life, which is a process I call cultural
perversion.
All original pre-patriarchal tribal cultures were nonjudgmental; they did not judge life. Instead, they understood
the subtle logic of the universe and therefore were leading
plain, whole and integral lives. As a result, they lived peacefully, and in positive communication with nature. Idealism
was unknown to them.
Idealism is an intellectual construct that is a result of frustration, and disintegration from the wholeness of life, our
natural continuum, which includes the emotional, the sexual,
and the spiritual dimension. All these three dimensions were
discarded out by patriarchy!
Patriarchy’s morality code posited that any ‘good life’ is to
be lived in a non-emotional, non-sexual and non-spiritual
dimension. Emotionality was replaced by fierce and arrogant

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 521

intellectualism! Sexuality was replaced by compulsive childbreeding through raping the marriage partner, thereby institutionalizing rape as the single most accepted sexual act,
while paying lip-service to the contrary.
And spirituality was replaced by compulsory religion in
the form of worshipping a paranoid and murderous godfigure, called YAHWEH, that was a mere projection of human
imperfection put on the stage of an imaginary ‘eternal theater.’
So where are we now? Are we still entangled in the paranoid plot called patriarchy that is on stage since five thousand years and that preaches persecution, torture, murder
and death as its prime values, or are we getting beyond this
cultural madness, once for all?
Realism is a notion that was completely distorted by Cartesian science, and generally, the Cartesian reductionist
worldview that discards out more from life than it admits,
ending up with a residue or a torso of life — a mutilated construct that is based upon paranoia, not upon human sanity.
A realistic worldview, under the Cartesian paradigm, was
a total reduction of life, to the point to end up with a caricature of life and living. However, this is not what realism is
about when resorting to the original meaning of the term.
Realism means to be objective, as much as possible. Humans

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 522

cannot be totally objective, they are objective and subjective
at the same time. The only thing humans can do with regard
to their perception of reality is to strive for objectiveness — 
without ever attaining it.
The false and doctrinaire view under patriarchy was that
the male is by nature objective and the female by nature
subjective. Needless to say that, by now, this is recognized
by a majority of social and natural scientists to be a pure
myth. The truth is that females tend to be more objective
than males, for example in the science world.
This has been demonstrated by research over and over.
Females tend to be more courageous than males to defend their objective scientific assessment when under stress
or being criticized.
Females also are more redundant to react objectively
when under pressure than males in the same kind of situations. Incidentally, males tend to be more violent, that is,
psychologically lesser robust than women in situations involving high psychic stress.
Hence, being realistic means to be more grounded in
tangible reality than this was and is the case in cultures that
are founded upon religious ideologies, such as, for example,
orthodox, fundamentalist Christian or Muslim societies.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 523

Now, from this insight, there is but a step to see it embedded in the human world, in the human sphere.
The human being, to repeat it, is gifted with both a tendency to be objective and to be subjective, to be rational
and to be irrational. Both qualities are complementary in the
sense that humans need both these qualities to function
completely, freely and creatively. When irrational reasoning
and behavior is discarded out of communication, the communication process will be distorted; incidentally, this leads
to the paradoxical result that when communication is forced
to be rational, it will become more irrational.
When we focus upon human life and society and ask what
is realistic behavior, or a realistic attitude, we have to consider the total human, that means the human who is both rational and irrational. This will lead us quite automatically to a
humanistic understanding of life and humanity, and of human
behavior. This, in turn, will lead us to be more open and
permissive regarding humans, and thus more human-friendly.
From this starting point, our social and legal policies will
be much more adapted to the nature of humans, instead of
being, as now, adapted to the nature of compulsive morality
and thus to an intellectual construct that has no real existence in life. To see this means to understand that our present social policies are made for dummies, not for humans.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 524

10/12 — Promoting Pleasure-Seeking Behaviors
Promoting Pleasure as a Positive Life Function Reduces Violence.
Condemning Pleasure as Negative Morality Raises Violence.
It has been demonstrated by research over the last four
decades that there is a mutually exclusive relationship between pleasure and violence.
Back in 1973, the British neurologist Herbert James
Campbell published a thought-provoking book, entitled The
Pleasure Areas. In his book Campbell retraces his own research but also the research of a number of other neurologists who came to the result to assume a mutually exclusive
relationship, in our brain, between pleasure in violence.
To put it in a formula, when the brain runs on pleasure, it
doesn’t run on violence, and vice versa. Locally in the brain,
there are regions for pleasure and for violence. When the
pleasure areas are stimulated, the violence areas are inactive,
and vice versa.
This means that when a society fosters pleasure, it is little
violent, and when a society such as ours says ‘violence is better than sex,’ it fosters violence through a marked reduction
of the pleasure function.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 525

Next, the American developmental neuropsychologist
James W. Prescott, PhD, ventured into the daringly new and
controversial research on violence that is now to be considered the leading edge in neuroscience, behavioral psychology and research on positive human evolution.
I have retraced Prescott’s revolutionary research over a
number of years, for it was never published conclusively in
one research volume, but is scattered all over the Internet.
The truth is that Prescott never found a publisher, and that,
once again, is symptomatic for our allegedly so democratic
society!
When it goes to unveil the hidden connections that explain why our culture is so violent, and why it spreads this violence worldwide, there are only closed doors. Back in 2010, I
had published all those findings, including the United Nations research on violence against children in one monograph, and the book, while it was first published with Createspace / Amazon, was about one month later torn down by
Amazon and blocked in my Createspace account.
No reason was given for this barbarous undemocratic
censoring of valid content and all my dozens of emails remained unreplied to until this very day!
Recently, Dr. Prescott has published a DVD entitled The
Origins of Love & Violence: Sensory Deprivation and the De-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 526

veloping Brain, which contains a wealth of research documentaries on the roots of violence in our culture.
I discovered the writings of Dr. Prescott back in the 1980s,
at a time when I was evaluating the research of Ashley Montagu, Frederick Leboyer, Michel Odent, Alexander Lowen,
and Bronislaw Malinowski.
The two major articles written by James W. Prescott, that I
discuss in several of my own books, were coming to me like a
revelation to a question I had asked since more than a decade: ‘What are the roots of violence?’
Knowing from anthropological studies and from spiritual
work that violence is not the natural condition for humanity,
but a sort of emotional and cultural perversion that results
from deep hurt suffered early in childhood, and probably
also from scars that go back to former lives, I was grateful to
have found at least one conclusive research that not only
analyzed our condition, but also pointed to viable solutions.
These solutions that James W. Prescott suggests, are
changes in the process of child birth and our educational system, a permissive and nonviolent child-rearing paradigm, social permissiveness regarding premarital sex and a definite
legal prohibition of physical punishment of children in both
the home and school together with effective government
collaboration in fighting domestic violence.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 527

To begin with, regarding infant care, Prescott stresses the
importance of primary symbiosis between mother and infant
during the first eighteen months of the infant, abundant tactile stimulation of infants and babies, using techniques of
child massage, as well as co-sleeping between parents and
small children.
It is interesting to note that the suggestions Prescott
comes up with from his perspective as a peace researcher
are very much in accordance with those suggested by Jean
Liedloff, in her book The Continuum Concept (1977/1986),
which is a vivid account of the integrated and wistful lifestyle
of native peoples.
Also, there is a striking similarity of solutions offered for
the same problems by Ashley Montagu, as a result of his
decades of skin research, and by the French obstetricians
Michel Odent and Frederick Leboyer who have looked beyond the fence of obstetrics and into what Odent called Primal Health, to formulate a holistic concept of health and
wellbeing.
James W. Prescott has now realized together with Michael Mendizza the educational DVD for the prevention of
violence and the transmission of the important research insights, so as to raise public awareness of the etiology of violence and the importance of paradigm changes in social sciences as well as governmental policy making. In detail, the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 528

DVD contains over three hours of historical film footage, indepth interviews and a comprehensive research database
(1966–2008).
Twenty-five years of NICHD brain-behavior research
document how early sensory deprivation, abuse and neglect
patterns the brain for a lifetime of depression and violence.
Dr. Prescott’s research also found that baby-carrying during the first year of life and breast feeding for two and a half
years or longer optimizes brain-behavioral development for
peaceful, harmonious and egalitarian behaviors.
Here are more detailed research results that document
the following principles, valid for all cultures:
—Pain and pleasure experienced early in life shapes the
developing brain for peace or violence;
—Complex neural networks are produced by sensory
stimulation; impoverished neural networks by sensory deprivation;
—These two sensory processes shape two different
brains: the neurodissociative or neurointegrative brain;
—Neural networks formed early in life influence the neural networks in the later developing neocortical brain, the
brain system for the formation of social and moral values of
culture;

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 529

—Children reared under conditions of pleasure (affectional bonding) are placed on a life path of affection, peace,
harmony and egalitarianism;
—Most children reared under conditions of suffering (affectional deprivation) are placed on a life path of depression,
violence, authoritarianism and suicide;
—Violent cultures impair brain development — the neurodissociative brain, which prevents the development of the
neurointegrative brain and peaceful behaviors;
—Cultures throughout the world must recognize the full
equality of the feminine with the masculine, if affectionate
and sexually nonviolent relationships are to prevail.
Dr. Prescott’s long-term research targets at reducing violence within society, all forms of violence, that is, domestic
violence, sexual violence, structural violence, and especially
violence against women and children.
The failure of intimacy in the mother-infant/child relationship is the principle cause of depression and violence, which
can best be prevented by breastfeeding for ‘two years of age
and beyond’, as recommended by WHO/UNICEF in the Innocenti Declaration of 1990; and by baby-carrying during the
first year of life.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 530

The Dalai Lama stated in Ethics For The New Millennium
(1999):
—Despite the body of opinion suggesting that human nature is basically aggressive and competitive, my own view is that our appreciation for affection and love is so profound that it begins even before our birth… A happy mother bears a happy child… Almost
without exception, the mother’s first act is to offer her baby her
nourishing milk — an act which to me symbolizes unconditional
love… What we see instead is a relationship based on love and mutual tenderness, which is totally spontaneous. It is not learned from
others, no religion requires it, no laws impose it, no schools have
taught it. It arises quite naturally.

The Dalai Lama affirms that mothers’ breastfeeding is an
act of ‘unconditional love;’ this observation is consistent with
Dr. Prescott’s research results reporting that 77% (20/26) of
cultures with weaning age of 2.5 years or greater are rated
low or absent in suicide and 82% (14/17) of these cultures
which support youth sexual love are rated low or absent in
suicide.
Additional studies found that 86% (31/36) of cultures with
weaning age of 2.5 years or greater were rated low or absent
in suicide. Hence, compassion and unconditional love are
first learned at the breast of mother.
In recent years many new statutes and laws have been
forged by our national parliaments that were put through in a
hurried manner, if they were not just legal ad-hoc replies to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 531

asocial or criminal cases and events, such as the so-called
‘Megan Laws.’ Such kind of lawmaking tends to be both remiss in attention to long-term legal policy and irrational or
even excessive in ‘punishing’ socially undesired behavior.
Only long-term legal policy effectively prevents violent
asocial behaviors. Ad-hoc laws, however, contribute to the
feeling that they are somehow arbitrary, undemocratic, tyrannical, unjust and excessive.
In addition, it’s a fact that humans tend to disregard laws
that they perceive as unreasonable or ‘impossible to follow’
in their outreach.
Hence, to draft excessive laws without inserting them into
long-term legal and social policy making means down the
road to draft ineffective laws.
This is why the situation regarding violence and abuse in
our society, as the media repeat saying, gets worse and
worse. The culprit here is first of all wrong lawmaking, and
negligent long-term social policy making.
It must be seen that it’s relatively easy to throw new laws
over the head of the citizen, and that it is more timeconsuming and thought-provoking to insert a number of
laws consistently into a long-term strategy of comprehensive
and socially acceptable policy making.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 532

This namely requires governments to think deeply about
the problems that their laws tackle; and often it will be seen
that the right approach of dealing with social problems is not
to draft criminal or administrative laws, but to care for preventing socially undesired behavior.
Prevention needs intelligent and diligent research, it
needs governments to collaborate with scientists, universities, and the media, it needs attention to detail, and understanding of human complexity.
When governments fail to responsibilize themselves for
really tackling the social issues at stake today, they are proving to be sloppy in their overall approach to ruling the community; then, they have to be replaced.
Hurried lawmaking is irresponsible governmental behavior; the only things that such lawmaking produces is public
hysteria, chaos, and still longer prison miles every year.
Prescott’s research, besides its new insights and results,
references a wealth of research that he reports and summarizes in his papers. When going through this research, one
really finds no long-standing theory that was ever proven to
be true and that affirms the ‘impossible’ human as the standard human prototype. Much to the contrary will one recognize that humans can be conditioned in all possible ways,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 533

and thus, that the human potential, so to say, is open for
every possible existential framework.
It’s precisely the lack of instincts, such as they are found
with mammals, that makes the human being so complex, but
also so endangered when it comes to violence as a totally
conditioned response, a response that originally is not contained in the human setup.
Hence, when we see that violence is a conditioned response, we have to think deep and hard what those conditions are that produce violence.
The answers we get are precise, and to the point. We
know the conditions, one by one, we know what are the social or rather unsocial circumstances that condition humans
for violence.
These circumstances, when they form the basic ingredients of a culture, then produce what I call a ‘wrong culture’ or
a ‘perverse culture’ or else an ‘upside-down culture.’
For example, research on the roots of violence clearly affirms that when infants are raised in a climate of sensory deprivation, when premarital sex is prohibited, when females and
female children are socially devalued, to state only these
three factors among a variety of others, there is a 100% prediction that this particular mix will produce violent humans
for the next generation.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 534

When these patterns are cultural patterns in the sense
that a majority of humans behave in that unnatural and deprivatory manner, then there is again a 100% prediction that
that culture is violent.
Thus, to summarize, there is no wishy-washy position possible regarding these fundamental research insights, as the
results are clear-cut!
James W. Prescott formulated the essence of his research
in a social policy strategy entitled Ten Principles of MotherInfant Bonding:
—Every Pregnancy is a Wanted Pregnancy. Every Child is
a Wanted Child. Unwanted children are typically unloved,
abused and neglected who become the next generation of
delinquents, violent offenders and alcohol/drug abusers and
addicts.
—Every Pregnancy Has Proper Nutrition & Prenatal Care 
— medical and psychological — and is free from alcohol,
drugs tobacco and other harmful agents of stress.
—Natural Birthing — avoid wherever possible obstetrical
medications, forceps & induced labor with no episiotomy nor
premature cutting of umbilical cord. Mother controls birthing
position with no separation of newborn from mother. Newborn maintains intimate body contact with mother for breastfeeding and nurturance that promotes Basic Trust.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 535

—No Circumcision of Newborn. The traumatic pain of
newborn circumcision adversely affects normal brain development, impairs affectional bonding with mother and has
long lasting effects upon how pain and pleasure are experienced in life that shapes the development of Human Trust.
—Breastfeeding On Demand by newborn/infant/child
and for ‘two years or beyond,’ as recommended by the
World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF. Failure to
breastfeed results in positive harm to normal brain development and to the Immunological health of the newborn, infant
and child. Encoding the developing brain with the smell of
mother’s body through breastfeeding is essential for the later
development of intimate sexuality.
—Intimate Body Contact is maintained between mother
and newborn/infant by being carried continuously on the
body of the mother for the first year of life. Such continuous
gentle body movement stimulation of the newborn/infant
promotes optimal brain development and ‘Basic Trust’ for
peaceful/happy behaviors. Mother-infant co-sleeping is encouraged for ‘two years or beyond.’ Mother-infant/child
body contact can also be optimized with daily infant/child
massage. The Father must also learn to affectionately bond
with his infant and child by being an additional source of
physical affection and supporting mother as a nurturing
mother.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 536

—Immediate Comforting is given to infants and children
who are crying. No infant/child should ever be permitted to
cry itself to sleep, which impairs development of Human
Trust.
—Infants and Children Are For Hugging and should never
be physically hit for any reason. Merging childhood parental
love with parental violent pain helps create adult violent
‘love.’
—Infants and Children Are Honored and should never be
humiliated nor emotionally abused for any reason. The
emerging sexuality of every child is respected which promotes Human Trust.
—Mothers Must Be Honored and not replaced by Institutional Day Care which emotionally harms children before
three years of age. Mother-Infant/Child Community Development Centers must replace Institutionalized Day Care.
Dr. Prescott stresses that the most critical early life experiences are formed in the mother-infant relationship, and that
this early conditioning affects all our later relationships and
the development of culture. Prescott’s research demonstrates the role of body pleasure in affectional bonding in the
mother-infant relationship and in the human sexual relationship as an important factor in the formation of nonviolence in
the individual and in human cultures.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 537

In his article Prevention or Therapy or the Politics of Trust
(2005), Dr. Prescott shows that basic trust must occur before a
politics of trust can be formed to effect changes at the individual and cultural levels and to transform violent individuals
and cultures into peaceful individuals and cultures.
He also explains the limitations of psychotherapy in effecting changes in the damaged emotional-social-sexual
brain, as psychotherapy tends to reach only the neo-cortical
brain, but not the subcortical brain.
Prescott’s insights result in his astonishing statement that
‘as culture shapes the developing brain, so the brain shapes
culture.’ He refers in his paper to Childhood and Society
(1950/1963) by Erik H. Erikson, who was perhaps the first psychologist to assert that without the foundation of basic trust,
which is formed during the early years of the life cycle, basic
mistrust takes its place, which influences all future stages in
the human life cycle. Erickson writes:
—It is now possible that only an equal, well-polarized maturation of
all-human maternal and paternal care can save mankind . . . But this
demands that a future involvement in motherhood and fatherhood
must be based on the unifying polarity of a maternally shared
earthly space and a paternal sense of a joint conservation and defense of such space. (Id., 10-11)

Prescott reports that depression, social alienation, impulse dyscontrol, chronic stimulus-seeking behaviors, vio-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 538

lence against oneself (self mutilation and suicide) and others
(homicidal assaults), maternal violence and sexual dysfunctions are some of the behavioral consequences documented
in animals and humans consequent to mother-infant separation.
He summarizes that high affectional bonding in the
maternal-infant relationship and adolescent sexual relationships (youthful sexual behavior being supported and not
punished) could predict with 100% accuracy the peaceful or
violent nature of 49 tribal cultures he examined, based upon
Textor’s cross-cultural summary. He writes in Prevention Or
Therapy And The Politics of Trust Inspiring a New Human
Agenda (2005):
—This 49-culture study used all the available information in the 400culture sample of Textor (1967) where information on both babycarrying bonding and violence (‘torture, mutilation and killing of
enemy captured in warfare’) was available on these 49 tribal cultures. (…) The behavioral matrixes of patrilineal and matrilineal
tribal cultures reveal the remarkable similarity of the patristic tribal
cultures with the patristic monotheistic cultures of ‘Western civilization,’ which are also violent, sexually puritanical/exploitive and god
centered (Prescott, 1975, 1977, 1989, 1990, 1996, 2001). (…) These
findings are consonant with the observations of psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich on the role of women and sexuality in a free and egalitarian society when he stated: ‘Sexually awakened women, affirmed
and recognized as such, would mean the complete collapse of the
authoritarian ideology.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 539

In Affectional Bonding for the Prevention of Violent Behaviors (1990), Dr. Prescott explains his theory comprehensively for the novice reader, and the researcher who is not yet
familiar with the details of his cross-cultural and multidisciplinary research:
—The failure to develop peaceful behaviors represents the single
greatest threat to the quality of human life and to the survival of
human civilization. The human mammal is unique in its ability to
engage in collective action to destroy its own species. Perhaps the
evolution of language and complex cognitive functioning are the
indispensable factors accounting for the uniqueness of human violence. Alternately, our evolutionary heritage, wherein the most aggressive individuals survived hostile and violent environments, may
have led to the development of an aggressive genotype. No such
genotype has, of course, been found, and it is highly unlikely that
such a genotype exists. The enormous extent and diversity of human violence throughout the world appears to defy any simple genetic explanation. Fortunately, there is another explanation. It is my
belief that the origins of human violence have primarily an ontogenetic basis with unique phylogenetic characteristics, in brief, my
SAD (Somatosensory Affectional Deprivation) theory states that the
failure to develop affectional bonds in human relationships is the
primary cause of human violence. The beginning of this failure is in
the parent-offspring relationship where sensory deprivation of the
emotional affective senses (tactile, vestibular, olfactory sensory modalities) is permitted to occur. It is these sensory modalities that
mediate somatosensory affectional pleasure experiences in the
parent-offspring relationship, which are held to be necessary for the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 540

development of primary affectional bonds between parent and offspring. (Id., 95)

In addition to this research, Dr. Michel Odent from France
has done an important contribution through his own more
than twenty years of research on the human pleasure function.
The Functions of the Orgasms (2009) by Michel Odent is
a remarkable cutting-edge study on the human pleasure
function in its largest contextual framework, and with a special regard upon female sexuality and the sexual function of
birthing and breastfeeding. The study confirms and fully corroborates the earlier psychological, neurological and sociological research done by Wilhelm Reich, Herbert James
Campbell, James W. Prescott, Ashley Montagu, and others.
The title of the book is deliberately coined to allude to
Wilhelm Reich’s pioneering study The Function of the Orgasm (1942) as the author expressly notes, saying that his intention had been to ‘rewrite The Function of the Orgasm in a
new scientific context.’
Before I review this research more in detail, I may say this
as an introduction. It is natural that one ventures out from
one’s own pleasure continuum. Everybody does that.
For example, somebody who experiences homoerotic
attraction, will venture out to know more about homosexual-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 541

ity. Somebody who feels sexually attracted to the other sex
will study the more conventional literature on love between
the sexes. In other words, the understanding of the whole of
life, and the way we perceive life, is conditioned by how we
experience pleasure. But it is also a limitative view when one
ventures to know only about one’s particular emotional or
sexual addiction.
Michel Odent’s approach is comparatively larger. While
his focus is primarily upon female sexuality and the sexual
nature of the process of birth, and breastfeeding, he is saying that the experience of pleasure, in its ecstatic dimension,
connects us back with our source, and thus becomes an experience of transcendence, an experience that is not just
subjective and ‘personal,’ but essentially transpersonal.
Odent links back to the oldest of traditions that even
Reich probably ignored, the times when women had freedom and power to live the whole of their feminine erotic experience. But now this is scientifically proven, not just a remembrance of olden times of matriarchy. Odent’s research
has been corroborated also by Candace Pert’s discovery,
back in the 1970s, of the opiate receptors, the so-called endorphins, the ‘molecules of emotion,’ as she called them.
— See Candace B. Pert, Molecules of Emotion (2003).

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 542

Odent’s main tenet is that the female has been disempowered to give birth autonomously, because there is a fetus
ejection reflex that is connected to the limbic system and the
hypothalamus, and that is overridden by the neocortex.
Hence, all kinds of procedures that ‘assist’ the mother in the
birthing process are dysfunctional; all support, even midwifery, as Odent largely demonstrates, is dysfunctional as it
activates the neocortex in the laboring woman and suppresses the fetus ejection reflex as a result. The same is true
for the orgasmic experience of breastfeeding that was overridden, according to the author, by guilt and shame as a result of cultural conditioning.
Odent also reports that the rise in cesarean birth led to
mothers’ lesser desire to breastfeed their infants, or to
breastfeed only a short time. He advances evidence showing
that breastfeeding should be a matter of years, not of
months, with humans.
He also reports interesting details about certain apes and
especially dolphins and their non-reproductive sexual life,
which is based, as with humans, exclusively upon pleasure
and exchanging pleasure.
Besides, he speaks of a ‘cocktail of love hormones’ that is
involved in any kind of sexual experience and a special hormone called oxytocin that triggers in the laboring woman an
altered consciousness that leads to the mother ecstatically

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 543

embracing the newborn with all her soul, making for deep
bonding between mother and infant.
Needless to add that because of all birth assistance and
machinery, the flow of those hormones has been largely
blocked, which is the ultimate reason why women for one do
no more like to breastfeed their infants, nor really bond with
them in the first moments after birth, which makes for later
problems with codependence.
I namely show in my extensive research findings on
parent-child codependence and emotional abuse that one of
the key factors in this etiology is lacking mother-infant symbiosis during the first eighteen months of the newborn, including a lack of breastfeeding and tactile care for the child
from the part of the emotionally frigid mother.
Generally speaking, it is the inability of the mother to derive pleasure from the birthing and the post-birthing experience with the infant, and as a result of this blockage of the
emotional flow, an ability of the mother to give to the baby a
sufficient amount of autonomy to explore the world without
the symbolic ‘bondage’ of the matrix.
When one grasps the universality of pleasure in the
higher vertebrates and especially in the human, one’s personal addiction loses importance and one ventures out into a
larger realm of human experience that is valid and experi-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 544

enced by many more people than a tiny group. This then
makes for a higher level of erotic intelligence and better
overall judgment ability in matters of human emosexual experiences and their cognitive, emotional and social importance.
I have discovered Eight Dynamic Patterns of Living in the
lifestyle of native peoples around the world, which are lifestyle patterns, or patterns of individual and collective behavior.
The first of this set of patterns is autonomy, the second is
ecstasy. I also found that ecstasy is of paramount importance
in the shamanic experience, and in deep healing.
Dr. Odent’s research shows that besides the importance
of the woman having full autonomy over her body during
parturition, ecstasy is of high importance in the whole of human sexual life, and especially the experience of motherhood, with its high demand on being abundantly tactile with
the child.
To fully understand the similarities between orgasmic
states and other ecstatic states, we need to go far back in
time, namely to the Eastern Tantra, a culture that preceded
the pleasure-hostile Vedanta by thousands of years. While
Vedanta is a relatively new religious paradigm in Hindu culture, Tantra was much longer-lived, and for good reasons.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 545

Odent also cites the ‘age of sacred prostitutes’ and
speaks about a distorted scientific worldview in which the
main paradigms were forged only by men:
—It is as if there are female ways to evaluate the comparative importance of different perspectives in exploring human nature. All
scientific hypotheses are more or less based on intuitive knowledge
and intuitive knowledge is gender related. Until recently the scientific world was highly dominated by men. We are entering a new
phase in the history of sciences, with a more symmetrical input from
each gender. (Id., 4)

From this insight into cultural bias, which is intrinsically a
bias of perception, the author explains how it could happen
that the fetus ejection reflex was overlooked for so long:
—There are several reasons why we’ll first look at the fetus ejection
reflex. The first reason is that after thousands of years of culturally
controlled birth very few people — including the natural childbirth
advocates — can imagine what it is about. Another reason is that, in
the current / scientific context, when the fetus ejection reflex is understood, it is easier to look at the other orgasmic/ecstatic states.
We must add that this climax probably corresponds to the top of
the highest possible ladder human beings may have the opportunity to climb. (Id., 4-5)

In accordance with the oldest religious teachings of the
world, not only Tantra, but also Taoist doctrine and especially
the teachings of Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu in China, Michel
Odent advocates the cultivation of sensuality and ‘orgasmic

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 546

states’ as the ultimate pathway to transcendence, and the
realization of unity with all-that-is.
It is wonderful to see that a medical doctor, famous obstetrician, scientist and author of our days has found this
perennial wisdom that I equally have dug out of the cultural
treasure of the ancient wisdom traditions. And equally in accordance with these traditions, Odent warns of the danger to
overstimulate the neocortex through an exaggerated focus
upon language, and concepts.
In all natural processes that require a let-go and an utmost of spontaneity, such as the sexual embrace and particularly, as the author shows, the birthing experience, the neocortex should be at rest, for otherwise it interferes with the
quite automatic processes that nature has set in place for
regulating and maintaining these processes in a sane manner. The author writes:
—An authentic fetus ejection reflex takes place when a human baby
is born after a short series of irresistible contractions, / which leave
no room for voluntary movements. In such circumstances it is obvious that the neocortex (the part of the brain related to intellectual
activities) is at rest and no longer in control of the archaic brain
structures in charge of vital functions such as giving birth. (Id., 9)

Dr. Odent has summarized two decades of research done
on spontaneous birthing, to demonstrate that when nature is
followed, there is neither excruciating pain involved in giving

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 547

birth to a child, nor any psychological symptoms that let
birthing appear like a disease.
We don’t need to look back very far; still recently birthing
was done in hospitals in pretty much the same way as operating a tumor, in antiseptic rooms, under strong lights, with
metallic instruments making sharp noise, and with cameras
installed for monitoring the ‘operation.’
And I may add here, since I am living in Asia since almost
twenty years, that all those positive developments that the
author reports about the change of parturition toward a
more ‘homely’ process, in a more home-like setting and ambience, has not taken place at all here in South-East Asia. It is
here as it was in Western countries twenty or thirty years ago,
with women giving birth to their children in an operation-hall
kind of setting that is worse than anything before the advent
of ‘modern childbirth’ in the West.
I may be allowed to report what I saw in a report on German television in my younger years, and thus already more
than thirty years ago. That documentary was showing how
women from a mountain tribe in Caucasia give birth under
extreme conditions. The video showed a strongly built
woman walking naked into a mountain lake, at about –20º C.
At the shore, a crowd of people was standing there in silence: her extended family and friends.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 548

Walking ahead, she had to break the ice with her hands
and feet, until she reached a spot that she found suitable for
giving birth. She broke the ice in a circle around herself, and
was then taking a position that in Chinese Kung Fu is called
the ‘horse’ position, with her feet firmly on the ground, and
her legs slightly bent, as if riding a horse.
Then she seemed to get into a state of trance or meditation, as she suddenly was completely silent and immobile. A
few moments later her pelvis began to exhibit strong contractions, something like automatic convulsions that seemed
to wanting to push the baby out. And it was as one would
expect it, as those pelvic contractions were very strong. It
took no more than about three of those major spams and the
baby was falling out of her womb, in her hands, that she had
held wide open, while bowing down with the last contraction.
She took the newborn up, smiling, and bate through the
umbilical cord. This was a matter of just seconds. Then she
slowly and peacefully walked back to the shore where the
crowd attended her in respectful silence.
This documentary fascinated me to a point that to this
day I have not forgotten a single detail of it. And it of course
came to mind right when reading Odent’s book. It shows
that, while the author makes believe that all tribal populations practice abusive and insane birthing rites, what the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 549

author claims to be a medical or obstetric novelty, is none. It
has existed since millennia in tribal populations, while much
of this wisdom was lost for our own culture, mainly through
our patriarchal past.
The book also contains a professional and one would
perhaps find, surprising, criticism of midwifery. But the argument is not far-fetched when we see that any kind of assistance or ‘coaching’ may suggest to the laboring woman that
she is not in control of the process, but that other people
are, who are ‘professionals.’ The author writes:
—Understanding that laboring women need to feel secure, without
feeling observed and judged, leads us to the root of midwifery. It
seems that women have always had a tendency to give birth close
to their mother, or occasionally close to an experienced mother who
could fulfill the role of a mother figure: the midwife was originally a
mother figure and, in an ideal world, our mother is the prototype of
the person with whom one can feel secure without feeling observed, or judged. In most societies, though, the role of the midwife
has been gradually altered. Most languages condition women to
accept that they do not have the power to give birth by themselves;
they must ‘be delivered’ by somebody. As a result, the midwife has
gradually become a figure who is more often than not an authoritarian and dominating guide, an observer, and an agent of the cultural
milieu. She has also played a key role in the transmission of perinatal beliefs and rituals. (Id., 11)

The fetus ejection reflex can also be inhibited by vaginal
examinations, eye-to-eye contact or by the imposition of a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 550

change of environment, as would happen when a woman is
transferred to a delivery room. It is inhibited when the intellect of the laboring woman is stimulated by any sort of rational language, for example if the birth attendant says: ‘No
you are at complete dilation. It’s time to push.’ In other
words, any interference tends to bring the laboring woman
‘back down to Earth’ and tends to transform the fetus ejection / reflex into a second stage of labor which involves involuntary movements. (Id., 12-13)
In addition, there is another important key element in the
birthing process that was traditionally overlooked in our
medical tradition. It is the hidden truth about how the
mother bonds with the newborn, and what the mechanisms
are of this bonding.
This was notoriously a matter fervently discussed in religious and transcendental circles, as science was saying since
quite a few decades that no mother loves her newborn
‘automatically’ but that there must be something like a mutual kind of adoption.
This was also what psychoanalysis is saying and what, for
example, Françoise Dolto (1908–1988) was telling me in an
interview back in 1986 about the matter. Of course, in those
circles this scientific view was and is debated and it is alleged
that ‘naturally, all mothers love their babies.’

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 551

What is true here, and what is myth, we may ask? Michel
Odent shows that both views are somehow true, depending
on how we define ‘love.’ Nature has not overlooked this important clue as most cultures have.
It is namely through the same ‘cocktail of love hormones’
that the author says makes birth a natural and easy process,
that mother-infant bonding occurs immediately after birth.
Candace B. Pert would call it a matter involving the ‘molecules of emotion.’ The author writes:
—There are clear similarities between the immediate post orgasmic
states following a fetus ejection reflex and an orgasm of genital
sexuality. During the hour following the birth, when mother and
newborn baby are in close skin-to-skin contact and have not yet
eliminated the hormones released during the ejection reflex, each
of these hormones has a specific role to play — natural morphine
being a typical example. Since all opiates have the properties necessary to create states of dependency, it seems obvious that bodyto-body contact between two individuals who are under the effects
of endorphins can induce the beginning of a co-dependency, or in
other worlds of an attachment. (Id., 45)

Finally, the author emphasizes the importance of extended breastfeeding, which is not only a concern for bringing up infants within a continuum of utmost tactile stimulation and optimum nutrition, but also a concern of public sanity.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 552

As we have seen, James W. Prescott showed in more than
twenty years of research on the roots of violence that the
turndown of breastfeeding within violent tribal cultures, ancient patriarchy, and modern consumer culture is one of the
primary factors in the etiology of violence.
— James W. Prescott, Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence
(1975), Deprivation of Physical Affection as a Primary Process in the
Development of Physical Violence, A Comparative and CrossCultural Perspective, in: David G. Gil, ed., Child Abuse and Violence
(1979), Affectional Bonding for the Prevention of Violent Behaviors,
Neurobiological, Psychological and Religious/Spiritual Determinants, in: Hertzberg, L.J., Ostrum, G.F. and Field, J.R., (Eds.), Violent
Behavior, Vol. 1, Assessment & Intervention, Chapter Six (1990), The
Origins of Human Love and Violence, Pre- and Perinatal Psychology
Journal, Volume 10, Number 3: Spring 1996, pp. 143–188, Prevention or Therapy and the Politics of Trust: Inspiring a New Human
Agenda, in: Psychotherapy and Politics International, Volume 3(3),
pp. 194–211 (2005).

Michel Odent writes:
—The duration of breastfeeding is undoubtedly influenced by family structures. Since human societies organize mating and create
marriage rules, they also indirectly influence the duration of breastfeeding. Nobody knows exactly what the physiological ideal for the
duration of breastfeeding is among humans. For any other mammal,
the answer is simple — almost as simple as for the duration of pregnancy. For example, after spending 230 days in the womb, the baby
chimpanzee is fed by its mother for two years; a bottle-nosed dolphin is breastfed for 16 months. For human beings the answer is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 553

much more imprecise, although a / physiological ideal can be deduced as a reference point. Comparing human beings with other
mammals and taking into account the duration of our life in the
womb, our degree of maturity at birth, our lifespan, the special nutritional needs of our big brain, tooth development, and so forth,
we might conclude that breastfeeding among humans was originally maintained for a matter of years rather than a few months. (Id.,
66-67)

The author also clarifies on page 67 that before the ‘lifelong strict monogamy,’ most babies were breastfed for two
to four years, which was a practice that according to the
author started in ancient Greece and went along all the way
up until the 19th century — and I may add here that in the
upper classes of most societies, this is still the case today,
and was in my own family.
My grandmother did not breastfeed any one of her four
children. This was done by the ‘Amme,’ a maid specially
hired for that purpose, who had time and love for this work.
What this truth suggests is that we need to be precise about
the words we are using. When we talk about responsible
parenting, this does not imply that parents are not replaceable. They are to a certain extent.
What children need is not parents, but caretakers! While
in most cases these roles are both met by the parents of the
child, this does not need to be so! The important thing here
is that the child’s needs are met, first of all their bodily needs,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 554

then as a matter of culture, also their mental and intellectual
needs.
In agreement with Riane Eisler who wrote in her book Sacred Pleasure (1996) that pre-patriarchal cultures such as the
ancient Minoan Civilization were essentially sane and peaceful because they respected the natural laws of nature, including the natural equality between male and female, I would
go on to say that in our attempt to formulate new and better
social policies, we need to emphasize pleasure, because it is
pleasure that turns down violence, and only pleasure, and
that means that we have to understand ‘orgasmic states’ as
the real pathways to transcendence, not just as a form of individual or social entertainment.
In a way, the quest for reinstituting the natural pleasure
function in all its dimensions is a holy, sacred quest because
life, and all natural life functions, and especially sexuality, are
sacred.
Michel Odent gives conclusive examples out of the life of
the higher apes and dolphins that demonstrate that these
animals, that are the most closely genetically related to the
human race, do enjoy a sexual life that is non-reproductive.
This research is really important for it shows the invalidity
of the view forwarded by fundamentalist religions that sexuality was exclusively procreative in the whole of the animal

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 555

realm, and that only humans have ‘transgressed’ this ‘natural
law’ by being ‘pansexual’ to the utmost extent.
In fact, the argument of ‘pansexuality’ is turned down by
‘Christian’ scientists such as Jeffrey Satinover who attack not
only homosexuality but also pedophilia, if not the whole
range of sexual paraphilias with the argument that with
mammals sexuality was highly regulated and procreationfocused, not pleasure focused.
— See Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth
(1996).

Much to the contrary, Dr. Odent writes:
—Dolphins are known to have sex very frequently, in many different
ways, for reasons other than reproduction, and they sometimes engage in acts of a homosexual nature. Copulation takes place faceto-face and though many species of dolphins engage in lengthy
foreplay, the actual act is usually only brief, but may be repeated
several times within a short time span. Various dolphin species have
even been known to engage in sexual behavior with other dolphin
species. Occasionally, dolphins will also show sexual behavior towards other animals, including humans. (Id., 90)
—[Bonobos] often copulate face-to-face and the frontal orientation
of the Bonobo vulva and clitoris both strongly suggest that the female genitalia are adapted for this position. During sexual intercourse the females have been heard emitting grunts and squeals
that probably reflect orgasmic experiences, which perhaps explains
why sex, among bonobos, is not just for reproduction — it is the key

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 556

to their social life. Bonobos become sexually aroused remarkably
easily, and they express this excitement in a / variety of mounting
positions and forms of genital contact. Perhaps the bonobo’s most
typical sexual pattern is genito-genital rubbing between adult females. The two females rub their genital swellings laterally together.
Male bonobos, too, may engage in pseudocopulation; they often
perform a back to back variation, one male briefly rubbing his scrotum against the buttocks of another. These mammals also practice
so-called penis fencing, in which two males hang face-to-face from
a branch, rubbing their erect penises together. (Id., 90-91)

Michel Odent emphasizes also the fact that humans have
genetically tight relations with aquatic animals, a fact that has
been overlooked by philosophers and scholars for thousands
of years. It is also significant, as the author reports, that human babies can stay erect and walk in water before they are
able to walk on dry land. Dr. Odent then concludes on page
94 that ‘all chapters of human anatomy, physiology, behavior,
pathology, and evolutionary medicine must be rewritten in
the light of this so-called ‘aquatic-ape theory.’
I wish that this important book finds an audience beyond
the circles of academia, which has unfortunately never happened with the research both of Herbert James Campbell
and James W. Prescott, as the mass media appear to suppress any such information these days for reasons of ‘political
correctness,’ at least as far the United States of America is
concerned.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 557

Nonetheless, as this is a vital and noble cause, especially
when we think of reformulating the basic social policies that
regulate human behavior, and specifically those that regulate
human sexuality, we must grant this research a prime agenda
for it unveils most of the myths that cultural conditioning has
brought up about the nature of pleasure, thereby belittling
or outright turning down the importance of pleasure for the
human race, and generally, for all of life.
We also should keep in mind that cutting-edge quantum
physics and consciousness research has demonstrated that
even particles possess consciousness and actually choose
where they wish to be and in which orbits they wish to circulate around the nucleus.
In a sense, we can say that it is up to them where they are
located, until the moment they are observed, and thus localize; however without observation, they may determine their
locality as a matter of pleasure.
We have good reasons to assume that the pleasure function is not restricted to human beings alone, but that all of
creation basically ‘runs on pleasure,’ which means that positive sensations are the stimulus for evolution, for life to unfold.
It is deplorable that over the last five thousand years, and
with the turn of Tantra into Vedanta, and the historical turn to

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 558

devolution, the pleasure function was demonized in a way
that is unprecedented in human evolutionary history. This
namely led to forging laws that are punishing life, and that
are countering the positive evolution of humanity.
There cannot be an evolution of the human race, and
generally, of all of life, as long as we demonize and prohibit
pleasure, or when we regard human sexuality as basically
dangerous and potentially aggressive.
Our criminal laws, and here particularly our sex laws do
not display much respect of the human nature; in fact they
seem to consider us to be an ‘impossible human’ instead of
a ‘possible human,’ which is why these laws need to be abolished.
For anyone engaged in law reform and the necessary reform of our basic social policies, the scientific contribution
Michel Odent has made is substantial and important. It is
important because it shows that the natural pleasure function
is in no way to be taken as a ‘potentially chaotic behavior’
but is regulated by nature in a way that no harm is done.
When harm is done, it is not the result of the natural
pleasure function, but exactly the denial of that function
through moralism and fundamentalist life-denial.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 559

Proposal 10/12
We were looking at research that demonstrates the importance of pleasure, and the role of the pleasure function,
in the natural human setup. We saw that this research fully
confirms not religion, but secular concepts which since long
intuited that the human being is not by nature violent, but
that violence is a conditioned response.
We saw that research proved that pleasure and violence
are in a mutually exclusive relationship, by the very setup of
our brain, which means that when pleasure is on, violence is
off, and when pleasure is off, violence is on.
We also saw that pleasure enhances intelligence, while
violence reduces intelligence, that pleasure helps building
the necessary preferred pathways, that is, neuronal connections, as early as in childhood, but not only in childhood, that
make both for high intelligence and a nonviolent, peaceful
lifestyle.
It can thus be said that patriarchy with its horrendous fear
of pleasure and its repressive attitude toward pleasure, as
well as all religions that have supported patriarchy, are responsible for our society being so violent. Our society being
violent means both that the human beings in this society are
predominantly violent in their overall behavior, and that the
society, its institutions, its police forces, and its law enforcement procedures, are structurally violent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 560

At the same time both the majority of humans in our society, and its social institutions are hardly aware of their violence, and tend to play this fact down, belittle it or project it
on certain social groupings, on certain groups called ‘sex offenders’ or the generic group of ‘criminals,’ those ‘behind
bars,’ those who are labeled for their particular kind of violence or nonviolence, those who have smoked ‘illegal plants,’
those who have touched a child in ‘illegal ways,’ and so on
and so forth.
The very vocabulary that this society uses for labeling
people and discarding them out from the group, to let them
roast years and decades in its endless prison miles is a signal
for how mad, how truly insane this society is. It is obvious,
after we have seen the hidden or not so hidden connections
between pleasure and violence, and between pleasure and
intelligence that the only valid social policy for bringing
about a more peaceful society is to do away with all
pleasure-denying policies, including draconian sex laws, and
to enhance the pleasure function as early as in childhood,
through fostering a really permissive education, a love education.
I may add a word here on the status quo. It is certainly
not surprising that under the absolutist regime of the
Church, the pleasure function was turned down, as it is also
proven now by research on the relationship between sexual

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 561

activity and identity, that when people are deprived of sexual
mating, they are losing identity and become dull and passive, that is, easy to regulate and to rule around. Dictators
intuited this fact since millennia and in all fascist regimes,
pleasures are turned down and violence is screwed up, sexual behavior is severely restricted and all but procreative
sexual behavior is demonized and harshly punished.
All this we know, or let’s say, those who have kept their
pleasure function intact, know it, while those who are already
on the violence track, tend to persistently deny it.
My question is how it can happen that a secular state,
such as a modern democracy, has taken over this fatally
wrong social policymaking, while such a state doesn’t really
want to rule around its citizens, doesn’t really want to indoctrinate them with religious or severely ethical restrictions,
doesn’t really want to establish a political dictatorship? Yet all
this insane tool box has been taken over from the dark ages,
including the absolutely insane sex laws.
And not only that, after having taken all this over, the
modern state even goes on to expand those outmoded dysfunctional sex laws to make them even more severe, and direct them against children and adolescents who are now
considered as potential ‘sex offenders.’ If this is not stateordained paranoia, I don’t know what it is! But I am not even
sure that the incentives are set directly by government offi-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 562

cials, and I even doubt it. It is in my experience much more
plausible that behind this trend to legal fascism are the
churches and sects, and religious fundamentalism, and our
control-obsessed multinationals.
I must leave the question open here for it goes beyond
the scope of this proposal, which is meant to be scientific
and not political in the strict sense of the term, and which
sees no good in labeling and accusing certain people or
groups of people for what appears to be institutionalized insanity.
The question remains, while there may be a number of
perhaps contradictory answers. The question is why, despite
democracy, and secular states, insanity is perpetuated over
generations, and why no change was so far brought about?
It is true that there were attempts to reform the system
including reform of the age of consent laws, back in the
1970s. But from about the mid 80s, the opposite trend set in
that was to wipe all reform ideas from the table, to establish
the antiquated form of holding the citizen tight and rule him
or her around in all possible ways.
Plants were declared illegal, harmless forms of adult-child
touch were declared ‘a crime,’ let alone sexual relations between both groups. The touch alone suffices now to get
somebody jailed for twenty years. If such is not insane as a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 563

social policy, especially now, as we have the scientific proof
that all touch is beneficial and even important for the healthy
growth of the child, I do not know what is insane!
From the mid 80s, the abuse culture, as a form of institutionalized insanity, was brought about, with all the consequences we are facing today. The main consequences are a
general rise of domestic, sexual and structural violence, the
rise of police violence, the rise of violence against social,
sexual and ethnic minorities, a rise of violence beyond the
borders of the state, through international hegemonic
strategies, and other deplorable social factors such as a rise
of youth suicide, the rise of addictions of all kinds, the rise of
depression, the rise of terminal diseases such as heart disease, cancer or HIV, and a rise of exactly the sexual tendencies that the state wants to see turned down, that is, homosexuality, pedophilia, and large-scale sadomasochism.
Is that surprising? No, it’s not, it is the paradoxical answer
of nature. As quantum physics has shown conclusively, nature
answers with paradoxes when we look at nature in the wrong
way, when our concepts about nature are dysfunctional,
when our belief system about natural behavior is flawed.
Quid est demonstrandum.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 564

11/12 — Male Affection as a Peace Conductor
Homoemotional Affection gets Males into Balance.
Homosexual Attraction gets Males out of Balance.
Developing affection between males, which includes
males of different generations is of paramount importance
for reducing violence in our society.
There is no doubt that males are the ones who are primarily responsible for most of the violence committed on a
daily basis in any given society — and I may add, not just
males, but emotionally confused males.
What is the emotional confusion that many males are suffering from? It is the idea that yin-values, tenderness, caregiving behaviors, and bonding, to name a few, are somehow
reserved for women only.
Of course, this emotional distortion is by no means a result of nature, but a consequence of culture, wrong culture,
which induces in men this kind of simplistic and overly restrictive self-definition.
It goes without saying that males are just as eager as females for delivering care, especially care for the young.
When males suppress this natural desire, they suffer emotionally, on a subconscious level, and this suffering contributes to their becoming violent.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 565

This desire to be caring is natural and is related to the
pleasure of being naked and vulnerable in the presence of
those one loves, the partner, and one’s children, and sharing
one’s affection through fondling, stroking and hugging.
These are natural behaviors that are known in all societies
all over the world, but males who struggle with restrictive cultural norms will tend to avoid them, belittle them, ridicule
them or declare them as ‘unnatural.’
Affection, shared tenderness, where sexual attraction is
not excluded but largely secondary, is the most natural of all
behaviors. Males can exhibit such affection toward elders,
children, other males and, in moments of the day where mating is inappropriate, with their partner. What I am saying here
is that one of these affectionate relations is more important
than the others, more important not generally, but in our
specific culture. It is male-male affection, and the affection of
senior males to junior males, both in the corporate and outside the corporate setting.
In the corporate setting, friendship and mutual support
between senior and junior managers are daily reality. These
relations form part of our positive ethical code. They are
largely approved and subsequently supported by the social
framework; they do not encounter suspicion or estrangement. But outside of the corporate setting, things look a bit

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 566

more wild, and a bit less protected. The social framework
seems to only marginally support such relations.
When a male spends much time with another male, outside of the corporate setting, there is often suspicion the
men were either homosexuals or, while being heterosexuals,
were for one time interested in a homosexual affair.
Typically, things do not turn out that way, not naturally so,
in my observation. The desire for affectionate bonding is real
between males, and it is of the utmost importance for emotional balance in males. This kind of bonding may at times be
homoemotional in the sense that such exchanges may include nonsexual gestures such as hugging, pat on the back
or shoulder, slap on the butt as sometimes observed among
teammates in various sports, and lastly perhaps even a kiss
on the cheek. There may also be shared nudity, but no sexual
mating in the sense of genital interaction. In such a case, we
cannot speak of homosexuality or homoerotic behavior. I am
speaking in such cases of ‘homoemotional bonding.’
This kind of bonding between males, this is the interesting thing, reinforces the sexual attraction of males toward
females, because emotional balance is necessary in males for
being fully attracted to females. To put it in a shorter formula, homoemotional bonding reinforces heterosexual behavior and attraction.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 567

Now let us have a look at the homosexual scenario, which
looks quite different. Here we encounter males who are out
of touch with their yin nature, and equally out of touch with
their natural behavior pattern to bond affectionately with
other males. Now what fills this vacuum then is compulsive
sexual bonding, where ‘sexual’ means genital embrace in either the positive-master-phallic role or the negative-slavevulva role.
Here, we see not two full human males bond but two
oversexed bodies copulate where one is reduced to a
sperm-giving phallus and the other to a sperm-receiving oral
or anal vulva. Research on homosexuality shows that men
who suffer from homosexual attraction are out of balance, go
out for mating with a large number of different partners, in
unsafe places like public toilets, and may, as psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, in his bestselling book Homosexuality and the
Politics of Truth (1996) shows with an example, have up to
about fifteen different partners in one single night.
I concede that Satinover’s book is written from a slightly
homophobic base position and an outspokenly ‘Christian’
moral inhibition against this form of mating, a bias I do not
personally share. The book has however its value, when one
is able to accept the author’s position as a simple form of respect for his personal opinion and his perhaps bewildered
feelings.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 568

The person that Satinover talks about in his book was one
of his immune deficiency syndrome patients when he was
still a practicing psychiatrist, and the man died atrociously a
few months later.
I doubt that all homosexuals live their love in such a
compulsive manner, but some of them may. There are many
who live in stable relationships.
Strangely enough, while Satinover’s concern regarding
the etiology of AIDS seems rational when we are looking at
single males who go out for unsafe copulations virtually
every night, and in many different places, this doesn’t seem
to be the case with homosexuals who live in stable partner
relations.
Yet Satinover says that AIDS in these cases is not lesser
than with the first group of homosexual males. This argument, which is not backed by scientific evidence, cannot be
verified rationally.
So I may forward my observations and experiences instead, while I am, exactly like Satinover, not a member of the
homosexual community, nor am I in any way antihomosexuality. Thus I have no bias.
I may not have all the information needed, however, and I
am ready to admit that. But I have encountered homosexuals
and have always attracted homosexuals when looking for a

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 569

(female) partner through placing an ad in MSN. I got about
fifty replies, and about 10% were homosexuals. However, the
way they behaved estranged me.
As I have no prejudice against homosexuality, and found
especially one of those males interesting, I proposed a
friendship. The man was a lawyer, like myself, from Rome, Italy and wrote a perfect English — obviously an intelligent and
cultivated man. He invited me on the spot to come to see
him in Rome and spend a fortnight with him.
However, when I replied I would like to visit Rome again
and improve my Italian, visit his law firm, and have discussions with him and affectionate exchanges, he was reacting
with outright estrangement, and a kind of ultimatum. He
simply replied that either I would come to have sex with him,
or not come.
As I replied in the same calm manner that I was not homosexual but could well imagine an interesting friendship
with him, I got silence as a reply. And with the other four homosexuals, from Latin America, it was the same, while communication was certainly not a problem, as I speak and write
Spanish.
In my view, such behavior is compulsive! As a heterosexual, I have many friendships with women and cannot imagine
to be categorical in such a manner, as we need both pas-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 570

sionate relations and affectionate relations. In times of crisis,
I often saw in my life that friendships are more important
than passionate love relations, as they provide emotional
stability and support, and thereby are a balancing factor in all
times of turmoil.
Hence, to discard such relations out from one’s life may
be a signal that the person is emotionally imbalanced. Affectionate relations are as important if not more important than
passionate love relations. This is so because affection and
tenderness are balancing emotions.
Now, the most interesting while in many societies also the
most critically disputed kind of relations is those between
adult males and young boys.
I am advocating to concede that those relations may not
always be pederastic, but are in my view, for the most part,
and naturally so, platonic in the sense that the sexual impulse is sublimated if not on both ends of the relation, but
certainly on the side of the adult. I have demonstrated such a
relation in a fictive tale, a teaching tale, I wrote in the form of
a film that features and illustrates the affectionate bonding
between a Frenchman, David, and a 12-year old Jewish boy,
Jonathan, in Paris.
David had been jailed before because of pedophile relations with boys, and had taken a firm vow to not fall back in

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 571

the old pattern. So he keeps the relation with Jonathan
strictly affectionate and refuses all erotic advances of the boy,
who for that reason, flees him during a nightly train travel, to
be picked up by a pedophile artist and filmmaker who sleeps
with him that very night, much to the boy’s gratification as he
missed exactly that aspect in the relationship with David.
When they later discuss the affair, the boy concedes that he
loves David more than Jim, the filmmaker, because of shared
values which are beyond the merely physical aspect of the
relation. The film was actually inspired by the Biblical story of
‘David and Jonathan’ where David talks about his love for
the boy as ‘surpassing all woman love.’
I wanted to show in this film that men-boy relations, while
their sexual aspect has been subject to scientific study, are
not defined by that sexual aspect but rather by the variety of
nonsexual affectionate interactions and values that are typically part of such relations. It has been assessed by even
mainstream psychologists that male affection is for adolescent boys even more important than for adult men. To receive affection and support from older males is in the words
of a Canadian psychologist a constituting factor in the psychosexual growth of young boys.
James W. Prescott, whom I mentioned earlier on, also advocates intergenerational affectionate bonding as a consti-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 572

tuting factor in brain development toward nonviolence and
caring, nurturant behaviors.
Dr. Prescott emphasized in private communication that
such affectionate bonding is in no way to be confused with
pederasty or pedophilia, as in most cases the adult partners
restrain their sexual impulse either because of the law or of
cultural factors that determine these relations to be affectionate only.
I can fully confirm this view from my cross-cultural experience. Having lived and worked in many different cultures, I
can testify that for example in South-East Asia, despite the
common prejudice of these cultures being sexually abusive
toward children, the rule is that adult-child bonding is affectionate only, as the traditional morality strongly opposes
adult-child sexual bonding.
There is well in my observation physical abuse in the form
of adult-child harsh chastisement, but I have not seen any
circumstances or situations involving sexual abuse.
I am talking here of course only about local people relating to each other, not the largely discussed affairs between
foreigners and local children that are on the agenda of most
NGOs and that have for that reason been widely eradicated.
In fact, nonviolent and affectionate bonding is the rule in
Asia between males and young children of both sexes, not

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 573

only in the school setting but everywhere. Male Asians are
not suspecting other males being sexually intended when
interacting with a child, while this seems today to be a group
fantasy in all Western cultures, to a point it has reached the
level of public hysteria.
I have heard many stories of real child protection in Asia,
while when we follow the news, the contrary seems to be
true for most Western countries. It is not uncommon in Asia
that children have to walk or bike to their school a few miles
every day, without being accompanied by anybody. Here in
Phnom Penh, Cambodia, where I am living since more than
ten years, small children of three to five years walk in the
streets without any apparent protection, barely dressed or
even completely naked; they cross streets, they buy their
candies at kiosks, they have their friends and relationships,
but there is well an invisible protection simply because everybody cares for any child, not just for one’s own child.
And it is very rare to see a child gets lost. I have heard of
only one or two such cases in the ten years I live here, and in
both cases, the child was taken back to the family by caring
adults other than the parents who were investigating the issue, without any police needed, and taking the right action
to get the child back to the family. In most cases, the loss of
children is not related to abduction for sexual purposes, but
for a variety of other reasons, or because the child simply

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 574

wanted to visit a distant relative and had no idea how far it
actually was to get there.
Adult-child affectionate bonding is of paramount importance for reducing violence in our society. The media’s perverse focus on child abduction and child pornography is unreasonable as it is not conducive to really building a safe environment for our children.
As I have extensively analyzed the situation, I can only say
that child protection is no protection. If anything, it is another consumer business, and more specifically, a global
business. There are huge corporations earning a lot of
money with that, while this whole absurd theater has done
absolutely nothing to give real safety to our children.
The mass media around the world uniformly keep repeating that in matters of child protection, the situation is getting
worse with every year, to come, despite all the government
funding for new and better child protective measures, most
of them being highly coercive, many of them infringing upon
civil rights; and yet the effectiveness of this whole machinery
is close to zero!
The challenge for new policy making in this area in our
Western civilizations is obvious. We are struggling with a
problem that, as it all boils down to, we don’t really understand. We are trying to fight an enemy that we do not really

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 575

know. We are screwing up our laws every year, and turn down
civil liberties accordingly because things are going the wrong
way, but we don’t know why they are going the wrong way.
Sergio Zyman, former CEO of the Coca Cola Company
writes in his enlightening book The End of Marketing (2000)
that when you run a promotion and evaluate the results, you
may believe you have been successful because of your promotion while in many cases, the reason why you were successful had nothing to do with the promotion and was based
upon factors you ignored at that moment. Of course, when
you run the next promotion based on the same false premises you most likely will fail because of your perception bias.
Hence, the lesson to learn here is that life is too complex
to be reduced to one cause bringing about one effect; the
reality is that one cause brings about multiple effects, and
one single effect may be brought about by many causes.
Until the day our politicians learn that not a Cartesian but
only a holistic approach to reality will ensure they are drafting
the right social policies, we are going to continue to stumble
in the mess with no results delivered other than a massive
police empire that jails and discards more of its citizens with
every coming year.
The digestive tube of these insane social policies ends in
endless prison miles where a large portion of our society is

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 576

given over to an unpredictable fate while they are humans
just like all of us.
This process needs to be reversed. Social policies need
to be drafted that reduce crime effectively at the root level,
that is, through real prevention, not through endless persecutions and prosecutions.
The bulldog police state that needs zillions of police is
‘on very shaky ground,’ observes the American career coach
Laurence G. Boldt in his book The Tao of Abundance (1999).
In fact, it is not grounded at all, it floats in the air with the
feet above the head, as the Fool of the Tarot. It is a puer culture that is characterized by its abysmal collective narcissism
as a result of all the traumata that are inflicted upon children
through all the fear and terror that both the family and the
state inflict upon the tiniest member of the community.
It has to be brought to the International Court of Justice
that in the United States of America children are registered
as sex offenders, and are being lynched or electrocuted simply for living their sex life. If Congress does nothing to abolish these laws, Congress will be forced to do so by a higher
instance. I am hopeful that human rights lawyers around the
world will be more and more sensitive to these issues and
will take appropriate action!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 577

Of course, this undesirable result can be avoided if once
a responsible government steers a different course, simply
by intelligently understanding that the current way of doing
leads straight into an impasse.
Proposal 11/12
In today’s modern society, the immense progress made
by the Gay-Lesbian movement seems, on the surface, to be
the hallmark of the free world.
However, in reality, social benefits granted to the gay
community constitute the stopping point with respect to
freedom.
In other words, the achievements of the gay movement
are as far as society will go in terms of granting social accommodations!
— See already John P. Alston & Francis Tucker, The Myth of Sexual
Permissiveness, The Journal of Sex Research 9/1 (1973).

In older, traditional societies, homosexuality may not be
embraced, it may even be ridiculed, but these societies give
way more freedom, including sexual freedom, to their children. Field research carried out as early as in the 1920s by
Bronislaw Malinowski and Margaret Mead on the Trobriand
natives in Melanesia showed that in this culture, homosexuality, pedophilia and sexual crime are virtually unknown.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 578

— See, for example, Bronislaw Malinowski, Crime and Custom in
Savage Society (1926), Sex and Repression in Savage Society (1927)
and The Sexual Life of Savages in North West Melanesia (1929) as
well as Margaret Mead, Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive
Societies (1935).

In addition, Trobriands are almost ideal marriage partners. Marriages tend to last long if not for life, and the divorce rate is about 3 to 4% only. The reason why these reputed anthropologists found this tribal culture to that point
sane and balanced was that these natives give their children
an utmost degree of love, freedom, autonomy and respect,
which includes sexual freedom. Children are never punished,
never beaten, and spoken to softly and in a way to show
them they are ‘big enough’ to understand. When a child was
naughty, a parent would simply talk seriously with the boy or
girl and the child would listen, and correct their behavior.
From about age 3, children sleep together in special
dormitories. One of the reasons for this custom is that Trobriands are afraid of parent-child incest, which is the primary
reason for this tradition. The second reason is that Trobriands
believe that children are naturally promiscuous before they
reach puberty. Hence, there is freedom for these children to
copulate with each other, while it’s usually the older children
who initiate the younger ones for love making.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 579

Interestingly so, when a child reaches puberty, their sexual behavior changes completely. There is no more promiscuity, but the child searches for a partner, a person for sharing all their emotional and sexual life, a durable relationship.
After some such long-term relationships, somewhere between age 15 and 18, then, Trobriands marry and have a
regulated family life. There is no more promiscuity, and there
is no mistress-keeping either.
When we look at research on homosexuality and especially newer research on pedophilia as I have myself conducted it, we see that the etiology of pedophilia clearly is a
childhood hangup. It is through lacking peer-peer relations,
or disturbed relations that the person, usually either at the
end of adolescence, or in their thirties, suddenly realizes an
attraction toward children. This attraction, as it is to be seen
in many personal stories, is first not sexual at all, but emotional. It is as if the adult wanted to be again a child, at least
in the imaginal realm, hence the need to be around children,
to play with children, to be childish and to engage in dependency relations.
In most cases, these dependency relations are really falling in the pattern of pathological codependence, thereby
repeating what the pedophile man or woman went through
as a child, as they regularly have had highly codependent
parents. It is usually the relationship with the parent of the

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 580

opposite sex that is the problematic one where codependence was the reason for the child or adolescent to be deprived of peer relations, to be deprived of early emotional
and sexual freedom.
As a result, this early deprivation of autonomy is later a
vacuum that the person needs to fill. It is filled through codependent relations with children who then, psychologically,
play the role of the parent who did ‘not give enough love.’
The child or adolescent is then in the pedophile relation the
‘healing agent,’ which is why in my view, pedophilia is always
a temporary condition, not as the myth goes, a lifelong addiction. In addition, I have shown in various publications that
the ‘pedophile predator’ as it ghosts around in our mass
media today, is a myth.
But one thing should be clear-cut for our policymakers. It
is the fact that it is our society itself that breeds large-scale
homosexuality, lesbianism and pedophilia! The reason is a
wrong education that is largely violent, lacking out in true
respect for children, both from the side of parents and educators, the belittling of children as being ‘childish and immature,’ the lack of honesty that talks ‘over the head’ of children
instead of talking with them as fully equal persons, and the
commercial exploitation of children through mass media
manipulation.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 581

Hence, the only reasonable solution to these distortions
of nature, or social pathologies, is the establishment of a
truly permissive education.
12/12 — Fostering Permissive Education
Promoting the Cause of the Sexual Child is not Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is Not a Social Cause but a Psychosexual Hangup.
Developing an argument for permissiveness is not easy in
a society that is so highly controlled and that believes in control more than it believes in self-regulation. Nature is based
upon self-regulation, not control, upon flow, not upon coercion, upon co-evolving systems, not upon conflicting systems.
— See, for example, Fritjof Capra, The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision (2014) with further references.

There are certain social philosophies and scientific doctrines that I do not need to name here, as this is common
knowledge, philosophies that made us believe that society is
a creative mess that needs antagonism as the motor for all to
run smoothly. It is a belief system that views human aggression as normal as civil war, and that reasons that without aggression there would be no evolution.
It is a belief system, sometimes called Social Darwinism,
that sees violence as ‘imbedded in human nature’ and that
assumes that societies in a way need to be violent and de-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 582

stroy themselves so that there is renewal in nature, and renewal in culture.
Oswald Spengler, an author who by the way was not putting too much effort in distancing himself from the Nazi ideology, was forwarding such a view.
Darwinism contributed to this view by stating that random mutations are the rule, while complex order was the exception in nature. During Darwin’s lifetime, science ignored
that nature is basically consisting of entangled autopoietic
networks that are mutually self-sustaining and co-evolving.
When we look at modern systems theory, where is the
violence that those scientific and social freaks have believed
to be ‘inherent in nature’?
The truth is there is no such violence to be found in living
systems. What is to be found is order, intelligent patterned
order, total information, and something like total care for the
sustainability of the system, which is an effect, as we know
today, of the quantum field, the quantum scale or unified
field, where all living beings are interconnected.
Those philosophies are simply invalid. Fritjof Capra has
done a major intellectual effort in demonstrating in several of
his books that Darwinism is systemically wrong and out as a
science paradigm as it largely represents a projection upon
nature, not the result of an observation of nature.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 583

— See Fritjof Capra, The Web of Life (1997), The Hidden Connections (2002) and The Systems View of Life (2014).

And with regard to Spengler and Toynbee, who notoriously predicted the fall of civilizations as an automatism in
human evolution, they were of course examining highly violent patriarchal civilizations that, because of their abysmal
violence, had to suffocate in that violence as a matter of
karma, as a simple matter of cause and effect. But their
wrong conclusion is to assume an automatism in all societies
that makes that one day they will decay. This assumption has
not been verified scientifically in any way.
In old China, before the times of the Warring States, the
time namely of King Wen, author of the I Ching, there were
kingdoms that lasted over many generations because their
rulers were nonviolent and wistful. They were studying the
Tao (Way), they were treating their vassals not as vassals, but
as full humans, and they were respecting the human nature.
As a result, their lawmaking, if ever, was smooth and permissive.
It was exactly the Warring States, the subsequent period
that is very closely related to our modern consumerist mass
culture, which was characterized by political and moral decadence, the upcoming of moralism as a coercive mandatory
set of rules, and draconian laws that was then, not long

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 584

thereafter, decaying within all the abysmal violence it had
created for itself and other kingdoms.
It was this kind of ‘Armageddon’ culture that was later
ruthlessly annihilated by those it had repeatedly raped and
violated in its conquests all over China, just as it was the
case, in the West, with the Assyrian patriarchs and King
Hammurabi, the creator of the first compulsive penal law
known in the history of human sexual behavior.
To state that giving the child free choice relations, the
freedom to maintain their own friendships, be have sensual,
erotic and sexual exchanges would amount to ‘normalizing
pedophilia’ is on the same line of reasoning. For it assumes
that violence is somehow embedded in all human sexuality
and that an adult partner will always represent potential
danger to a child who is enamored with that adult. It is on
the same line of violent moralism that is so characteristic for
upside-down cultures, for highly decadent cultures, to assume that every adult facing a naked child is driven to rape
and assault the child.
This is clearly a projection, not an observation of nature
or of human behavior. It is to assume that psychopathological behavior is the rule for humans, while it is clearly the exception.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 585

Psychopathological behavior is to an extent daily reality
in our modern consumer cultures that it strikes the observer
for this is completely unknown in cultures that are still closer
to nature. The best example is Japan, a culture that was basically sane traditionally, still today having one of the lowest
incidences of heart disease, cancer or immune deficiency
syndrome, mainly as a result of their nutritional wisdom, and
the fact that sexual behavior was never condemned in their
culture as sinful, except with regard to homosexuality.
And yet, since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japanese
have sought to be close with American culture and tried to
model and clone American lifestyle to the utmost extent this
is possible for an Asian.
The result is that today, Japan has next to Australia one of
the highest youth suicide rates in the world and psychopathological incidents like the mass shooting of children in
schools by mad youngsters are daily reality, just as in the
United States or France.
As long as our modern society values psychopathological
behavior before it values natural behaviors, we cannot turn
the negative spiral upwards again, and the result will be that
we will be every year more paranoid as a metagroup and
probably then attract a worldwide fascist tyrant that will embody all the fears, taboos and repressions that we have accumulated as an erotically really stupid culture.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 586

From a sane perspective, it is obvious that giving the
child the right for free choice relations is a different agenda
than granting political liberty to the cause of pedophilia!
The parallels of the strategic agenda of both homosexual
and pedophile organizations are striking, as Jeffrey Satinover
convincingly shows in his book. The homosexual cause was
political from the start and the research they cited for backing up their claims was produced from their own extended
network that is nationwide in the United States.
Satinover retraces their political fight, that was not always
transparent and often of an assaulting nature, and that was
really based on Hitler’s propaganda minister, Goebbels. It
used intimidation to achieve goals. It used to intimidate
straight psychiatrists, to get them to trace homosexuality
from the DSM, so as to normalize it.
And that was achieved, and much more. Today we can
say that homosexuality is a social force in the United States
of America that cannot be overlooked and that pursues their
own agenda, which is not necessarily identical with the
agenda of the government. But there is so much economic
and thrust power behind them that we can say in a way homosexuals today jointly govern America!
The same can be true tomorrow for the pedophile
agenda, despite the obvious reticence today to even discuss

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 587

this in public. It seems that everybody is paralyzed to even
mention the existence of that attraction, for fear to be drawn
into the abyss of ruthless and violently moralistic persecution
that has no regard for civil rights, nor for the rights of the
child.
So let me be explicit here! The cause I am advocating is
the cause of the child, not the cause of pedophilia, which is a
cause of a childhood hangup, a pathology, as all research,
including my own, clearly shows.
As homosexuality is not genetic, not hereditary, and not
unchangeable, so is pedophilia. It is neither genetically predetermined, nor is it hereditary.
And it can be changed, while today, the main bulk of psychiatrists tend to deny this fact, assuming that pedophilia
‘cannot be cured.’
I have all the proof to forward the opposite argument, but
we also have to see that the pedophile witchhunts serve a
secret agenda in that they target intellectuals who do not fit
in the blindfolding consumerist machinery that this society
fosters under the header of ‘worldwide democracy’ and that
it throws over the head of all and every country in the world
that dares to go their own way, and define their own values.
The violence of the pedophile witchhunt paradigm is obvious, but it does not for that matter give right to the pedo-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 588

phile cause because such a cause is as nihil and fake as the
homosexual cause. The only cause there is, and which is real,
is the cause of the child or more precisely, the cause of the
sexual child.
I have demonstrated in more than twenty years of research on sexual paraphilias that we all have pedoemotions,
but these emotions are caring and tender and they are not
by nature sexualized. The function of pedoemotions is to ensure that childcare is given enough attention as it ensures the
survival of the human race; otherwise we would since long
have ceased to exist, as today people care much more about
cars, computers, sumptuous estates and holiday cruises than
caring for producing offspring.
This is obvious and shown by statistics. We are facing
more and more female frigidity and besides, a growing interest in consumer goods that is paralleled by a growing disinterest in having children, and bringing up children. For it
involves time and care, it involves a good deal of learning
also, for the challenge to bring up a sane child in a largely
insane culture is obvious.
We are living on the edge, and our choices are open,
more open than ever before in human history. But when we
collectively choose to do away with procreation, just for ‘enjoying life’ and so and so many consumer goods, we are
done as a human race!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 589

Hence, the function of pedoemotions and why they exist.
But my research also shows that pedoemotions are not by
nature sexualized, while they may become sexualized for
reasons we still ignore. Sexology doesn’t have the answer
why in one case pedoemotions do not sexualize and in another case they do.
I have drafted a teaching tale to exemplify the complexity
of the matter with a practical example. This story shows a
male day care teacher, Bernard F., who has been screened
and found without blame, who has a stable girlfriend and defines himself as heterosexual, one day engages in sex games
with some of the children, for reasons that in the subsequent
trial remain largely veiled. This tale serves as an empirical fiction as it is highly probable that many childcare representatives will find themselves in said situations.
Therefore, there is an urgent need for additional vocational training for childcare workers which covers unique aspects of care such as pedoemotions, and the building of
emotional awareness.
In Bernard’s trial, these complex details were not elucidated simply because there was no interest to do so from
the side of the authorities who played the ‘easy game’ as in
most such affairs. They simply labeled Bernard a ‘pedophile,’
having ‘sought the access to children in cunning ways,’ having absolved his diploma in early child care with the ‘pre-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 590

meditated intention to abuse children,’ and so on and so
forth. The usual rhetoric. But this rhetoric veils the essential,
it veils the truth that things like that can happen. It veils the
truth that never in human vocational training for teachers the
idea came up to train people who are around children to be
emosexually aware, which means to become vigilantly conscious of their pedoemotions, as I have suggested to implement it as an add-on to vocational training for teachers (with
no reaction so far from any professional circles).
Our society seems to be highly afraid of the sexual child,
for the simple reason that it assumes that most adults are not
ready to face erotically exuberant children without attacking
them sexually in one or the other way.
This concern is not far-fetched when one considers my
teaching tale. The reason why Bernard interacted sexually
with a minority of children in the group, and not all of them
was most probably the result of the children having had sensual and sexual feelings for Bernard, in the first place. And
Bernard fell into the trap. He became enthralled by the erotic
energies of these children, without understanding that these
little girls actually projected unconscious incestuous feelings
for their fathers upon him. He was trapped by an attraction
he could not cognize, and as he had never received formal
training on these matters, he became a victim of a situation
he was not equipped to handle.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 591

Of course, in the legal setting, he was labeled as a child
predator, whose chief aim was to satisfy his huge ego needs
and lust for forbidden fruits, as the prosecutor poetically
termed it in his philippic. In truth, Bernard did not have the
faintest idea of such a thing when he started out to become
an educator. He had never even once thought about such a
thing, and he would have quite decidedly rejected such an
idea, as a matter of his professional ethics.
All those group fantasies were thus projected upon him,
by the media, by the metagroup that needs scapegoats for
their derelict repressed perversions. And the media rejoiced,
more than anybody else involved in that sordid trial, about all
the stories it could invent around the ‘perpetrator’ that
needed to be ‘crushed’ by law enforcement, and who was
feeling that a world was collapsing on his head and shoulders.
In a climate of paranoid fear and terror as it is reality today in postmodern consumer cultures around the world, no
more true education can be done. It is a fact that educators
who never had training for handling pedoemotions cannot
responsibly cope with the pressures and psychic tension
which is the reason for the increase in teachers committing
suicide for allegedly ‘unknown reasons.’ It is also the reason
for youngsters attacking teachers violently which is a growing
concern especially in France where many teachers have been

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 592

murdered by their students, in schools all over the country,
and for which the government largely has no explanation.
Nicola Sarkozy’s approach to handling pedophilia in
French society is notoriously a combative one, and as such,
treats a certain sexual minority group in an uncivilized fashion. His approach was during his presidency in accord with
global paranoia regarding the issue of pedophilia.
But Mr. Sarkozy should recognize that France is a pluralistic society like many other countries and as such, sexual diversities do exist and must be acknowledged and respected
through due process. His proposal to eradicate members of
the said group via Euthanasia, in which lethal medical drugs
are administered with the chief aim of ending someone’s life,
constitutes uncivilized policy-making. This proposed approach to the handling of pedophilia can be seen as an attempt to sexually cleanse France of people deemed as demons in much the same way as he demonizes the Muslim
immigrants residing in France.
That is why social change is needed for we cannot allow
Nazi-like behavior to surface once again. Permissive education entails showing the entire picture and not just part of it
or a distorted one. The reasons for this polemic are obviously
political. Sarkozy made the game easy when he blamed ‘pedophiles’ for all the pitfalls of his largely incompetent presidency and his inability to communicate effectively with non-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 593

mainstream groups, let alone integrate different interest
groups politically and socially.
In addition, he seems to be obsessed by the idea that
pedophilia was ‘inborn and unchangeable’ and that for that
reason, pedophiles have to be euthanized.
It’s really a fascist agenda as we know it from the times of
Hitler and Mussolini and in Italy it was at the time exactly the
same, under Berlusconi. Hence, the political explosiveness of
the subject but also why both these fascist rulers were
chased by their politically conscious populations!
If children are not allowed to be sexual, and to have free
choice relations, there is only one argument why this is denied. This one single argument is that our leaders are insane!
Police terror was largely rising in France and Italy under Sarkozy and Berlusconi exactly for these reasons, and the cause
of the child was treaded in the gutter. Children were streamlined to ideological ideas and political strategies just as under any fascist and totalitarian regime of the past. Fortunately this tragic comedy of corrupt leadership was ended by
the political will of the peoples!
In this context it is of course highly disturbing for political
leaders to learn from cutting-edge research that children are
erotically conscious and have real sexual feelings, not just

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 594

autoerotic desires as Freud and the rest of Freudian psychoanalysis tends to think.
We know today through multiple pathways of research
that children are not just autoerotic, but fully erotic in the
sense that they desire to have complete intercourse as early
as possible with partners of their choice. This fact is demonstrated in children’s sometimes playful behavior in which they
try to imitate sexual intercourse by thrusting their pelvis while
laughing — an activity often done by male children.
The changes of legal and social policy that I am suggesting here are obvious when one really peruses my reasoning
and the scientific data that back it up.
These changes must be radical or they will not bring any
significant change for the better. In clear text, this means a
total abolishment of all sex laws, the decriminalization of all
human sexual behavior, and the establishment of trusted
consultancy consisting of highly trained psychiatric personnel
specifically engaged to provide counsel to people thereby
ensuring they are able to handle their vital energies constructively.
By contrast, to give way to the pedophile movement’s
claims for recognition would lead to a similar situation as it is
now with homosexuality, where a social grouping maintains
power as it were ‘on false premises’ because the scientific

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 595

data that is advanced to backup its ‘natural’ attraction, are
for the most part truncated.
Such a ‘normalization’ of pedophilia would not necessarily bring any advantage for children; it would not per se give
the child free choice relations. Social policy making must
start not from a utopian or far-fetched agenda, but from the
status quo! The status quo regarding children’s rights is such
that the child in the modern nuclear family cannot really develop their autonomy because they are held tight, so to
speak, as evidenced by pro-active supervision on the part of
parents and teachers.
This is an insane situation that is not conducive for bringing about responsible humans. And to change this, we need
to start where we are, we need to start with the child, not
with the childlover.
We need to give the child the right to choose their partners, and when a child chooses an adult partner, then this
adult partner will not be criminally prosecuted for loving and
knowing the child erotically, sexually, intimately.
Of course such a notion is bound to prompt immediate
outrage in most people, however, social change can only occur if we are willing to question established approaches to
childcare, particularly if such practices are to be effective,

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 596

while entertaining new ways that may prove to be more
promising.
Proposal 12/12
It seems to me that the widely irrational and aggressive
polemics about pedophilia in our mass media have very specific reasons. First of all, it has nothing to do with morality.
Second, it has nothing to do with child protection. Third, it
has much to do with veiling the state of the art, or rather, the
state of the lacking art of our modern education. It has much
to do with covering up the deplorable ignorance we have in
front of children’s full humanity, and the equally deplorable
arrogance we possess to regard them as pleasure cuties and
night pillows for their emotionally immature parents.
This cover-up function of the pedophilia polemics becomes obvious when one has done large-scale research on
the reasons why men and women choose children as their
partners, through deliberate emotional choice and a resulting sexual attraction in some of the cases. I stress the fact
that the sexual attraction is indeed second, and that it is random, as we do not yet know why natural pedoemotions turn
sexual in one case, but not in another case.
For example, it is known that the British mathematician
and photographer Lewis Carroll loved little girls, but it is not
known if he was in any way also sexually attracted to them.

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 597

For the least we do not have any evidence to the latter assumption. This is what I call an ‘emotional predilection.’
But of course, the whole of the myth of the pedophile
predator covers up the fact that pedoemotions are natural
because they are at the basis of our interest to procreate,
and also our interest to become teachers or day care workers. When a person says ‘I love children’ one does regularly
not associate that the person is sexually attracted to children.
One associates that the person has an emotional predilection for children, which means an interest in being around
children, an interest also to care for children, and sometimes
an interest to save children from any unfortunate life circumstances, which includes, for example, the desire to become a
nurse in a pediatrics hospital or to work for an NGO that
works for improving the life conditions of children in the third
world or in countries where there is war or civil war.
Yet the perhaps astonishing fact is that it is often within
these professions that adult-child sexual contacts seem to
happen. This was quite obvious also when the persecution of
child sex offenders started in the Philippines and Sri Lanka, in
the 1980s. Many of those arrested child sex tourists turned
out to be child care workers, teachers and pediatricians.
This shows that regularly, a sexual attraction develops as
it were on top of a prevalent emotional predilection. This insight is the result of my own research; it is nowhere to be

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 598

found in books on child abuse, nor in sexology manuals, for
the simple reason that today’s mental health professionals
still assume that human sexuality was a ‘drive’ in the sense of
being an automatism. But it is not, not at all. The assumption
of ‘sexual drives’ was first made by Sigmund Freud and it was
harshly contradicted by Wilhelm Reich who wrote this in one
of his books:
I stress the rationality of the primary emotions of all living.
The mechanists of depth psychology have namely spread the
view that all emotions were but drives and therefore irrational. However, emotions are specific functions of the protoplasm. Emotions and the natural movement of the bioplasm are functionally identical phenomena.
As Dr. Reich said it, the Freudian view and the view of
modern sexology regarding the human sexual function is
completely and hopelessly mechanistic. It is wrong because
the human being, as modern science discovered through the
systems view of life, is not a machine!
Now, how to draft a social policy that both makes for
happier childhoods and that avoids people turning into homosexuals and pedophiles?
The way to go is to draft an educational agenda that is
the most possible respectful toward the emotional and sexual needs of the child and to change our ‘public morals’ ac-

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 599

cordingly. The above-mentioned new policy proposal will
most likely be difficult to embrace by most people for they
are radical in vision; hence the need for a definite break from
mainstream thinking.
However, I harbor a sense of urgency here and the rest of
the world should, too, if we are to foster a more pro-life future.
In order to activate social change for the betterment of
everybody, the only way to bring about social change which
takes into account the greatest happiness for the greatest
number is to introduce social and legal suggestions aimed at
reducing violence and paranoia, while at the same time
gradually developing a more pleasure oriented, pro-sexual
society.
With the current polemics and the systematic propaganda against sexual diversity, what we create is more of violence, more of homosexuality and more of pedophilia. It’s as
simple as that.
But this is not what we want as a sane society, right? So
we should give reasonably course to a liberation of the child
from consumer pressure, and allow children free choice relations within the realm of natural morality, which means that
children learn to respect the golden rule of conduct, that is,
to do no harm to self and others!

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License

Love or Morality? / 600

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Contextual Bibliography
Published on Scribd

©Creative Commons 4.0 International License