The Roots of Violence
Love or Morality: Chapter Eleven
“The Tao of Love”
“Toward a Functional Understanding of Love”
“On the True Nature of Human Sexuality”
“The Demonization of Adult-Child Erotic Love
“The Commercial Exploitation of Abuse”
“The Patriarchal Love Bias”
“The Truncated Account of Adult-Child Erotic Attraction”
“Does Pedophile Love Equate Abuse?”
“Is Pedophilia a Sexual Perversion?
“The Legal Split in Child Protection”
“The Violence of Morality”
“The Roots of Violence”
“The 12 Angular Points of Social Justice and Peace”
Download PDF from Scribd
Download the Book (607 Pages)
Download PDF from Scribd
Violence Begins Inside
Love and Morality
The Value of Permissiveness
Pleasure Defeats Violence
Breaking the Vicious Circle
The Tactile Imperative
The Importance of Sensuality
Social Policy Considerations
Quest for a Distinction
For the Child’s Best?
The Turndown of International Adoption
Child Play vs. Morality
The Love Continuum
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 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 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 so-called 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, terrorists 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 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 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 well-churched politicians.
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 today 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 cross-cultural 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.
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 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 feel-hostile 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.
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-and-abuse 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 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 life-denying 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-of-consent 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 balance, 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 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 state-individual 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 catastrophic 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 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 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 (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. 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 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).
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 system-conform 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.
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.
— 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.
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.
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.
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 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 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 co-sleeping 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 corroborated 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.
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 destructive 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 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:
— 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 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 publications 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 child-rearing 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.
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 enjoyed 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 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 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 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 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 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 so-called 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.
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?
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 others. 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 self-healing is part of your spiritual perfection as a complete human.
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 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 motivated 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 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 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 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.
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 life-enhancing 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 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 morality’ 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 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 Uncle 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 child-related 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 statistics 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.
The following graphics is thanks to the ‘Family Violence Prevention Fund’ in the United States.
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 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 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-to-grasp 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 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.
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 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!
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 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 Sherriff’s Van (1968), A.M. Scarro Jr. (ed.), Male Rape (1982). See also Interview with Brett Portman in P. A. N. 15, 29–39 (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).
In addition, it is established in forensic psychiatry that the nonviolent pedophile and the child-assaulting and child-murdering 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.
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 traditions, 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 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 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.
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 growth-fostering 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, 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 peace-loving;
— 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 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.
— 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 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 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 slaughter-politicians.
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 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 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.
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 cooperating 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 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 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.
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, especially 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 State-authorized. (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 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 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.
— 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 purport 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 well-being — 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.
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 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 facilities 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 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 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.
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 ongoing 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, 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 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 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 America-driven 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.
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 Middle-Ages. 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.
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:
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;
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;
Projection, that is what has been repressed and thus was blinded out from consciousness is projected on others as 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 no-solution; 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 infamous 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.
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 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.
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.