Peer Review and Pedophiles

Editors Note: This article is not for the faint of heart, or the soft of stomach. Young children should not continue to read, as this subject matter is definitely more mature in nature, unfortunately. Parental discretion is strongly advised. 

A recent article published by a peer-reviewed journal highlights just how fast and how far our moral fabric has been unwound. This particular journal, Sexuality and Culture, published by peer review journal magnate Springer, recently published an article entitled “Childhood ‘Innocence’ is Not Ideal: Virtue Ethics and Child-Adult Sex”. The title itself should reveal just how disgusting this article is, but it gets even worse the more you dig into it. This article will discuss the underlying agenda and mindset that permits these journals to publish this garbage.

First, as we’ve previously discussed, peer-review is a process by which academic journals attempt to ensure what they publish is accurate and provides value.  In order to do this, they contact other “experts” in a given field and ask them to review a manuscript. Once the article has been reviewed, no easy feat given the egos and time elements involved, it is sent back to the author to have any issues addressed.  Once the author addresses the issues, ideally, the article is published.  Generally, this means that the author must secure at least implied approval of at least one, generally two or three reviewers, plus the editors of the journal before publishing.

With that in mind, let us talk about the author of this paper and the journal itself. Sexuality and Culture is ranked 38 of the one hundred plus journals that cover “gender studies” so it is not the most influential, but it isn’t exactly obscure in its field either. Nor is this the first time pedophilia has been broached in this journal. The topic was discussed as early as 2015. This journal was infamously hoaxed in 2018 by a group of researchers drawing up falsified papers deliberately to illustrate the hypocrisy of the “gender study” journals.  The author, Thomas O’Carroll, is an equally bad actor.  He has been imprisoned three times for pedophilia-related crimes, though one conviction was later overturned. One of those convictions, which was not overturned, was for producing child pornography in which children were tortured. I think it is a fair assessment to say he might suffer from a bit of bias. Logically, of course, we cannot reject his arguments simply because of this, but it’s worth keeping in mind.

The logic of this author is actually surprisingly good. It is the application of his logic that is the issue. Because he starts from a secular worldview, his foundation is shaky, and therefore no matter how sound his logic, his premise is false. He accidentally illustrates the issue is the foundation in his opening arguments. “But what is the true teleology of sex? For some traditionalists the answer is obvious: procreation. Thus limited, however, we would be obliged to declare the viciousness of masturbation, homosexuality, contraception and much else.”

The author asks the question, what is the purpose of sex? Because he starts from a secular worldview, his answer is purely the pleasure of it. Thus it logically follows that every form of sexual activity that can give pleasure should be pursued. This is essentially the Epicurean philosophy that the Bible talks about in 1 Corinthians 15:32 summed up as “Eat and drink for to morrow we die”.  This author, while his outlook is repugnant, is being logically consistent in his views. If sex is purely meant for pleasure, then why not pursue every possible outlet that brings you pleasure?

If, on the other hand, sex is meant to produce children and provide pleasure in so doing, then all other forms of deviant sexual behavior must be rejected out of hand. This is a simple logical argument, one which the author of the paper acknowledges.  He points out that if the purpose of sex is to have children, then homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality and so on must be rejected immediately as outside the purpose of sexuality.

This article is calamitous yes, but there is more at stake here than one perverse article. As disgusting and disturbing as this article is, it is merely the tip of the iceberg.  There is a war going on. The war is between two worldviews. The view of sexuality is merely one aspect of that worldview. This article illustrates that, to the secular worldview, nothing is sacred. Instead, everything must be made submissive to the secular idea of what is right, just, and good, even though those ideas are borrowed from the Bible. Pedophilia has already become accepted among some members of the elite academic and entertainment branches of our society. Barring a miraculous revival, it will continue to spread, and permeate the culture, because our culture has, by and large, accepted the secular worldview on which it is based.