“Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20:1. The present study investigated whether the etiology of preferred partner sex among pedophiles is related to the etiology of preferred partner sex among males preferring adult partners. Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually. This, of course, would not indicate that androphilic males have a greater propensity to offend against children.“ (Freund & Watson, 1992)
And such starts almost every caveat on the topic in modern social sciences. They report the truth about the overwhelming homosexual overrepresentation among pedophile abusing children, but then turn around and outright deny the obvious with hand waving. If you call them out on it they will dismiss you as unqualified/uneducated or if you are on academic parity with them; as a bigot.
The profuse data is undeniable despite of this. The overrepresentation of homosexual males amongst pedophiles is between 6-16x prevalence rate, which is dependent on what number you use to estimate homosexuality that range between 2-5% of male population (this differences from country to country but also based on measurements; some studies use self-identification and others “homosexual experiences”. The former is significantly lower than the later). Busts such as on of the largest Darkweb pedophile site in the world with 400 000 registered users being named “Boystown” and being dedicated to abuse male children and toddlers is indicative of such. Female pedophiles are so statistically rare that they are considered irrelevant. One study stated “ Since pedophilia either does not exist at all in women, or is extremely rare, only men were included in the study.” . This however, does not mean that women are not complicit in allowing male pedophiles to molest children for monetary, social and relationship benefits (which is disturbingly common, especially amongst organized pedophile rings such as those found in Child Protecitive Services).
So what is one of the main causes of this? The clear liberal bias in academia:
“In the social sciences and humanities, however, there is a stronger imbalance. For
instance, recent surveys find that 58 – 66 percent of social science professors in the United States identify as liberals, while only 5 – 8 percent identify as conservatives, and that self-identified Democrats outnumber Republicans by ratios of at least 8 to 1 (Gross & Simmons, 2007; Klein & Stern, 2009; Rothman & Lichter, 2008). A similar situation is found in the humanities where surveys find that 52 – 77 percent of humanities professors identify as liberals, while only 4 – 8 percent identify as conservatives, and that self-identified Democrats outnumber Republicans by ratios of at least 5:1 (Gross & Simmons, 2007; Rothman & Lichter, 2008). In psychology the imbalance is slightly stronger: 84 percent identify as liberal while only 8 percent identify as conservative (Gross & Simmons, 2007; Rothman & Lichter, 2008). That is a ratio of 10.5 to 1. In the United States as a whole, the ratio of liberals to conservatives is roughly 1 to 2 (Gallup, 2010).”
Liberals have been at the forefront of legitimizing homosexuality over the last decades, along with other deviant behaviors including transgenderism, incest, bestiality, pedophilia etc. As this has been one of their goals, they have been actively downplaying the psychopathologies associated with homosexuality, which opposes their whole agenda of them encouraging homosexuals to have “pride”. The elephant in the room of them not wanting the public to realize the huge connection between pedophiles and homosexuals. Why? It is not because of an inherent opposition to pedophilia amongst the radical left (although moderate leftists oppose it), as this is one of their long term radical goals, but rather it is simply a strategic goal of preventing a negative public backlash to homosexuality and pedophilia as the public at present has not been psychologically processed enough to accept pedophilia.
Furthermore, conservative catholic clergy have highlighted the fact that the Catholic church pedophile problem was multiplied by an order of magnitude with the allowance by the church for gay men to become clergy members. This allowance of sodomites to infest the church and establish a “Lavender Mafia” as E Michael Jones has put it, has allowed for them to cover up them and their colleagues sexual abuse against boys (whom are the main demographic that has been abused in Catholic churches). I will share some of what has been written by a Conservative writer on it:
“A German cardinal, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, is in a lot of trouble for pointing out the obvious: the problem in today’s Catholic Church is homosexuality and its inescapable link to pedophilia.
The sexual abuse of boys by Catholic clergy is now a mushroom cloud hanging over the Catholic Church, threatening its stability and its future. The issue burst into the open with the revelation in the summer of 2018 that six dioceses in Pennsylvania had been covering up at least 1,000 instances of child sexual abuse by hundreds of priests over the course of decades.
A study commissioned by the German Bishops Conference and published last year “found that more than 3,600 children were sexually abused by Catholic clergy in Germany between 1946 and 2014.”
Cardinal Brandmüller was a bit too quick to deflect blame from the Catholic Church itself, by blaming the whole problem on homosexuality. But they invited this scandal when it began allowing homosexuals to enter its seminaries in the 1960s. They did so because of the difficulty of recruiting young men into the priesthood who quite naturally wanted to marry and have families.
As more and more homosexuals flooded seminaries and then went into the priesthood, a culture of homosexuality was fostered in the church with all its attendant pathologies.
One pathology that LGBT activists will not acknowledge is the unmistakable connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children stated flatly that “the vast majority of the offenders are male.” (The information in these paragraphs is found in the publication, “The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality” from the Family Research Council.)
The Journal of Sex & Married Therapy, in a study of male sex offenders against children, found that one-third of the offenders directed their sexual activity against males. And the Journal of Sex Research found that homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of sex offenses against children.“
It is good that the same information is being brought up by this writer.
“This fact is particularly disturbing. Homosexuals comprise just two percent of the population, yet are responsible for 33% of all child sexual abuse. They offend against children at 16 times the rate of the normal population.
The Archives of Sexual Behavior, in a study of 229 convicted child molesters, found that “eighty-six percent of offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.”
Thus it comes as no surprise to discover that research into the priesthood scandal in the Catholic Church reveals that 81% of the victims of clergy abuse are young boys.
Now this is most certainly not to say that every priest or even most priests are pedophiles. The great majority, of course, are not. But some, in fact too many, are and that’s the problem.
Fortunately, the Catholic Church for the first time seems to be taking firm steps to deal with this, by making men with same-sex proclivities ineligible for the priesthood. If they had established this standard in 1960, thousands upon thousands of children would have been spared the life-altering trauma of sexual abuse.”