Do Academics Defend Pedophiles?

We, the academics, are a source of all ills. Whenever anything goes wrong in our society, blame those commie pinko hippie feminist postmodern Baudrillard-reading Kristeva-quoting frappuccino-chugging enemies of humanity.

Not only do we pollute the minds of our impressionable adult students, we also pervert little kids. How do we manage to do this if there are no little kids on campuses? By spreading vicious pedophilic propaganda through our research, of course. Don’t you know that “research” is a horribly dangerous thing that undermines the things our society holds most sacred? Aren’t these vile academics the same people who brought us this completely invented evolution theory? And after you defend evolution, the next step is logically to promote pedophilia.

Anne Hendershott heard that some academic somewhere said (we don’t even know in which context) that “childhood innocence” is a fantasy. Another academic uttered a very boring platitude that “a child of seven may have built an elaborate set of sexual understandings and codes which would baffle many adults.” Hendershott must be the only person in the world unaware of the well-known fact that children of seven are hypersexual and that this biological reality in no way excuses pedophiles. She immediately fired off an angry article about horrible academics plotting to pervert little kids.

The article is, of course, just standard academia-bashing. We all know how much I detest pedophiles. Still, one could easily pluck some quotes out of my own doctoral dissertation to make me look like a huge pedophile. I also discuss in my classes that childhood is a socially constructed phenomenon of very recent origins. Academics study a variety of subjects that tend to shock when recounted in the language of a tabloid. However, the idea that academics infiltrate the university presses to spread their propaganda in books that maybe 20 people will get to read (and that’s wildly optimistic) is kind of silly. The greatest propaganda of pedophilia is how famous actors kiss Polanski’s ass in public.

Hendershott isn’t interested in that at all, though. An attentive reader will soon realize that pedophiles are not the greatest aim of her rage. The article is filed under the tags “homosexuality, pedophilia.” In the middle of the article we see the following advertisement:

Given that most instances of child abuse are perpetrated within a child’s own family, this exhortation tells us that Hendershott doesn’t give a rat’s ass about abused children. She simply wants to attack the two groups she hates the most: academics and gays. Then, of course, there are gay academics, which is a reality that, I’m sure, Hendershott finds very traumatic. She cannot confess that because in the academic environment homophobia makes you a pariah. This is why she masks her hatred of gays behind a completely spurious concern about non-existing movement of academic defenders of pedophilia.

I will now let you guess who is to blame, according to the very stupid, nasty, homophobic Hendershott, for the (again, completely spurious) tolerance for women who pervert little girls? Right you are, feminists!

I have to ask, why does King’s College in New York employ this vicious freakazoid?

16 thoughts on “Do Academics Defend Pedophiles?

  1. It’s so nice to know that my pedantic little poststructuralist essays about Renaissance and Romantic lit are in some way contributing to a vast intellectual conspiracy of pure evil. And here I thought I had to wear a silly outfit to be a supervillain.


    1. And what really bugs me about the whole thing is that there are so many brilliant academics right now who are not employed while this nasty jerk has a job. She is putting her entire institution to shame, yet they are keeping her (even though she obviously doesn’t have tenure). Why?? Why aren’t her colleagues boycotting her? Why are they just sitting there like dummies?

      I’m angry.


      1. I think it’s kind of a tabloid phenomenon. “Shocker! Lewd Literati and the Lolitas they Love!” Whatever represents intellectuals as all pervs and criminals gets readers and brings in the cash, since it appeals strongly to ignorant people who wish to continue feeling morally justified in their horrible opinions.

        That said, I think Hendershott is spot on that “[t]his opens the door for the postmodern pedophile to see such behavior as part of the politics of transgression,” though not in the way she thinks. Abusers love to take sociological research out of context to normalize their abuse. Thankfully for them, Hendershott does the legwork of misrepresenting Foucauldian analysis and “socialist-feminist” work.

        Wouldn’t surprise me if some flowering pedo stumbled across this article and, without seeking further information anywhere besides the cited NAMBLA page and that “intergenerational intimacy” thing, decided that hey, the smarty-pants progressives are on my side after all!


        1. You always help me get over my anger with your brilliant sense of humor. “Shocker! Lewd Literati and the Lolitas they Love!” is absolutely priceless.

          And you are absolutely right in that Hendershott ends up being of use to actual pedophiles. This is why I say that she isn’t really interested in addressing child abuse. In the fundamentalist religious circles where she undoubtedly moves, nobody frowns on pedophilia. She just uses the general outrage against pedophiles to promote her homophobic academia-bashing feminist-condemning ideas.


  2. That “article” was a doozy, but what I’m most confused by is how she can cite the Penn State case as “proof” of academia’s evil, when in fact, that was the university’s football program, which is usually touted by these types as the ultimate in values-building, which was responsible for aiding and abetting child rapists in that case.


    1. I know!!! Most academics are in favor of cutting the obscene funding for athletics in favor of reinstating grants to promising students. Now postmodern scholars and feminist critics are to blame for Penn State all of a sudden??



    Anne Hendershott is a visiting professor at “The King’s College” NY, NY. This is a Christian college founded in 1938 in NJ, moving to NY and gaining NY accreditation in 1955. It went bankrupt in 1994 due to decreasing enrollment and poor management, and was rechartered in 1997, with Campus Crusade for Christ as the sole member of the corporation. Conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza has been president since 2010.

    Campus Crusade for Christ belongs to the wing of conservative Christian evangelical Protestants who consider politics as a crusade against godless liberalism, and who hold anti-gay, anti-feminist (anti- non-submissive women), anti-abortion, and anti-contraception public platforms, to gather members and donations and to stir up the electorate. Privately, the CCC management political objectives are anti-union, anti-regulation, anti-tax, anti-worker safety, anti-minimum wage, anti-welfare (other than corporate welfare aka subsidies, which they favor).

    Dinesh D’Souza was in the Dartmouth College group that published an alternate conservative student newspaper funded by non-collegiate donors. His best known student work was writing and publishing an article in 1981 outing the members of the Dartmouth Gay Alliance, not all of whom were out to their parents. That’s 1981, a different and more repressive time, when being known to be homosexual was a serious impediment to employment. The outing was not done because there was a scandal or other “legitimate” news item, but just out of malice or desire to emulate the tabloid scandal sheets. D’Souza does not have an earned degree higher than a B.A.

    Academics at The King’s College: Direct quote from the wiki above: “The college is authorized by the Board of Regents to grant two degrees in a total of four programs.[18] and has received regional accreditation from the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools’ Commission on Higher Education.[19][20] The college currently maintains degrees in “Business Management,” “Politics, Philosophy, and Economics” (“PPE”), and[21] a major in “Media, Culture and the Arts” (“MCA”), which was officially launched in August 2009.[22] Within the PPE program, students are able to pursue “concentrations” in literature, media, theology, and foundations of education.[23] The MCA program has concentrated electives in literature, creative writing, journalism, media studies, and the visual and theatre arts.[24] Students also take courses in theology and Western civilization.[25]”

    They have one biology professor (emeritus), formerly head of a Creationism (anti-evolution) institute.


      1. I have some interest in the culture of American (and increasingly, foreign) conservative evangelical and Neo-Pentecostal believers and organizations, and in the political machinations of religious organizations and of those who use religion as a hook to motivate voters.

        I don’t understand “true believers” who don’t test their beliefs in the face of experience. Their mindset is alien to me – and these are 20% of our fellow Americans.


  4. Considering intergenerational intimacy, I have known gay male couples who would qualify. It is fairly common to see pairings between 25 year olds and 45 year olds (or older). A 20 year age difference in a relationship likely qualifies for intergenerational intimacy. Some young gay men actively seek only older men.

    Note that intergenerational intimacy is supposed to be every heterosexual man’s desire. Visible male success is having a trophy wife 20 years younger than hubby.


  5. Do academics defend pedophiles?

    If the definition of a pedophile migrates to include inter generational intimacy and relationships. If the line is blurred to that extent then yes academics do defend pedophiles. If we can unify the definitions of intimacy and relationship to justify our sexuality we can seperate them as quickly to accuse and condem. Once separated it would not surprise me to see all academics defined as unprosecuted pedophiles given their desire to engage in inter generational relations daily and on mass. Once such delusional thinking is entrenched we can go on to vilify anyone that interacts with youth. Mentors and even parents. Oh wait we already have.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.