9News.com

DENVER – A controversial self-published book that offered advice to pedophiles has apparently been pulled from the website that was selling it.

Amazon.com no longer had a listing for "The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover’s Code of Conduct" on Thursday.

A search of the site produced a link to Pueblo author Philip R. Greaves II’s book, but the link now leads to a dead end. The listing apparently has been deleted.

The online bookseller came under fire Wednesday when some of its customers threatened to boycott the site because of the book.

Amazon had issued the following statement Wednesday:

"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."

Greaves had defended the book on Wednesday.

"Every time you see them on television, they’re either murderers, rapists or kidnappers, and, you know, that’s just not an accurate presentation of that particular sexuality, it’s not."

Amazon.com did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Here is a hard-hitting but highly accurate recap of the problem of child sexual abuse in the Boy Scouts, triggered by our trial in Portland this past Spring.  The Boy Scouts of America has such great potential, and has been such a positive influence in the lives of so many kids; but that cannot and should not erase the story of tens of thousands of boys who were sexually abused in Scouting, while all the time the national organizations knowingly stood by and did nothing to change its program to protect its kids, and indeed even covered up the problem. 

Have they learned their lesson? And, of course, like too many institutions of trust where abuse happens, BSA did nothing to reach out to known child sexual abuse victims and offer them help.  Those who are most committed to Scouting should react most strongly to the utter failure of BSA to live up to its own ideals when it comes to the sexual abuse of children in the Boy Scouts.

Read Here.

We encourage you to contact Amazon and express your outrage at this. This deserves a full boycott if they don’t heed the message.

Amazon defends ‘Pedophile’s Guide’
Another book protested in 2002 for advocating adult-child sex is still available on the site.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40112145/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/

By Helen A.S. Popkin
November 10, 2010
www.MSNBC.com

NEW YORK — Amazon is selling a self-published book defending pedophiles, sparking discussions about the retailer’s obligation to vet items before they are sold in its online stores, and threats of boycott from Amazon customers if the book is not removed.

The book, " The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover’s Code of Conduct" by Philip R. Greaves II, offers advice to pedophiles afraid of becoming the center of retaliation. It is an electronic book available for Amazon.com Inc.’s Kindle e-reader.

The author’s description (misspellings included) reads:

"This is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian rules for these adults to follow. I hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals, with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred and perhaps liter sentences should they ever be caught."

Amazon issued a statement that will no doubt fuel the outraged comments multiplying on the "Pedophile’s Guide" Amazon page. "Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable," it reads. "Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."

As a private company, Amazon has the right to sell whatever it wants as long as it’s legal, and as such, offers books that cater to Holocaust deniers and other hate groups, as well as graphic dog fighting and cock fighting videos. Adult (legal) pornography, while available in book and magazine form, is not permitted in the Kindle e-reader store. This is possibly because of its iTunes partnership with the notoriously porn-free Apple which removed both "Ulysses" and the "Kama Sutra" from its own book store.

Video: Why was Amazon selling pedophilia guide? (on this page)

A customer review on the "Pedophile’s Guide" Amazon page written by "Outraged Mother" reads, "The line of immorality is at best a zone with ill defined boundaries. Whatever. This crosses into the unsavory and shameful side of the zone. Take it down."

"There is a point when, even though a company has a no-censorship policy, that selling certain books is simply wrong," reads "Disgusting Abomination," another customer review. "Not censoring is one thing, and I commend that, but choosing to sell this book on a site that accessed by millions of people (including children) daily is reprehensible. This is a disgusting choice you have made, Amazon. Whatever money you are making off this book can’t be worth the ire you are receiving for selling it."

In an unexplained turn of events, more than 103 customer reviews populated the "Pedophile’s Guide" page earlier today, when news first broke about the book’s availability, but dropped down to less than 30 by late afternoon. The number of reviews has since grown to over 60.

As news and outrage about the book spread, the first (presumed) Internet jokester chimed in with "A fantastic guide," the first five star review:

"I can’t thank Amazon enough for keeping this great work of literature up for those of us with ‘special tastes.’ The instructions and images in the guide were extremely insightful and led to a wonderful experience for both myself and my partner. Thank you for protecting free speech, Amazon!"

In 2002, Amazon.com cited the First Amendment as justification for offering another book that advocates adult-child sex, "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers," by David L. Riegel. Further, the paperback book is still available on the site.

At that time, Amazon stated, "Our goal is to support freedom of expression and to provide customers with the broadest selection possible so they can find, discover, and buy any title they might be seeking."

An Amazon employee emphasized that "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers" was "not a ‘how-to’ manual for molesting children. The author simply expresses his point of view about what he feels are misunderstood."

"Pedophile’s Guide" has also triggered mounting outrage on Twitter and beyond. A chorus of Twitter users is calling for Amazon to pull the book, and a campaign to push the hashtag #BoycottAmazon into Twitter’s top trends is underway.

A keyword search for "Amazon" on the microblogging network reveals a growing number of retweets featuring Amazon’s contact info and urges to keep calling and e-mailing "until the book is removed."

Associated Press contributed to this report.

TUNE in on NOVEMBER 5 and NOVEMBER 12, 2010 to watch the show!

Matthias Conaty participated in this Oprah special as one of the two hundred survivors of sexual abuse.  He serves on the board of directors of the National Association to Prevent Sexual Abuse of Children and is the vice chair for the National Child Protection Training Center board of directors. 

As I sat in the audience of 200 courageous men at this groundbreaking taping of The Oprah Winfrey Show, my thoughts and emotions were difficult to contain. I felt my long journey of suffering and surviving sexual abuse and finding ways to cope with the toxic shame and blame it left behind had reached a turning point.  Oprah pointed out what a tremendous amount of energy we had gathered with the noble purpose of shining a light of awareness on the pervasive, insidious human tragedy of sexual abuse of children.

A major theme in the show was how men who were sexually abused as children tend to stay silent. While this is also true of girls and women, statics tell us males are even more likely not to come forward. My transformation from victim of childhood sexual abuse to survivor began when I finally found my voice and was able to speak up. Thankfully I was believed. Family, friends and advocates supported me. I was able to help my home state, Delaware, pass landmark statute of limitations reform. This law, the Child Victim’s Act, allowed 10 victims of the man who abused me to be among the many victims who were able to speak up and move forward in their journeys of recovery. The community is now on notice that there are dangerous predators among us. Rooting out predators is critical because we must focus on preventing sexual abuse from happening to children right now and in the future.

For me, the indelible image from the Oprah show will remain the entire male survivor audience to holding up 8x10s of our childhood photos as the program began. That simple act alone was a powerful statement made by this landmark show.  As adult men, we were standing up for the boys we once were and representing the thousands of silent children and wounded adults who are among us.

I am honored to work with the dedicated child protection professionals and volunteers at the National Child Protection Training Center. In this effort, I am able to turn a tragic part of my childhood into positive action for others today and in the future. NCPTC has a unique vision and purpose. We have set the goal of ending child abuse in the United States within three generations. Sounds idealistic, doesn’t it? It certainly is. It’s idealistic and critically necessary. Our executive director, Victor Vieth, has created an inspiring peer-reviewed plan of action — Unto the Third Generation — that is concrete and unfolding throughout the nation right now.

Since its inception, NCPTC has trained more than 40,000 front-line child protection workers and forensic interviewers in all 50 states and 17 countries. Prevention education is also a major component of our mission. Along with the prevention specialists of the Jacob Wetterling Resource Center, NCPTC educates families and communities to prevent the exploitation of children. Prevention is delivered to adults, children, teens and community coalitions or agencies. Please join us in this grassroots movement to ensure minors are never again treated as objects and that all children are afforded the personal safety and dignity they deserve.

Matthias Conaty of Wilmington, Del., helped to lead the Coalition to Pass the Child Victim’s Act, which successfully lobbied the Delaware Legislature to repeal the civil statute of limitations and enacted a two-year civil window for victims of childhood sexual abuse in Delaware. He also serves on the board of directors of the National Association to Prevent Sexual Abuse of Children and as the vice chair for the National Child Protection Training Center board of directors.

NCPTC and NAPSAC are nonprofit organizations dedicated to ending child abuse through education, training, awareness, prevention, advocacy and the pursuit of justice.  NCPTC promotes reformation of current training practices by providing an educational curriculum to current and future front-line child protection professionals around the nation so that they will be prepared to recognize and report the abuse of a child.  You can make donations to NCPTC—a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, or NAPSAC—a nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization.  All donations received will help fund services and programs of the organizations.  Make a donation to NCPTC or NAPSAC today.

  Click here to learn more about Oprah’s two-day show event.

Stay tuned for more commentary to follow.

Child abuse and crime victims groups file amicus brief urging the Oregon Supreme Court to help break the cycle of secrecy in child sexual abuse cases.

Read the brief here!

The news that over 1000 teachers in Kenya have been dismissed in recent years for sexually abusing girls is stunning.  Read The Article Here.

No matter how long I do this work, I never get used to such things—and especially not to such numbers.  If you assume that, on average, each teacher involved had 10 victims—a conservative number, according to psychological literature—there are at least 10,000 girls affected.  But wait: we know that only a handful ever get caught or reported: 10% would be a very high number.  But even if it is that, there would be as many as 100,000 girls abused.  Again, the problem seems to be of staggering proportions.

This dynamic is similar to what we learned in the sex abuse trial of the Boy Scouts in Portland this past spring.  We had over 1200 “Perversion files” introduced into evidence, all concerning Boy Scout leaders sexually abusing boys, just from 1965-85.  Expert testimony established that, for such an environment, each such Boy Scout leader would have, on average, 10-20 victims, and that, perhaps 10% of all sex abuse in the Boy Scouts  would ever be reported—a very optimistic number, the experts agreed.  But if you do that math, it means that somewhere between120,000 and 240,000 boys were sexually abused in Boy Scouting, JUST from 1965-85.  And we know that the Boy Scouts have been keeping their “confidential Perversion files” on child sexual abusers since 1925.    As I have said repeatedly since the trial, I am personally convinced that the problem of child sexual abuse in the Boy Scouts is at least as serious, if not worse, than the sexual abuse problem in the Catholic Church.

Read here: Oregon sex-literature laws ruled unconstitutional

This is what I meant when I said, in a 2008 debate with the ACLU’c Charlie Hinkle at the City Club that we in Oregon have "too much free speech." When we cannot pass common-sense laws aimed at protecting children because of wholly abstract "free speech" limits, then we have "too much free speech," and judges run a risk of so alienating the public, so separating the "constitutional sense" from the "common sense" of the people, that both the courts and the constitution will lose legitimacy with the average citizen.

My full comments can be found at here.

"However, it is the scandal over paedophile priests that will plague the Pope throughout his visit.

…"But while the Pope has expressed contrition over the revelations, even senior Catholics in Britain believe the Vatican has not handled its response to the crisis well.

‘The Vatican has got itself into a very defensive position, which probably inhibits the positive initiatives we could be taking,’ Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster, said recently. ‘The Holy See can do a lot better in its understanding of how the media perceive things and how important those perceptions are.’

…"The Vatican‘s attitude appears to remain one of minimising the wave of criticism focused on Pope Benedict’s handling of the crisis over paedophile priests. Complaints were ‘excessive amplifications’ with ‘an echo superior to that which is the true sensitivity of the population’, Federico Lombardi, spokesman for the Vatican, said on Friday."

–Financial Times, Sept 13, 2010.

"Excessive amplifications?"  Really?  Really.   Compare this response, so typical of the Vatican, with that of the Belgian Church in today’s NYT– which really seems to get that the abuse scandals there are a very big deal and must be dealt with in an upfront and uncompromising way.  See article here.

Tragically, the American Church’s response has been and continues to be closer to that of the Vatican than that of Belgium.

It didn’t have to be this way. Way back in the mid-1980′s, after the cases involving Fr Gil Gauthe of Louisiana came to light, the National Bishops Conference commissioned a study by three men whom they trusted as being experts in the field, one of whom was a young priest and canon lawyer, then in the Washington DC Vatican embassy, with an obviously bright future, Fr Thomas Doyle.  The study came back with an unpopular conclusion: the Church has a major child abuse problem on its hands, and, unless the Church comes forward quickly and aggressively to acknowledge it, seek out the victims and get them help, the Church could be facing huge liability. How huge?  Perhaps as much as a HALF A BILLION DOLLARS in liability, the study concluded.

Well, the report was shelved, and Doyle’s bright career was derailed.  (He ended up as a longtime priest in the Air Force, and has become the leading priest expert in the nation on the abuse problem, testifying hundreds of times for victims in court and depositions. He is one of the most spiritually courageous men I know.)

But fast forward twenty years, and the American Church has been badly damaged by their own failure to do the right thing back in 1985.  SEVERAL Billions of dollars paid out in judgments and settlements– just in the US– plus several dioceses bankrupt, a Cardinal from Boston forced to resign, and the image of the Church in tatters. 

All because the Bishops thought the Doyle report was–to borrow from the words of Fr Lombardi above–"excessive amplifications."

After six weeks of trial against the Boy Scouts of America—resulting in, as far as I know, the largest child abuse verdict in American history on behalf of one plaintiff—I am being asked repeatedly to blog about the lessons from the trial.  There are of course many, and some of the most important have to do with Kerry Lewis, my client and now friend, who stood so courageously and told his story so clearly.  But the lessons from the other end of the evidence—about what happens when good youth organizations forget their first principles and react to allegations of child abuse by keeping secrets—is what I want to write about first. So here is an open letter to youth organizations; here is what I hope they learn:

Dear Youth Organization:

I write this to you because you have taken on the great task of working with children.  Whether you are a school, a church, an athletic league, a dance company or a day care center, whether you are a public or private entity, whether you are a new organization or have been around for decades, you are doing good work. You are helping our young people to grow up, and you are doing your best. No doubt.  So I respectfully offer some of the lessons of the long trial in Portland, Oregon against the Boy Scouts.  Please learn these lessons, so that kids will be safe and so that you don’t make the same mistakes that too many other youth organizations have made.

So, while it is all fresh in our minds, let’s consider the lessons from this trial against the Boy Scouts of America – once America’s most trusted youth organization – as the evidence came in to a very attentive and unusually well-educated jury:

1.  You Cannot Keep Secrets About Hidden Dangers to Children.

Youth organizations must do everything feasible to protect children, and cannot keep secrets about hidden dangers to children.”  This simple theme was the foundation for our entire case. It seemed to us—my co-counsel Paul Mones and I– to be a fair and general principle to which any youth organization would agree.  We had planned to go from that principle to showing that BSA had not adhered to the common sense rules.   Yet numerous times during the trial we were stunned to hear witnesses for the BSA who would refuse to acknowledge this basic idea. Not refuse to acknowledge that the BSA violated this idea– we expected that.  But refuse to acknowledge the basic principle itself!   The message given to the jury by such quibbling was that the BSA was playing word games and putting qualifiers on the question of safety to children. 

The fact is, the BSA has known for decades that it had a serious child abuse problem. They kept interior confidential files on the problem since the 1920’s, and certainly by the 1950’s and 60’s knew that the thousands of files (the evidence was that by 1985 the BSA had at least 3000- 4000 pedophile files)—representing thousands or tens of thousands of children abused–  meant that their program was being targeted by pedophiles. 

Yet, the BSA still refused to admit in open court the very obvious truth that it had, and has, a child abuse problem.  Several key witnesses repeatedly argued about or qualified the simple phrase “problem” in response to direct questions. It was like listening to an alcoholic or addict refuse to admit that he or she “has a problem” and needs help, when everyone around sees the chaos and insanity of substance addiction.  The jury saw this fierce and calculated denial of the problem, and quite apparently did not like it.

So the message is simple: youth organizations cannot keep secrets about hidden dangers to children. Parents and the community have a right to know if there is a risk to children.  You would give a clear warning about food poisoning among your kids, or about a dangerous crosswalk near your building.  The fact that your warning might have to be about an embarrassing problem with child abuse within your organization does not change the obligation to warn. Not even for the esteemed Boy Scouts of America.  That is one of the key lessons of this trial.

2. As your knowledge increases, so does your responsibility. 

Oregon law, as is true of the law in most states—as well as common sense– says that whether a person acted “reasonably” under the circumstances depends upon what the person knew about the dangers at issue.  A seaside hotel owner who knows that people regularly get caught in dangerous ocean undertows right in front of the hotel has a different obligation to warn guests than that same hotel owner might have to warn about a freak and unforeseeable storm.  It is just common sense.  So, as the BSA over the years and decades gathered its knowledge about the pedophile problem within Scouting, it was no longer good enough simply to keep a list of the pedophiles so they could not come back into the organization.  At some point, the BSA had an obligation to take and use that information to make the organization safer. If the BSA headquarters had been filled with $100 bills instead of the names of little boys, and 4000 times over a 5 decade period thieves had broken in to steal money, the BSA would not simply have kept a list of the thieves to prevent them from getting into the building. The BSA would have changed its security systems to prevent new thieves from getting in!  That simple analogy perfectly describes the BSA’s response to its child abuse problem.

So the second lesson for youth organizations from the BSA trial is painfully obvious– as your knowledge increases so does your responsibility.  Is it a good thing to keep data about your safety issues?  Of course. Is it smart to make sure that a known pedophile cannot get back into your organization?  Obviously.  But that, in and of itself, is not enough to fulfill your duty to protect children.  You must look at what changes are necessary to make the organization safer.

3. You must always put the safety of children ahead of the interests of the organization.

If there is a common thread that I have seen in advocating for child abuse victims against a variety of institutions of trust—churches, schools, foster care agencies, and now the BSA—it is this:  there seems to be an idea that the work of the organization is so important, its goals so noble, that there might be times when it is necessary to “keep a lid on this problem.”  This, of course, is the misguided historical response that produced the ongoing scandals in the Catholic Church.  But it goes way beyond that particular institution of trust.  So many youth organizations have great goals and purposes.  They do good work. They help children and help the community.  And so, when trouble comes along, their first instinct is to protect the work. And if this means keeping a potentially embarrassing problem quiet—even at the risk of keeping secrets about child abuse—they reactively take that route.  While that may be an understandable reaction, it is always disastrous, sooner or later.  The old idea that “the ends justify the means” can never apply to a sluggish response to child abuse, and too many good organizations fall prey to the temptation to protect the organization.   The safety of children, and whatever it takes to accomplish that—including blaring trumpet warnings if that is necessary—must always take precedence over the reputation of the organization.  That is lesson 3 from the BSA trial.

4. When it goes bad, accept responsibility and apologize.

It is a timeless truth that runs through all societies at all times and places, but especially through the religions and ethical systems of Western culture: apologies heal.  This truth is central to our legal system as well, even to the point that it is an expectation in the criminal justice system that someone who is found to have broken the community’s rules will apologize—in part, at least because we understand that it will be helpful for the victim.  But it is not limited to the criminal justice courts: we expect apologies from those who have harmed others, and those who have knowingly failed to protect those in their care—especially institutions of trust such as churches, schools and youth organizations like the Boy Scouts. 

And all this is especially true for victims of child sexual abuse, who so often believe that, somehow the abuse was their fault, that they should have done something to stop it, or they should have immediately told someone—all beliefs which the mental health professionals tell us are almost universal in child abuse victims.  So when they receive an acknowledgement of responsibility and a sincere apology from those responsible for their abuse— the perpetrator of the abuse, an institution that could have prevented the abuse, or both—it is incredibly healing and empowering.  Suddenly, in one moment, the survivor realizes that his or her core beliefs about this life-altering event—“it was my fault; I am fundamentally flawed because of what I did and did not do about this”—are all wrong, and that the person or institution who is factually and morally responsible for the abuse is owning up to what happened. The weight and burden of this wrong, which has been on the shoulders of the victim for so many years or even decades, is lifted off of the victim and placed where it belongs.

This is such basic common sense and human experience that it is hard to understand why institutions of trust—such as the Boy Scouts, the Catholic Church, and others— are so reluctant to make this simple and profound gesture.  Of course, it involves the acceptance of responsibility, and too often that acceptance is slow to come for an organization that prides itself on the nobility of its purpose. It is, after all, hard for someone who thinks he is a hero, or divinely inspired, to admit that he failed utterly in one of his prime responsibilities and is now being called to account for it.  We have seen this for at least a decade in watching the Catholic Church come to grips with the magnitude of its child abuse problem—to accept that it even had a particular problem, to acknowledge that the Church badly failed in its historic response to that problem, and to make unequivocal apologies to those who were damaged by those failures. 

This same dynamic of denial seems to be true for the BSA—which, apart from the specific facts of this case in Portland, continues to deny publicly that it has historically had a serious child abuse problem—different both in type and frequency from that in society at large.  Not once during the decades that we have litigated against the BSA, in dozens of cases, whether settled or tried to a jury,  has the BSA offered even a simple apology to any of our clients.  And we know of no circumstance in which the BSA ever has issued an apology to the thousands of boys who were abused by Scout leaders.

I want to say in conclusion, again, that the Boy Scouts of America is a great organization. Our boys need good, strong role models to learn the art and habits of living an honorable life as they move into manhood.  Lord knows our society needs more young men of integrity, purpose and faith.  BSA is in a position as it enters its second century to play a unique role in shaping young men.  It is an awesome responsibility.  We can only hope that the leadership of this organization steps back, moves past the shock and shame of a jury’s stern rebuke, and takes stock of what is truly all about.  If it does, then it can move to reclaim society’s trust and admiration. If it does not, if it continues to shoot the messengers—lawyers, plaintiffs, juries, the news media– then it will lose its credibility, it will become a shell of what it once was and again could be, and it will eventually slide into irrelevance.

By Kelly Clark, Child Sexual Abuse Attorney
Portland, Ore.

American political junkies often use a phrase to describe a politician’s secure standing with the electorate: “He’s a shoe-in—that is, unless he gets caught sleeping with a dead woman or a live boy.”   In other words,  Senator Bulbousnose will surely win, unless, that is, he steps across the unspoken final lines of decency we all know about—necrophilia and pedophilia being two  of them.

So, there are two things that amaze me about the unfolding scandal in France: first, that the Minister of Culture, Frederic Mitterrand, would think that his lurid book accounts of “paying for boys” in Thailand could fly under the radar and not matter to his public career; and, second, that it almost did.

In case you haven’t read about this unbelievable story, here is a quote from the Times Online, dateline October 8:

“President Sarkozy’s new Culture Minister, Frédéric Mitterrand, was struggling to save his name and possibly his job last night amid a storm over his past accounts of paying “boys” for sex. The nephew of the late President Mitterrand, who is openly gay, was thrown on the defensive after opposition politicians homed in on a memoir in which he described his delight in visiting brothels in Bangkok.

“I got into the habit of paying for boys … The profusion of young, very attractive and immediately available boys put me in a state of desire that I no longer needed to restrain or hide,” he wrote. The autobiography, La mauvaise vie (The Bad Life), was a critically acclaimed bestseller in 2005 and Mr Mitterrand, 62, a popular television presenter, was praised for his honesty. It rebounded on him this week after he leapt to the defence of Roman Polanski, the filmmaker, who was arrested in Switzerland for extradition to face a Los Angeles court for having sex with a girl aged 13.”

Now, let’s ignore the obvious about-face he has done in the last day or so, trying to play down what he has written. After all denying the obvious is what politicians do– although trying to say that admitting that he paid for sex with boys doesn’t mean that he paid for sex with boys may set a new standard.

No, I want to ponder the two aspects of all this that I mentioned above.  First, how did someone who wrote this—in 2005—get  appointed to a high post in a European government?  Surely he did not think no one would notice: he is, after all, the highly visible nephew of former President Francios Mitterrand and a TV personality in his own right.  No, it seems he was doing what a lot of celebrities do, which is to write a lurid autobiography “revealing all” to boost sales through shock value.  Surely he intended the world to know that he was tantalized and hooked by the Asian sex trade. He wanted people to know…

No, what is amazing to me is that he thought that this admission would shock people in no different way than, say, talking about drunken nights on the town or lurid sexual escapades of the kind we have grown used to with celebrities.  But that  he thought he could just cruise on in as Minster for Culture—that’s so rich in irony I can’t even know where to start— after admitting to deep-seated pedophilic behaviour is just stupefying. I don’t know whether this says more about the man’s flawed political judgment,  or about how far Western standards for decency have fallen.  After all, let’s not forget, that this book was published 4 years ago and up til now there had been no blow up.   He actually thought he could get away with it.

This brings me to the second source of amazement—he almost did. In fact, had it not been for the controversy over Switzerland’s arrest and the US’s extradition demands of filmmaker Roman Polanski for sexually abusing a 13 year old girl, we old-fashioned types in the US might not ever have heard about Mitterrand’s pedophilia.  But the fact that Europe heard about it and there was no uproar for nearly five years surely says something fundamental about the way those ‘sophisticated’ societies think (the condemnation by the avant garde of the US in fashionable circles for Polanski’s arrest is no less indicative).  Is it really okay for a major public personality now become public minister to have engaged in pedophilia?  Note that there is no indication that he has acknowledged in sorrow the wrongness of his behavior, sought help, amended his way of life.  This is not a story about a guy who couldn’t find forgiveness when he asked for it. This is about a guy who didn’t—apparently didn’t—even realize that what he had done was fundamentally wrong… even by the standards of Senator Bulbousnose… even by standards of European ‘sophistication.’  

Boy—no pun intended—did Mitterand get the surprise of his life. There are still some things that politicians, even in Europe,  can’t do. Thank God.