Gayle Rubin, Pat Califia, Michel Foucault – the first queer theorists – all openly advocated for pedophilia, and the founding document of queer theory “Thinking Sex” spends over half its length supporting NAMBLA and man-boy lovers. All the original queer theorists argued for a total transgression of every sexual norm, and for people to apply anarchist theory to sexuality, including pedophilia.
A professor of Ethics at Oslo Metropolitan University in Norway has called to legalize AI-generated child pornography, claiming that pedophilia should be seen as an innate sexuality that requires destigmatization.
Ole Martin Moen, a gay man who identifies as “queer,” currently serves as a member of the advisory board on Norway’s Patient Organization for Gender-Incongruence (PKI), a social and political lobby group for trans rights. According to their official website, PKI’s purpose is to provide access to “gender-affirming treatment” to the public “regardless of factors like non-binary identity, sexual practice or having other diagnosis.” Moen has also served as academic council at Civita, Norway’s largest liberal think tank, since 2015.
Recently, Moen targeted Christina Ellingsen, a Norwegian feminist who is facing a police investigation and a potential sentence of three years in prison for tweets in which she stated that men cannot be lesbians.
Moen has repeatedly harassed the Twitter account of Women’s Declaration International Norway, making false claims about the nature of the investigation against Ellingsen.
But while Moen believes Ellingsen’s ideas on transgenderism are worth criminal prosecution, his own academic history would likely be considered far more disturbing to the average person.
“Pedophilia is bad. But how bad is it? And in what ways, and for what reasons, is it bad?” Moen wrote in a 2015 paper titled “The Ethics of Pedophilia,” which was then republished in 2018 in The Palgrave Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy, a textbook widely available at Universities across the globe.
“In this paper it is argued that pedophilia is bad only because, and only to the extent that, it causes harm to children, and that pedophilia itself, as well as pedophilic expressions and practices that do not cause harm to children, are morally alright [sic],” reads the abstract.
Moen details arguments for and against “adult-child sex” before ultimately coming to the conclusion that “adult-child sex is not categorically very harmful” but may result in “risks” of children being harmed. He offers a quick disapproval of penetrative adult-child sexual relations, but goes on to make statements that defend pedophilia as an innate sexual orientation, comparing the desire to sexually abuse children to homosexuality.
“We must appreciate that sexual attraction towards children is often a deep and integral part of pedophiles’ personalities,” he writes, while suggesting that pedophiles should not be held responsible for their actions as “many pedophiles are ignorant of the truth that adult-child sex exposes children to [harm].”
Moen also argues that pedophiles who do not sexually abuse children should be “praised” for their “admirable willpower,” and says that condemning pedophiles for their attraction should be considered “unjust.”
The academic claims that “many of us have been pedophiles at one point,” and presents a bizarre argument that most people experienced sexual attraction to children when they themselves were children.
“When you were 11, it is not unlikely that you were sexually attracted to prepubertal children… the mental state of finding children sexually attractive is very common,” he says, continuing: “Youngness, the property children have in excess, is a property that, when present to a lesser extent, is widely considered sexually attractive. As such, what makes pedophiles diverge from others is that they prefer more youngness than does the average person.”