(Boylove Essays) - The Great Innocence Rage

From BoyWiki


This article was originally posted to BoyChat on December 16, 2015.[1]

A Look at a Hitherto Unrecognized Hyperaggression Syndrome Affecting Some Heterosexuals
December 16, 2015
Kamil Beylant @securityconcern , 2015.

May be reproduced if left intact.


Encounters with distinctive, repeating patterns of extreme rage on the internet, coming from individuals imagining nonexistent threats to children, occasioned a re-examination of various situations where irrational fury arises in the hypothetical protection of children, the child-raising environment, or child-like innocence.

A novel hypothesis proposes that rage behavior that originally evolved to enable parents to defend children vigorously from predatory wildlife and hostile humans can be triggered in a way that verges on psychosis in sufferers of a disorder termed Heterosexual Hyperaggression Syndrome (HHS). Sufferers of this syndrome tend to experience dramatically irrational rages that go far beyond the basic needs for vigilance and emergency arousal in child-care.

The heterosexual sexual orientation is named in the terminology partly because the rage behavior is endemic to real, imagined or remembered situations involving the raising of children, a normative concomitant of heterosexuality. Also, however, this wording is in conformity with existing sexual differentiation ‘disorder’ categories, i.e., paraphilic ‘disorders,’ named in The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5).

The article suggests that irrational child protection rage in seriously affected HHS sufferers may be pathologically triggered in various ways leading to physical and sexual assaults on the children themselves, thus accounting for a substantial proportion of the over 450 children per year murdered by parents and step-parents in the USA. As well, HHS may account for many cases of violent sexual acts misconstrued as ‘situational pedophilia,’ i.e., parental or step-parental rape or prolonged sadistic, incestuous sexual abuse of children.

The regular occurrence of irrational child protection rage in moral and ethnic panics, such as historic anti-Semitic blood libels about ‘killing Christian babies,’ or lynchings of African-American youth based on real or imaginary sexual interest in white youth, is also discussed in the general context of HHS. In addition, ultra-violent, romantic social quests for atavistic innocence, such as the ISIS movement and Pol Pot’s communistic agrarian innocence campaign, are explored for connections to HHS-fueled rage in a minority of highly disturbed heterosexual individuals. The documentation of clearly defined HHS behavior in the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic story of Lut or Sodom is given a realistic context outside of traditional interpretations mistakenly implicating homosexual sexual orientation.

Introduction. A new basic idea in psychology – legitimate?

In a big ‘jump outside the box’ recently, psychologist Brian Nosek and 269 co-authors tried to reproduce the results of 98 published studies in psychology. They discovered that only around 40% of the studies could be reproduced; the rest were ‘irreproducible results.’ This was a shock of epic proportions, perhaps a turning point in history. Our troubled societies spend billions on research in psychology, psychiatry, sociology, and many related fields that attempt to explain and direct human behavior. Is over half that money really being spent on nonsense?

In reality, the results of some of the irreproducible papers might have been true, momentarily. The researchers’ focus may have intersected genuine, but transient, trends in socially influenced attitudes and practices. But that comfortable, face-saving idea immediately suggests that even the studies that WERE reproduced successfully may become invalid over a larger time scale. To what extent do any of the topics canvassed in modern psychological studies remain stable?

Psychology had its roots in phrenology and behavioral taxonomy, 19th-century attempts to reduce the natural diversity of human minds and characters to manageable categories. In the era of Freud, it moved into introspective speculation, but remained anecdotal, almost artistic. Its only claims to being scientific were that it was partly based on ‘clinical’ observation, and that it wasn’t religious. As time went by, it and its medical sister-discipline, psychiatry, became ever more prominently relied upon by governments and courts. As Thomas Szasz and others pointed out, this led to much mischief, since these speculative fields could find quasi-scientific arguments that supported eugenics, racism, any economic system, and any form of gender or sexual discrimination. In the 1960s and 70s, when psychologists turned en masse to modernizations like statistics, questionnaires and simulation experiments, the veneer of science over the field was greatly strengthened. Psychiatry also butched up, scientifically, by turning to drug therapies for mental conditions. Much of its practice, however, was still scientifically soft. The Nosek study is by no means fatal to these twin fields, but it is a major setback in public relations, if nothing else. One suspects that in the long run, it will be ignored and life will go on as usual, but its memory will remain – it will be the Twin Towers of the cognitive disciplines.

In light of this semi-debunking of the modern experimental psych disciplines, we can see that some of the most robust results these fields have produced are, in fact, the better speculative results. For example, the concepts of homosexuality and sexual orientation, though always open to question on various nitty-gritty levels, are bulwarks of enlightened civilization. They obstruct moralizers in their constant attempts to promote a social uniformity that is politically motivated and biologically inaccurate. Similarly, many named psychiatric disorders, such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder, are minimally supported by laboratory results, but they generally withstand examination well.

In the spirit of the scientists who have produced these successful, speculative, observational categories, I propose here, in this unofficial venue, to add one more.

I suggest that there is an as yet undescribed psychological disorder category that embraces problem behaviors that all of us are familiar with. It is a category that I believe would have been proposed decades ago, except that it involves a major social group that forcefully defends its normativity. This disorder category doesn’t by any means, however, describe the majority of members of the group in question – instead, it points at a small minority whose problematical behaviors are masked by their membership in the group. Although, as a new idea, it has no laboratory support, it is supported by an obvious evolutionary argument. I hope you’ll agree with it, even if you hate it.

Close encounters with a distinct form of irrational rage

I’m going to start by giving you the context of my analysis. As a proponent of respectful treatment for law-abiding minor-attracted (MA) people (pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebephiles), I’ve spent the last few years animating a Twitter account where I’ve been exposed to countless, startlingly similar death and mutilation threats, invitations to kill myself, statements that I’m a waste of oxygen, and so on, as well as constant profanity, particularly the epithet ‘sick fuck.’ This has happened even though I have never supported any behavior involving children (or adults) that anyone finds objectionable. I advocate an age of consent of 16 but am not militantly opposed to slightly differing lawful ages of consent or to close-in-age exemptions; moreover, I don’t advocate sex before marriage or marital infidelity. I believe all children should be respected and honored and that their images, regular or illicit, should be treated in a way that acknowledges a real person was photographed and might be affected by redistribution of the photographs. My online writings stress all these mainstream viewpoints. My very presence, however, suggests that lawful MA people or their supporters may exist as free people and that they may feel they have the right to speak out. That idea arouses immense, unreasoning violence, always combined with misrepresentation of my views as those of a rampant sexual predator.

As an interested, scientifically minded observer, I have found this impulsive violence and its accompanying exclusion of rational thought impressive. I’ve noticed a repeated pattern of statements along the lines of “if you come anywhere near my children, I’ll boil you in acid” – the threats of violence at the ends of these statements have been phrased in approximately a dozen different forms. In the same online sessions, while looking through daily news stories, I’ve seen at least one story every day documenting how one or more enraged parents had killed their own children, or their step-children. I noticed that journalists, bloggers and the owners of many personally maintained social media news-feeds relentlessly document and link every police charge involving sexual assault on children, but that almost all of them scrupulously avoid making any link among the cases of parental murder of children. Each such case is treated as separate and mysterious – often, to be sure, connected to divorce or separation, but with the ultimate motivation for murder of innocents left as an unfathomable puzzle. News stories often frankly state that the motivation for parental murder of a child is unknown.

Early on, I discovered that some of the data on the topic of parental child murder are collected under the heading of ‘filicide.’ In the USA, as it turns out, not less than 450 children per year are slaughtered by parents or step-parents, married or unmarried. Though the majority of perpetrators are men, women are also surprisingly frequently involved as child killers. The carnage attributable to this common factor of human life hugely exceeds the death toll arising from any sexually motivated murders of children. I noticed that when I pointed this difference out to aggressive people online, they nearly always retorted “but abuse murders children’s souls,” or words to that effect. This deflection (actually an unwitting quote from a 4th-century AD diatribe against homosexuality by St. John Chrysostom of Antioch) allowed the topic of filicide to be packed off, without further thought, into oblivion – its conventional place in the mental landscape of today.

I realized that there was a common thread that could link the aggression I had experienced and the annual blitzkrieg of parental child murders. I had clearly seen that scenarios involving children can arouse overwhelmingly violent urges in certain people. This strong, unreasoning aggression is evolutionarily predictable: it responds to a valid adaptive need in a species that, in prehistoric times, had to furiously defend children from predatory animals and from hostile human tribes. However, even though it evolved to protect children from threats, it can perhaps easily misfire in certain people and become directed against the children themselves. Whichever way it works, it is almost always found in people who are in a parental role or envision themselves in that situation. The association with parenting connects it integrally with heterosexuality, the sexual orientation that produces nearly all children.

I believe that if we recognize this extreme, child-focused aggression as a single phenomenon – complex, but meaningfully unitary – we can understand and potentially solve several major social problems, including some unexpected ones. I name this child-focused hyper-violence “Heterosexual Hyperaggression Syndrome (HHS).” I hasten to add that this label does NOT call all heterosexuals hyperaggressive. Rather, it simply recognizes that this hyperaggression is a statistically uncommon but regularly occurring adverse side-effect, as it were, of the natural child-protecting urges entailed by heterosexuality.

Why mention the heterosexual orientation at all in this context? I do this because it follows a psychological convention. The current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5; 2013) lists a number of sexual dispositions as paraphilias, which are not considered problematical, and then accompanies each one with a ‘paraphilic disorder’ that is considered to be a medical condition. Pedophilia, for example, is considered unproblematical, while ‘pedophilic disorder’ is marked by strong negative self-esteem connected to pedophilia, or by an inability to control the urge to act upon the sexual disposition in acts such as child sexual assault. As the Wikipedia description of DSM-5 states, “All criterion sets were changed to add the word disorder to all of the paraphilias, for example, pedophilic disorder is listed instead of pedophilia. There is no change in the basic diagnostic structure since (earlier edition) DSM-III-R; however, people now must meet both qualitative (criterion A) and negative consequences (criterion B) criteria to be diagnosed with a paraphilic disorder.” What I am suggesting is precisely parallel to this: heterosexuality is an unproblematical state of sexuality, and a disorder is only present when “negative consequences” – in this case, extreme, irrational aggression aroused in the immediate or conjectural context of child care – accompany it. Since the phrasing ‘heterosexual disorder’ would inevitably be misinterpreted as anti-heterosexual, I instead specify the applicable ‘criterion B’ in the name of the condition by saying Heterosexual Hyperaggression Syndrome.

Facets of Heterosexual Hyperaggression Syndrome

HHS, I believe, works at several levels. Based on the common involvement of step-parents (married or unmarried to the biological parent) in child murder, I suggest that additional more-or-less instinctive factors may be involved, apart from the basic urge to protect offspring aggressively. Step-parenting provides a unique evolutionary niche for aggression. Many species show a drive for ‘kin selection,’ which sometimes, but not always, involves acts that increase the prevalence of one’s own genes via the instinct-driven removal of offspring lacking those genes. This drive may play a part in linking child protection to child murder. People driven by HHS, most notably step-parents who are HHS sufferers, may risk easily becoming homicidally enraged at the children of their spouse partly because these children are, evolutionarily, ‘nest parasites’ who displace parental energy onto the ‘wrong’ genes. Clearly, no one would acknowledge having such a thought process working at a conscious level, but we are an evolved biological species, and, in HHS, the traces of the strong evolutionary kin-selection drive may remain as a sort of blind rage that can be triggered by unrelated children in one’s own home. The murder of unrelated children serves to protect one’s own biological progeny (perhaps as yet unborn) and one’s genetic line in general. In modern society, of course, it tends to result in prison sentences, which don’t by any means favor reproduction, but our atavistic biological urges may kick in despite such considerations.

In filicide, I should quickly add, murders of children by their own biological parents are also common. I suspect that child-protection rage, as a factor that is adapted to be triggered when children are nearby or being considered, can readily be triggered in HHS sufferers by the children themselves. Perhaps, in some cases, the children’s unwanted behavior, such as incessant crying, becomes treated as if it were an internal predator needing to be beaten out of the child – as if there were a disobedient spirit taking possession of the infant. In other cases, imminent separation from a spouse may trigger a rage that ‘protects’ the affected children from perceived family disaster by killing them.

Many may find this last idea counterintuitive. Conventionally, we imagine that rejected spouses kill children out of jealous spite, seeing them purely as possessed objects in dispute – but the idea that a person could take rage against a partner and turn it murderously against innocents on the sidelines, especially his or her own beloved children, is hard to accept. This is the factor that so often makes us feel that something is missing in our understanding of the murderer’s motivation in family mass-murder dramas. On the other hand, a child protection rage mobilized against an irrationally exaggerated perception of direly threatening, horrible circumstances that the children must never be exposed to – e.g., the broken family – could, in a twisted but understandable way, explain these murders. The divorcing parent in effect becomes cast as a hostile kidnapper, but the children are intrinsically connected to that kidnapper and are also enveloped in the rage response. They may be wept over even as they are murdered, but the HHS rage response has the upper hand.

Given that child-protection rage is blind and passionate, however, some cases may be more straightforward than any of the scenarios I’ve discussed so far. Rage triggered by a child may, in HHS sufferers, be a particularly murderous emotion. It may be even deadlier than the sometimes extreme anger people experience as disrespect-rage (e.g., ‘road rage’) or its pro-active ego-building equivalent, ‘bully rage.’ It may not matter that there is no real logic involved in the murder of the child – the child was near, the child-associated irrational rage was triggered, and that was sufficient to cause deadly harm.

Collective or societal influences of HHS

Another level of HHS involves certain kinds of violent social movements, including ‘moral panic’ movements and anti-heterodoxy movements. These ‘pogrom’ upsurges are often absurdly targeted and are couched in terms of protecting children or the child-raising environment. Even though they may be fundamentally based on the suspicion that people who are different are hostile to the community, they are best whipped into a social frenzy by child-protection fear scenarios. Classic anti-semitism, for example, was notable for linking Jewish people to fictions about the kidnapping, killing and even eating of Christian children. This idea became popular in early medieval blood-libels such as the 1255 case of Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln, in which 19 Jewish citizens of an English town were killed in response to the unsolved murder of a 9-year-old boy. The theme recurred in numerous anti-semitic pogroms, and has even persisted into the 21st century. It was recently repeated in the Syrian-produced 2003 independent television series ‘The Diaspora’ (الشتات), in which Jews were said to have confessed to draining the blood of Christian children to make Passover matzoh bread – an ancient European ‘blood libel’ that survives solely based on its appeal to the irrationality of HHS. Community child-protection rage, probably seeded by the combined, illogical child protection rages of a critical number of HHS sufferers, has sometimes contagiously overwhelmed whole cities and even subverted governmental and justice systems.

One interesting question that arises in this consideration of social movements is whether particularly brutal political trends such as the current ISIS movement are manifestations of HHS. Children may at first not seem to be prominently involved. If you look at typical militants on the front lines, however, they are mostly people of early child-raising age, 18-35. This happens to be the high point of bodily and military fitness in our species, but motivation for involvement still needs to be accounted for. One recurring theme in explanations given by young militants is that they have often been unsettled by freewheeling adult behaviors they have become involved in or observed, such as partying, drinking, and promiscuous sex. For example, in recent bloody ISIS attacks on Paris, France, the official ISIS communiqué denounced the city as "the capital of prostitution and vice.” Some militants have also been shaken by economic and career uncertainty, perhaps influenced by exposure to social prejudice – all conditions perceived as posing a threat to stable child-raising as well as to the adult’s sense of security. The apparently chaotic, unfeeling, self-centered conditions of the world of freedom have offended the innocent inner child of the militant, and he longs for a kind of perpetual family-style stability and meaning that would better protect the innocence of his own sons and daughters, even if these offspring are currently only imaginary. He feels intense anger against those who promote the world of chaos, depravity and uncertainty that threatens the innocence and stability of children, including the child he once was. With his back guarded by the fundamentalist religious promise of peace and prosperity through intensely administered order, he goes on a war of infinite rage against the world that seems so callous in its botching of innocent lives. His HHS fuels him – or her HHS fuels her – with more than enough fury to enable pushing rumored sexual deviants off bridges, chopping off the heads of rumored religious deviants, and arming schoolyards full of child trainees with Kalashnikovs so that they can partake in the glorious dream of establishing stable, communal innocence over sensuous, individualistic, ‘selfie’-clicking narcissism.

The enraging concept of the threatened innocent, when it motivates a person to violence, surely must include some projection of the angry person’s own injured, world-trammeled innocence onto the imaginary perfect innocence of whoever he or she imagines him- or herself to be defending. The precious innocence that could not be defended for the self can be defended with infinite fury on behalf of the children and society of the future. Thus, the mass slaughter of harmless Parisians, for example, can be perceived through this pro-innocence-warp as an act untainted by self-interest.

ISIS’s deadly order and purity ethos is reminiscent of the lethal agrarian purity fanaticism of Pol Pot in Cambodia, which murdered thousands in the name of preserving the cultural innocence of farmers. Similar anti-worldliness, pro-innocence fanaticisms were a fixture of the 20th century in violent southeast Asian Maoist movements and other radical secular or atheist revolutionary movements. Islam may be very close to being a ‘red herring’ in the ISIS movement. The well-hidden true driving force of ISIS, I would speculate, is actually HHS. A region with a long history of peaceful religious plurality is being disrupted by a force of fury that, at its root, has nothing to do with religion. Florid murders are accompanied by many acts of rape, including rape of children. ISIS, arguably, is a collection of people, assembled from all over the world, who share an undiagnosed mental health condition that makes them berserkers of irrational fury. HHS is masking itself as a severe form of religion.

Part of the scope of child protection rage is what might be called ‘nesting rage’ – moral fury against anything that would seem to foul the social nest that children must be raised in. A study of past moral panics suggests that the HHS sufferer will over-react explosively to perceived nesting threats as well as to notions of direct danger to children.

Insofar as pathologies can organize politically, a passion that might be termed ‘purist romanticist brutalism’ is the natural political orientation of HHS. It may cloak itself in any religion or in a secular movement such as ‘scientific socialism’ or nationalism.

An interesting development in the story of HHS in recent times is that one of the most extreme, mindless and brutal HHS manifestations, homophobic queerbashing, is rapidly disappearing in the Western world. This once-widespread activity, though fundamentally an outgrowth of schoolyard bully violence against perceived insidious weakness, was highly pumped up by the idea that homosexuals would molest, recruit or otherwise weaken or contaminate children. The miracle phrases that slowly drove that idea out of public consciousness were, firstly, ‘sexual orientation’ (or ‘born this way’), which said that the child-recruiting idea was unrealistic, and, secondly, ‘consenting adults,’ which said that LGBT sexual orientations were not directed toward children. The latter term has become a universal catchphrase among hyperviolent internetters reacting against anything perceived to be pedophilic in nature. When told that their stated urge to knife or acid-bathe or castrate law-abiding, non-abusing MA people is similar to previous anti-queer deviant-bashing, they predictably give a response much like “gays are only interesting in consenting adults, unlike you sick fucks.” The LGBT movement’s careful divorce, in the late 1980s, from previously allied sex-permissive pedophile and hebephile movements such NAMBLA has successfully driven the irrational child-motivated rage of HHS sufferers onto people perceived to be ‘pedophiles,’ in the broadest journalistic sense of the word. Queerbashing has become pedo-bashing. One need not be a molester or abuser to qualify for this Clockwork Orange hyper-hate.

HHS as a major source of actions popularly and academically interpreted as ‘pedophilia’

The final irony of HHS is that it may blame MA people for problems that it, itself, creates. Organizations that combat child prostitution (now often called child trafficking) recognize that the majority of people apprehended engaging in paid sex with children are not pedophilic in sexual orientation. Here’s a paragraph from an information sheet put out by ECPAT (End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes), a global NGO based in Bangkok, Thailand.

“The misuse of terminology results in confusion about the profile of child sexual abusers, most of whom are not, technically speaking, paedophiles or even preferential abusers. The majority of child sex abusers are situational abusers. They are usually men who use a child for sex because the child is made available to them, most commonly through prostitution or within the family. The situational abuser does not usually have a specific sexual preference for children.”

Many studies have shown that in every type of situation where child sexual assault occurs, many of the people involved turn out to be opportunists who do not have a predominant pedophilic orientation. So who are these ‘situational abusers?’ Here’s a clue from a news story about British victim-campaigner Shy Keenan, whose book ‘Broken’ documented abuse perpetrated by her stepfather.

“By 1977, Shy had been institutionalised for violent behaviour and branded by social services as being sexually aggressive. Once in care, the sexual abuse continued, perpetrated by various members of staff. In 1977, Shy's mother died. On the day of the funeral (stepfather Stanley) Claridge and an accomplice buggered her with a bottle, which shattered inside her. She was taken to hospital, almost bleeding to death.”

Claridge, though stated by Keenan to be a repeated rapist of herself and other children, was also the regular sexual partner of an adult woman, Jennifer Wootton, Keenan’s mother. Let’s put the pieces together here. We are told by feminists, and I agree with them, that rape is largely a matter of violence and dominance, not sexual desire. In this story, we have someone who is heterosexual and obviously aggressive, committing an act that is recognized as being far more violent than sexual in nature. Stories regularly appear in news sources about rapists raping elderly women: we don’t need to suggest that there is a category of elderly-woman-lusters who can’t obtain sex without raping someone. The picture we’re looking at here is one of pure aggression that happens to choose a child as its target. The choice of the child may sometimes be more directed at humiliating the mother than at satisfying a sexual or sadistic desire for a child per se. The humiliation of the child, however, may also be gratifying to the aggressor, since it assuages an underlying rage.

As reluctant as many will be to believe it at first, I believe that over time, we will all accept that situational child rape can be a pure act of HHS – a misfiring of a hyperaggressive urge that originally evolved to protect children. Just as sows who have given birth will start to lick off their piglets and occasionally progress to ghoulishly eating them up, so people who have an indwelling biological impulse to defend children with extreme violence may develop a pathology where that very violence becomes triggered and directed against the children themselves. The violence may take the form of murder, or injury – or rape. There is nothing pedophilic about this type of rape. In the case of male step-parents, the evolutionarily predicted kin-selection drive to insert one’s own genes into the lineage of any children one is raising may also be an unconscious factor adding to the hair-trigger status of HHS-driven sadistic rape.

To me, it is the ultimate in tragedy and irony when I find myself online, trying to reason with an enraged, irrationally threatening woman, only to have her accuse me of supporting the extremely aggressive stepfather or mother’s boyfriend who raped her repeatedly when she was a preteen. She has no understanding of her situation and is helplessly attacking an irrelevant target. In reality, she is a victim of HHS, but also probably a sufferer herself. I suspect that many of the people who so direly threaten law-abiding perceived deviants online are more dangerous to children than are the deviants themselves. Even if the HHS sufferers are focused enough to remain protective of children, they still experience almost uncontrollably powerful rage impulses that lead them to yearn for lynchings, genocide (I’ve received ‘your kind should all be killed,’ or more graphic versions of the same, countless times), mutilation or mass-imprisonment of completely lawful people, and other irrational mayhem.

I believe it is time to correctly account for the amount of ‘pedophilia’ reported by newspapers and prosecutors that, in reality, is heterosexuality observed in its hyperaggressive mutation. Even rape involving young boys, whose high voices, rounded bottoms, hairless skins and fine faces are obviously reminiscent of female biology, is likely to be a manifestation of HHS in many cases – especially the more appallingly violent ones. The people perpetrating these acts are often attracted to women and involved in heterosexual relationships. Some are not pedophiles at all; others may have a degree of pedophilic orientation, a sort of bisexuality based on age differences. The factor that triggers them to turn from attraction to obviously harmful abuse, however, is aggression. As in prison rape, the gender of the object is scarcely a consideration.

One thing that always struck me in my many years in the LGBT movement was how few gay men expressed any physical aggression: some were good at verbal dressing-downs of those who had slighted them, but gay fisticuffs were almost unheard of, a rarity restricted to severe lovers’ quarrels among the most marginal of people. Rape of boys and young men, meanwhile, is violence, not sex, just as rape of girls and women is. As paradoxical as it may sound, I suggest that a substantial proportion – though not all – of the aggressive sexual assault of boys and young men that occurs in the world is perpetrated by heterosexuals and is yet another manifestation of HHS.

Heterosexual Hyperaggression Syndrome and religion

As an aside to those who are Muslims, I think it will now be clear to you that the people of Lot/Lut mentioned in the Quran (same as the Sodomites of the Christian/Jewish bible) were not homosexuals, but were heterosexuals who raped members of their own sex as a manifestation of HHS. They followed and expanded on a long-standing ancient Middle Eastern custom of battle rape of male enemies by heterosexual warriors. They are clearly stated to have wives. Nothing they are stated to do is anything but aggressive and violent. The act of raping males that they became famous for was just part of a continuum of aggressive acts. Male rape showed not that they were gay, but rather that their aggression would stop at nothing. Their lust was for power against perceived community threats – in this case, the arrival of foreigners. Rape was only a mechanism within that aggressive lust.

There are no homosexuals anywhere on this planet who remotely resemble the Quran’s description of the Lutis. And there never have been. Akhi, ukhti, wake up. LGBT people must be integrated into the Muslim faith as full brothers and sisters, and the sting of rapist HHS must be forever removed from their backs. The throne of Allah does not tremble at the sight of love among members of dedicated, supportive adult couples. The Quran has shown us the way to apprehend this, whenever we are ready to accept its accuracy that transcends our own historic concepts. I cannot discuss all the aspects of this matter here, such as how it reconciles with marriage law, but I hope that in perceiving the true nature of Lutis, you can make a start. I suspect most of you living in Western countries have been yearning for some understanding of how your kindly LGBT neighbors can be given their true worth in Islamic respect.

Though the association is masked by the relative rarity of rape of males, the true equivalents of اللوطيين, (the Lutiin, the people of Lut) in today’s world, are ISIS, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their allies. These are people of indiscriminate violence who are only too ready to feel threatened by the innocuous stranger and to perpetrate unthinkable crimes against him. The cultural alienation they cause with this violence tends to surround peaceful Muslims and enslave them to the ISIS/Luti pseudo-theology: this provides a further sadistic pleasure for these modern Lutiin, accompanying their acts of mass-murder and mass-rape.

Conclusion: Understanding and treatment needed

We need to recalibrate our perceptions, and see the true causes of the heretofore inexplicable violence that has constantly agonized our world. I know that the many millions of even-tempered, thoughtful, and diligently protective heterosexual people of the world, including the vast majority of parents and step-parents, will possess the needed mental calm to perceive that they are not implicated in any of my writings about HHS. Now, it is time to separate out and offer treatment to those who ARE implicated.

In the long run, analysing complete genome sequences of substantial numbers of parental child murderers in comparison to well-matched, non-violent heterosexual controls should enable us to understand the genetic basis of this highly problematical behavioral anomaly.

Useful links

Reproducibility in experimental psychology http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

Filicide – murder of children by parents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide http://www.ibtimes.com/arizona-mother-drowns-her-own-twin-boys-why-do-parents-kill-their-children-2075658 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/10/parents-kill-children-fbi-data/15280259/

Antisemitic blood libel and child protection impulses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Saint_Hugh_of_Lincoln

History of exclusion of pedophiles from the LGBT movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association#ILGA_controversy

Situational child abuse by non-pedophiles http://resources.ecpat.net/EI/Csec_paedophilia.asp

Shy Keenan http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/feb/10/familyandrelationships.features1