@Calton:

I wrote a comment basically confirming what Owen Thomas has taken from Erik Moeller's writings about "child sexual abuse" on Wikipedia and this is what you have to say:

"Well, that's remarkably stupid on numerous levels, starting from the passive-aggressive question-begging and going on from there to moral panic and concern-trolling.

Not that I buy into the "logic" underlying your dopey premise, but you do realize that there are edit counters that actually answer your alleged question? And according to one of them, the largest number of edits he's racked up for any particular article is on...Mother Teresa:"

I present a factual, objectively stated argument, and your response is that it's "remarkably stupid" and "dopey."

This is indicative of so many things. I can't tell you how many times on topics of which I have education and years worth of experience, I've gotten the *exact same tone* of response from some Wikipedia editor who disagreed with me. Wikipedia a useful, credible, *accurate* source of information? Hardly. It's rife with errors because of editors with attitudes just as your own. And don't quote me the "Nature" article, as the science articles are written generally by people with education, experience and maturity.

So Calton, how many people read this moral justification for pedophilia in the child sexual abuse article before it was finally taken out?

Is this passage neutral? Has anyone interviewed a boy from ancient Greece to confirm his feelings? If someone, anyone, can prove me wrong without resorting to ad hominem, using the word "witch-hunt", or anything avoiding the issue, I'm more than happy to be enlightened, and admit I'm wrong.

It seems obvious to me that Erik is unfamiliar with K. J. Dover, who wrote "Greek Homosexuality," probably the most important books on the topic. The complexity of Greek homosexuality figures throughout the book, but I would like to quote from page 84.

"In the first place, we notice that heterosexual relationships in such a society and homosexual relationships in Greek society are the product not of reciprocated sentiment of equals but of teh pursuit of those of lower status by those of higher status. The virtues admired in an eromenos are the virtues which the ruling element in a society (in the case of Greek society, adult male citizens) approves in the ruled (women and children)."

Of course, it is far more complicated than this simple paragraph suggests, but the instigation for this comment is the character Pausanias, who discusses just such love in Plato's Symposium. So while Erik may sound authoritative, what he writes is essentially drivel.

@dannyisme:

Sure K.J's real name isn't Ben?

Buh boom TTSHHHHH

As for no detractors, I would like to hear of evidence of detractors for slavery in ancient Greece, or wife beating in medieval England, human sacrifice among the Aztecs, etc.

@dannyisme

Let me see if I can gauge what arguments Erik would use...

There are some slaves during the Civil War era who supposedly loved their enslavers. Women often return repeatedly to abusive men. Those who were sacrificed often complied because they thought they'd go to a more pleasant hereafter.

Therefore, just as when children don't object to adult/child sexual contact, all the above examples are really not morally wrong, and are branded as morally wrong by "hysterics" and "witch-hunters" out to stop people's freedom to do as they wish.

@dannyisme: I was about to bring up the slavery issue!

Where are Wikipedia advocates of slavery? Without them there could be no balance. Here is a straw man argument to create a neutral POV:

"Slavery was a crowning achievement of ancient society that enabled great technological breakthroughs such as construction of pyramids, etc. etc. etc. Because slavery was so beneficial to the classical time there is no reason why it should not be accepted in our day"

Why is this guy still at #2 at Wikipedia?

Um, ICK.

Pfft. Moller is an intellectual who knows how to put cultural trivialities behind and get to the facts.

You people are just bigots. Um.. Yeah! That's right!

If anything Erik is a choice WP editor imho

@dannyisme: slavery in Ancient Greece was wrong, and Good Wiffe beatings were a pox on Merry old England. As for the Aztecs, even illiterate Spanish Conquistadors were horrified by the shear barbarity of the rites.

@Bornean: He is European and thus better, smarter and much more cosmopolitan in his world view than any of us unwashed, repressed American troglodytes.

@Bornean: Damn straight! Now, fetch me a 13 y/o girl to help me with my damn straight thingy.

I just skimmed- this is no longer up on Wikipedia is it? It's crazy for someone to write on Greek culture with no education on the subject. I just don't get it- so he imagines there are no scholars out there who know better? The Dover book mentioned above is an older take, please, anyone interested, see Courtesans and Fishcakes, which is written for a general audience but scholarly (and takes on Dover.)
But my point is: he has written with faux authority on things NO ONE could POSSIBLY KNOW about Greek culture. That is what scares me. People who have confidence when bullshitting are freakish.

@TuesdayCramer:

"But my point is: he has written with faux authority on things NO ONE could POSSIBLY KNOW about Greek culture. That is what scares me. People who have confidence when bullshitting are freakish."

Welcome to Wikipedia.

TuesdayCramer, thanks for the new reference. I will read it. I haven't really touched the subject in any substantial way in at least ten years. It is good to get caught up.

Sounds like someone's trying to justify his admiration for young boys...