Magpie  – The journal of the Paedophile Information Exchange — (London, UK) text from issue number 11, May 1978.

La Gazza Ladra

Members will shortly be receiving details of our third Annual General Meeting which is to be held in London in the summer. We hope that everybody will make a special effort to attend, especially as it has been some time since we have been able to arrange the normal meetings through difficulties over space and manpower. For many of our new members this will be their first chance to meet others – which after all is one of the main functions of the organisation.

More important still, the AGM is the only chance for the ordinary member to meet the existing Executive Committee, and to vote in the new one for the coming year. For those of you who have been unhappy with our policies and actions over the past twelve months this will be the chance to suggest alternatives – and maybe even volunteer to help put them into practice. There is a well known proverb which says that you only get out of something what you put into it, and whatever else does not apply to PIE, this certainly does. Not that there are any perks to be had from working for the Exchange, no company cars or tax concessions and no (Mrs. Whitehouse et al please note) other benefits either – no admission to a secret circle of illicit sex or concessionary rates on porn either.

No, the rewards of working for PIE are rather more intangible. There's the chance to meet many others in the same situation as yourself or those possibly even worse off than you are. There's the chance to see at first hand some of the vast amounts of news and research material which flows to us – material which we cannot pass onto the membership at the present because we haven't the manpower to do so. But above all there is the chance to do something, however small, to advance our aims – to push back the barriers of fear and misunderstanding which haunt and surround us all.

You may agree with all this, and wish to help, but hesitate with fears of the dangers of such an involvement. Well these dangers must exist, we would be foolish to deny them. But we can say that those who help PIE, do so on their own terms, a person can make a valuable contribution amonymously, those who have been exposed in the media have had their names mentioned by their own request. But since being a paedophile is in itself a dangerous existence, active involvement in working for our cause can only help to make things better rather than worse.

And that is what PIE is all about.




On 10th March 1978 the sex law was changed in Sweden. From the 1st of April this year there is no legal discrimination of homosexuality any more. Anyone who is 15 or older has the right to have homo or hetero sexual relations freely. The new bill was accepted by parliament with 210 votes for, and 37 against. (98 were absent and 4 did not vote)”.



We have for sale a limited number of copies of a 99 page booklet by Den Nichols, called “Towards a Better Perspective For Boy-Lovers”. Published in 1976 in the United States in its preface to ‘serious minded adult males who feel an existential attraction to young boys”. Copies are £1 each, including post & packaging; orders to PIE.



In the past few months Tom O'Carroll, PIE's Chairperson has received invitations to address Students Unions at Liverpool and Oxford Universities. Although he has accepted these engagements, each has subsequently had to be cancelled because of local opposition to his presence. Although Tom has been prepared to risk receptions such as those obtained outside Conway Hall, he and the EC of PIE – have felt that it would be foolish to allow innocent bystanders to run the risk of being injured by mob violence generated by those who know no other ways of expressing their hostility to facts they prefer to ignore.



All members of the House of Commons and some Lords have been sent a copy of PIE's new booklet Paedophilia – some Questions and Answers. This distribution was timed to coincide with a Press Release announcing the publication of the booklet. 180 newspapers and periodicals in the U.K.. received this Press Release.

A letter in Magpie 10 reported and commented on the recent suicide of Alan Doggett three weeks before he was to conduct the London Boys Choir, together with massed choirs of other children at the Albert Hall. On the night of that concert the programme contained an insert describing Alan Doggett's years of dedicated service and paying tribute to his friendliness, integrity and loyalty. Shortly after this date a requiem mass was said for him at the Holy Cross Priory in Leicester by the Reverend Father Michael Ingram.

On Saturday 20th May a memorial service will be held to commemorate Alan's life and work. It will start at 3 p.m. and will be held at St. Barnabas Church, Addison Road, London, W14, taking the form of a choral evensong, performed by the London Boys Choir. These religious functions, one Roman, the other Anglican must be seen not only as ceremonies of intercession and remembrance, but also as containing an element of protest. It would seem to be true that in today's society religious organisations provide almost the only vehicle whereby such a protest can be made.



At the recent Annual General Meeting of the National Council of Civil Liberties a motion was passed which is of particular importance to PIE, bearing in mind the events of last August and September. Accordingly we reprint this motion. No. 39. in full.

“This AGM reaffirms the right of free dis- cussion and freedom to hold meetings for all organisations and individuals doing so within the law. Accordingly, whilst reaffirming the NCCL policy on the age of consent and the rights of children; particularly the need to protect those of prepubertal age, thus AGM condemns the physical and other attacks on those who have discussed or attempted to discuss paedophilia, ami reaffirms the NCCL's condemnation of harassment and unlawful attacks on such persons”.

PIE is affiliated to the NCCL and we hare long advocated that our members should join as individuals so they may participate in and benefit from the activities of this large and long established organisation. The address of NCCL is 186 Kings Cross Road. London. WC1.


Dear Sir,

The figures show that “enlightened” Britain has a mania for sending people to prison. Our prison population per head is vastly larger than any other European country. According to one BBC expert's estimate (Nov. 16th) there are about eight thousand children incarcerated in England. Yet Mr. William Whitelaw calls for more imprisonments, more severe sentences and “short sharp shocks”. At the same time 80% of boys and 35 to 40% of girls commit another offence within two years of release. In other words the custodial treatment of the young offender is completely ineffective if its aim is to change his antisocial desires and acts. It is of course more succes- sful if regarded in the light of a punish- ment. It also protects society for the period of custody.

Many people involved with the problem are aware of this inadequacy and of the destructive effect of the court – and custody experience. Some express bafflement. It is not surprising since the only solution in most cases is one that society finds it almost impossible to pro- vide and that is love. Adults mostly seem to love only their own children, the only arrangement regarded as normal. Many are unable to love and cherish any children even their own. There are no wellsprings of affection available to rescue these children and it is not surprising that statistics show the only hope for the recidivist is a successful marriage. Non-conforming and bitter children are even more likely to be starved of affection and, most damaging, to be treated with no consideration for their dignity. The evidence is all around us that violence is more acceptable to society than love. Court sentences show that. People have always tried to prevent love by others but have made sure if they were powerful enough, that society condoned or at least tolerated their own foibles. Thus the Victorian ‘gentleman' could have the working class girl-with dire consequences to her but none to him if they were found out, and every form of pro- stitution was available to him. Like the present day anti-porn lobby he was very concerned with the morality of others.

John Le Carre with his penetrating view of life writes in the ‘Observer' that the affection-starved youngsters at his prep school went from bed to bed like sticky frogs looking for a pond. “There at last we embraced like the infants we were not allowed to be”. ‘ For punishment – love of course was a punishable offence – we had the . . . choice of several small riding whips”.

Science should be leading us to ask as a matter of course – “But what does the evidence show us?”. It is disheartening to find so distinguished a leader of society as Mr. Whitelaw favouring instead an emotive prejudice, either through a lack of understanding or political expediency. We need a more enlightened and scientific approach to the problem of law and order and the soul destroying effect of our overcrowded prisons.

Yours sincerely,

Dear Editor,

I have been watching the progress of Magpie with interest since its inception last year, and I must say that it improves greatly with each issue, not only in quality of print etc., but also what started out as broadsheets, appealing for ideas and opinions, has developed into an intelligent, thought provoking publication. I read with interest Tom's article on child-porn (issue no. 9) and thought you and other members may be interested to hear one or two com- ments.

Firstly, I think the inclusion of erotic pictures in Magpie would be a contradiction of P.I.E.'s objectives and would fuel the fires of our principal enemys namely the National Front and the Mrs. Whitehouse's of this world.

Personally, like many other mem- bers. I suspect, I find magazines such as Male International, Kim, Boys Express etc., quite acceptable and I am not in the least offended by their contents. However. I feel that Magpie, for all its limitations, must he our vehicle for ideas, our means of communication, but more so, our shop-window to the world, our best advertisement for ourselves.

By producing an “educational” rather than “sensational” magazine, paedophiles will, I believe, gradually be- gin to come across as a caring rather than corrupting breed.

Only by striving to achieve a cloak of respectability will we be able to gain a place in society, we will never reach our goal by adopting a “don't give a damn what you think of us” attitude. This, I think is where the Gay Liberation Front failed to gain support because the media and most of the public have a built in defence against these kind of tactics. You go out there saying “Bang ! Crash ! – Here we are, and we don't care” and what happens – cries of “My God, how dare you do this ?” from the Press and T.V. etc. The result being that, far from furthering the cause – you frighten would-be members off ! No, I think to continue the magazine in its present format is far the wisest thing – after all we can all get hold of these other publications if we really want them. If anything, there could be a little more variety, perhaps more girls – and I am sure many members would not object to seeing boys in the 12 – 18 age group too. I think the inclusion os short stories or a serial would be a good idea, perhaps members could submit their own contributions, and I don't see why members couldn't contribute their own favourite photographs too – provided of course that they fit in with the objectives of the magazine.

I feel that articles written by such people on Dr. Brongersma are invaluable to our cause and I can only hope that you continue to publish his articles. There must be few among us who are not interested in nuts and bolts of paedophilia, and the inclusion of such items must surely increase our under- standing of ourselves.

It must also bring about new tolerances from the public, which at the end of the day will mean the gradual re- shaping of society's attitude towards us.

Yours 214.





In our last issue we gave a summary of Dr. Brongersma's second article on paedophilia, dealing with the paedophile personality. His third and last article discusses the influence on the child of sexual contacts with an adult.


As soon as this question is put, there arises a confusion of tongues, as was shown in several Dutch television programs devoted to this theme. On one side people, disgusted with some cruel murders perpetrated on children raped by panicking or sadistic criminals, and parents indignantly and rightly shocked by the behaviour of exhibitionists or other offenders who indecently assaulted their sons or daughters. On the other hand the spokesmen of the Action Group Paedophilia talking gently about the beneficial influence of an intimate and affectionate lasting adult-child relationship. In this way, of course, a discussion leads to nothing.

First of all we may ask why Dutch people are so much more shocked by the average of one sadistic child-killing a year than by the 1200 children battered to death or invalidity by their parents in the same period, or the 450 killed and the 9000 seriously injured in traffic accidents every year. The explanation lies in the fact that the sadistic murder involves sex.

It is said, rightly, that we're not allowed to sacrifice children in order to solve our adult sexual problems. This was meant as a warning to the paedophile. But it is equally justified to address this admonition to parents and educators who have an emotional negative attitude to sex. How many children have been sacrificed, tortured, abused, troubled or even driven to suicide by adult prejudices against masturbation, now proven to be stupid nonsence and generally considered to be devoid of the least foundation? Let's take care that the same doesn't happen with the negative ideas most people foster against other sexual activities of children!

The child is definitely not a non- sexual being, but has its sexual impulses right from its birth. Babies may masturbate, even to orgasm, without behaving abnormally. The young child has, as everyone knows, strong sexual interests. Then follows the so-called latency period in which sexuality seems to sleep. But now we know more about other periods of western history and other non-western cultures, we must confess that this latency period is only the result of our suppressing culture and that the child of six to twelve, if left to its true nature, abounds in sexual play. Then the sexual impulse comes to a turbulent life in prepuberty, to reach in the years of puberty itself a force never equalled during the rest of its life.

The image of the a-sexual “innocent” child is not the outcome of scientific observation, but only of wishful imagination. We ought not to sacrifice children to this invention of people abhorring sexuality, that is: human nature as it is created. Of course the sexual life of a child is in a process of development, as every other aspect of its life. It should therefore be approached with care and consideration. It should not be suppressed or ignored. The child needs its sexual play, as all higher animals do, to prepare itself for a complete adult sex life. The cultural suppression of the child's sexuality lies at the root of many divorces and unhappy marriages.

A sexual relationship between a child and an adult does not harm the child, may be even beneficial, provided the adult partner is considerate, loving, affectionate. The confusion of tongues about the influence of such relations is produced by the fact that nearly all studies on this subject are founded on criminal cases, throwing on one heap together, rapes and violent assaults with cases of accidental contacts devoid of any traumatic or lasting effect, as well as with cases of intimate loving relations. If we don't discriminate between the deeds of people who, under the stress of sexual abstinence throw themselves on a child while in reality preferring an older partner, and the deeds of paedophile people with erotic preference for a child, we will come nowhere. Most statistics and “scientific” deductions are calculated upon this chaotic mixture of very dissimilar situations and therefore worthless.

All acts of violence and compulsion are, by their nature, traumatic and should be fought as morally bad and criminal. But what is the influence of an erotic relationship to which the child is spontaneously consenting or which it solicited itself?

In order to deal with this question we have, to start with, one popular prejudice to clear away: boys are perverted by sexual contacts with adult males and are “made” homophiles themselves. This widespread belief was at the origin of many penal laws, but it is completely unfounded. On few points there is much unanimity among expert commissions that studied this subject (Wolfenden, Cardinal Griffin in England, Speijer in Holland) and authoritative scientists: nobody becomes a homophile by seduction. Homophilia. if it is not an inborn quality, finds its origin in the first years of human life; if a boy is not a homophile at five or six years of age, he'll never become one, regardless of how many homosexual acts he may participate in. This is shown best by boy- prostitutes and other boys who have sexual contacts with males for years on end while maintaining their sexual preference for girls.

Apart from this outdated prejudice, scientific literature enumerates many bad effects on children as a result from sexual approaches by adults. But this doesn't help us to gain insight in this matter, in so far as this literature – as stated above – doesn't make any clear-cut division between approaches which may be characteri- zed as assaults (and therefore more or less traumatic) and those which are expressions of love and affection, experienced as such by the child (and therefore not traumatic).

Everywhere when such a division is made we see that the authors arrive at very different conclusions. Burton (“Vulnerable Children”, New York 1968) studied 41 children who had sexual experiences with adults and compared them with 154 who had not. The first group was more looking for care and affection, because they got these less at home, than the second. For the rest there were no differences. Already in 1956, J.T. Landis (Experiences of 500 Children with Adult Sexual Deviations”) had come to the same results. Of his 1800 students, 30% of the boys and 35% of the girls had had such experiences. Of those who had. only 2.2% of the girls and only 0.4% of the boys thought themselves to have suffered from bad after-effects, but Landis concluded that even in these few cases the sexual experience had not been at the origin of the less desirable evolution, which was rather a symptom of an already existing trouble.

In 1972 the Dutch psychologist Dr. Bernard published a study in which he deals with a number of adult persons (male and female) who. as children, had had sexual contacts with adults. He subjected them to several tests. Compared to the average Dutch population, these adults proved on the main to be better equilibrated, more tolerant, and they showed more self-reliance in their relations with others. Most of them spoke favourably about the significance they attached to these relationships in their youth.

The outcome of these researches, confirmed by sexologists like Schorsch, Schmidt and Sigusch, criminologists like Hanack, Lempp and Rasmussen and pedagogues like Zitelman, Carl and Kerscher, are much at variance with the popular ideas prevailing among the general public. In accordance with these ideas most penal laws will punish a man who fondles a child erotically much more severely than a man who batters a child nearly to death!

Phobia against anything pertaining to sex, scientific publications throwing on one heap criminal assaults and expressions of tenderness and love, and a misplaced feeling that children are more or less the property of their parents and therefore shouldn't be on too intimate terms with other persons, are at the origin of this stupid situation.

It is pedagogically important, however, to see that this state of affairs is not protecting children but rather is a menace to their well-being. There is no reason to think lightly about the terrific damage inflicted on children who are subjected to parental outbursts of rage or dismay and to police enquiries on the discovery of the fact that they had, often at their own instigation and in any case with their own consent, affectionate erotic relations with an adult lover. When parents come to know that their son or daughter has had such relations, they should, in the very interest of their child, proceed with the utmost caution. Their first duty is to try to understand the real feelings of their child, not giving way to common prejudices.

It asks for some psychological discernment to see that – and why – some experiences in this field may be a source of fear and anxiety to one child, while to the other they are something unique, fantastic and delicious. Children who haven't been brought up in an un- healthy fear of everything sexual, who have had sexual play with comrades, who were not taught to be disgusted by the body and its functions and who don't have an abnormally weak sexual impulse, will mostly react positively when approached by a sympathetic adult. In more than 50% of the cases they even take the initiative themselves.

Nowadays there are more and more expert authors who have an open eye for the positive effects such an affectionate relation may have. No wonder! Could real love, affection, sympathy, tenderness ever have a bad effect on the evolution of a human being? The ancient Greeks had their wisdom about this and in our present day the official Speijer Commission, appointed by the Dutch government, came to the conclusion that “in a number of cases (heterosexual as well as homosexual) initiation by an adult may result in a better evolution of the boy or girl concerned”. The German scientist Prof. Schlegel advances the opinion that sexual contacts with an adult may be as necessary at puberty as maternal love and tenderness in the first period of life. Mature sexual behaviour has to be learned by children's sexual play as many ethnological researches show. If our society had better understanding of this, our adolescents would enjoy more sexual liberty and be less tempted to aggressive behaviour.


At the end of his article. Dr. Brongersma quotes a number of cases from his own experience in which fathers who, as boys, had sexual love relations with adult friends, favour such relations for their own sons. These people don't adhere to the popular prejudices, be- cause their own life story taught them a different view. An old Roman-Catholic priest, who always had held that a man- boy relation had to he morally rejected because adult sexuality was imposed in it on a child unable to cope with the situation changed his opinion completely when by chance he was able to study such a case in real life. Dr. Brongersma received a letter from this priest, in which he affirmed to “have come to conclusions that no critics, however numerous, now could eradicate from my mind…. I now feel that the affection and the emotion called forth by the person of a boy awakening to manhood may evoke in the adult man a silent admiration, tenderness and care. And I now understand that our culture, not to say the creation, would be warmer and richer if there were more men endowed with this talent”. □




Everyone knows the “Child Protection Bill” will pass. It is another misnomer, like “indecent assault” when applied to mutually desired and consenting happenings. This Bill is not designed to protect children (where does “childhood” end anyway?) but to “oppress” them. It seems that when you are a child, everything is illegal. You certainly can't have sex with anyone. When I was fourteen and horny as hell, it was maddening to know that I was only allowed by law to do it to myself, by myself, and then only in secret from my parents because they even thought that was wrong. It was illegal for me to have sex with a man – I had to be ‘ protected”. Now that I am grown up. and have finally reached the “age of consent” it is illegal for me to have sex with a fourteen year old boy. He has to be protected. So I've lost out both ways, first as a boy. then as a man. If only I had known that it was legal to be photographed in an “indecent” pose! I might have had some pictures to look back on. 1 knew I had a beautiful body at that age – I used to admire myself in the mirror. But now a boy will have to keep himself under wraps until he is hairy and ugly. I still don't know what I was supposed to have been protected from as a youngster. I wanted sex and couldn't have it. and I am still mad at society for it.

The Child Protection Bill is a popularity Bill. It was introduced at the height of hysteria and was bound to have a popular hacking. Mary Whithousc even imported Dr. Densen-Gerher to bring the coals hack to Newcastle. Densen-Gerher has done a lot of good with Odyssey House, but she only sees the bad things – the abuse, the drugs, the forced prostitution – and her mind is hopelessly biased against anything remotely sexual concerning youngsters. Cyril Townsend will gain votes at the next election. The whole House supports the Bill . . . who would dare stand up and speak against the protection of children? I'm sure I wouldn't. But would they speak up against the “oppression” of children? Maybe. It all depends on the votes. Our puerile parliamentarians will produce laws based on popularity, which itself is based on anything from prejudice to self-indulgent pride in supporting a cause which appears superficially respectable, instead of on scientific fact. That is where our democracy falls down Our politicians should take the lead in demanding to know the facts before laying down the laws. Many, many people of all ages will suffer because of them.




Pedofili i Norge – A Better Society

(Translated from the BULLETIN of the Norwegian Paedophile Workgroup)

Sexual feelings are probably so repressed, distorted and suppressed in our cultural environment that one can reasonably speak about a collective sexual neurosis. The suppression has certainly in some cases been caused by authorities wishing to control and govern society, such as the church and state. It has supposedly been necessary in order, for example, to create the aggression that men must have in order to fight in wars or some other heroic activity. If sexual feelings are given free rein, it is feared that society will break down.

We do not believe this. People who live in sexual harmony will have greater capacity to use their skills and human warmth in self-sacrificing work in the social system. In a society where the sexual feelings of children are not labelled as disgusting and filthy, but instead are valued as a positive impulse, the relationship between the generations is gentler and friendlier. The time-wasting and restricting lonely dreaming about sexual desires will be replaced by a positive to- getherness where the sexual energy is liberated for the good and happiness of people .and society.

The pseudo-freedom we have experienced in the 70′s with the porno and sex-clubs can -still be of certain help for society's isolated people, but often causes trouble because of the atmosphere of promiscuity in the sex-clubs, and a feeling of emptiness and guilt. Mere change in behaviour does not bring emancipation if it is not followed up with a profound change of attitude toward sexuality. This cannot happen overnight.

In a society so stamped with collective sexual neurosis, morality legislation has the function of protec- ting youngsters and adults against unfortunate and violent outbursts of the suppressed sexuality. The tremendous powers of punishment that are given to this legislation demonstrates the great fear of sex that we have in our culture. They express the importance attached by lawmakers to particular sexual acts, and the idea that it takes the threat of heavy sentences to stop them.

However, laws cannot control sexual impulses. The outlawed sexual activity assumes a more brutalised character, with overtones of anonymity, prostitution and commercial interests from a criminal underworld. This type of brutalisation is outlined in the book Rettspsykiatri (Retterstol/Eitinger – new edition 1976) in the section dealing with paedophilia. It doesn't arrive at conclusions as to the forms that the law ought to take, but we think that this section should be taken as a warning that unfortunate results can follow if paedophilia is encircled by a law-structure. If we are to hope that in the forseeable future we shall live to see a proper sexual freedom, we must today change our attitudes about children and youth. We must not suppress their sensibilities, which we as adults have no right to do. Children's sexual rights must be respected.

But so long as this collective sexual neurosis has such a hold, even on modern people, society can hardly do without laws which protect children against sexual exploitation and assault. Children over 14 could get the necessary protection satisfactorily from the general legislation that already exists for everyone against assault. This would prevent many tragedies which occur when an affectionate and friendly relationship is made the subject of a prosecution.

What about family situations where a girl has been forced to put herself at the disposal of her father? In such a case there might be cause for a heavy sentence, but in the majority of these cases family therapy will still be the best solution. One must not forget that in spite of sexual misconduct there is also found a genuine closeness and emotional attachment joining the adult to the child. A well-thought-out social service will be the best help for a family with this kind of problem, which is always associated with other social distress. A long stay in prison for the father will be experienced as every bit as tragic by the child as by the person punished.

One can today be justified in asking if the world is going forward. Are we not experiencing a stagnation and new puritanism, as we can see for example in the way that paedophilia is persecuted in Great Britain and the USA? And there is indeed not only sexual intolerance but a grave breach of democratic rights when a teacher in England is banned for an indefinite period because of his opinions on the English legal set up and his views on certain forms of sexual contact be- tween young people and adults. Norway is not Great Britain.

But here at home we can also notice a certain reaction and regression. And it is the unfortunate flood of bad (quality) child pornography which has given cause for indignation against paedophiles generally, in certain circles. The weekly magazine “Lek” (=Play) has, during the last six months, printed many interesting articles highlighting children's sexuahty, but one may ask whether the enthusiastic editor of this magazine, Jane Eldor, has advanced a bit too fast and shown unnecessarily provoking pictures of young girls. The reaction has, in any case, not failed to appear in “Arbeiderbladet” (=The Daily Worker) and “Vart Land” (=Our Country). The latter paper has made the Labour MP Astrid Murberg Martinsen say, “There is great risk that such pictures can encourage acts of gross indecency with children (under-aged).

The patient work of giving us more healthy attitudes towards sexual feelings and expressions must be allowed to continue. If we see the development in a greater context based upon historic developments we do have, despite everything, reason to be optimistic.

Labour remained in government in Norway after last autumn's parliamentary elections. We trust this party can discuss the problems connected with our sex (or “decency”) legislation in a sensible way. We do not believe that this party is interested in our entering the future with all our sexual taboos and prejudices. We hope that the government's paper on legal reform which is soon to be published will suggest some of the needs for re- form that we have pointed out, and that criminal policy will become the policy of the Labour Party, and not be handed over to a handful of civil servants in departments and directorate of public prosecutions.

A paedophile writes to us about his situation after having lost his job, his home, and love:

“… This is a pressure that makes all other problems pale. The problems of homosexuals become nothing in comparison. Women's Lib is a ghost compared with our problems. Salary and working hours, hire purchase and careers, which cause problems for many, seem like a tiresome joke”.

This letter shows us that the fight against the collective sexual anxiety is a necessary one. More humane sex laws will be able to help in this context at the same time as it will remove weight from the burden with immediate result. Let us show that society will continue to exist, and probably also will become a much better society if we cease throwing paedophiles into prison. Let us show that we can create a better society and a better life. **

“CHILD PORN” “Porn's evil men on the run” (newspaper banner headline) “I cannot understand the mentality of people who produce such muck” (MP quoted in newspaper) I've been looking at some “such muck” pictures of naked boys with beautiful bodies traceried rib cages knees like rounded nuts a delicate black flash of pubic hair and happy faces not particularly exploited (no more than by capitalism, advertising or education) j Sirs, your “campaign” is motivated by hate of sex, of the human nude, of the possibility of deviance. You, who refuse to contemplate the existence of more than one view, you are the “evil men”.

A JUBILEE SONG The disturbed boy quivering in his teacher's hands and scraping at their flesh with his nails, because he knows he can expect nothing but entertains fantasies of smashing everyone's heads — what have we done for this? The poor harmless paedophile imprisoned for a reciprocal love, and scalded as a “nonce” (but Mrs. Whitehouse says who considers the children?) — what has he done for this? My own poor grown-up gay lover from the East End of London accustomed by dad's beatings to being out of work behind with the rent, and your name in the local paper — what have you done for this? A black boy and a white boy, two friends happily making love to one another, the one buying wranglers jeans because they above all things turn his lover on — may we go through hell-fire and high water that we may be worthy of these and may we all at last have peace.




You show me yours…

Remember playing Doctors ? As kids, most of us discover this marvelous excuse for touching and exploring another human body. The work of many social scientists and researchers have uncovered an abundance of early sexual experience – in sharp contrast to the common disclaimers from parents and teachers alike that the years before puberty are not sexual, not REALLY.

Statements about children being uninterested in sex are becoming less and less credible. The belief that preadolescence represents a period of sexual latency or inactivity is being rejected along with several other Freudian teachings. In their place we find a new understanding of sexual development as a lifelong process that begins at birth.


Birth — 2 years

Boys are often born with erections, and although there is no documentated evidence, there is no reason to suppose that girls do not enter this world in the same state. All of the sexual response equipment is present and operative on day one – it is the reproductive systems that do not develop until puberty. One study of nine male babies (aged 3 – 20 weeks) reported that the number of erections varied from five to forty per day. Fretting, crying and stretching usually accompanied the erection, which was followed by playful and relaxed behaviour.

During the first four weeks of life, the infant girl sustains an extraordinary though temporary degree of sexual de- velopment. Her genitals are swollen and red because of the remaining maternal hormones which produce a momentary masturbation. Her vagina also shows physiologic patterns, including secretion, similar to those of an adult woman. With all that equipment ready for arousal, it's no surprise that genital play is one of most infants earliest experiences. A psychologist studied one infants genital play during his first and second years. The infant watched his penis bounce up and down when he sucked his stomach in. He let the bath water run over his penis until it became erect. He stimulated himself intensively once a week, and explored his genitals with moderate interest three times each week. He put his favourite stuffed toy between his thighs and squeezed, while having a partial erection.

Infants in the first year of life are not generally capable of the direct, voluntary action we call masturbation, but occasionally, infants do specifically stimulate themselves. The Kinsey report found six boys under the age of one year, and twenty three girls under the age of three years who masturbated to orgasm. There is no reason to think that these children were abnormal because they displayed their sexuality. More likely they were simply the ones who were spared the harsh lessons usually delivered when children touch themselves “down there”. Although a mother stimulates the infants genitals when bathing etc., she also often scolds and slaps hands when infants do the same thing. Such a young mind cannot understand this inconsistency, but it does set the stage for developing the negative attitude towards sexuality that plagues many an adult.

Modern psychologists now consider that erotic genital play is a good indicator of whether the infant is getting enough physical affection. Research shows that infants who receive large amounts of affection display high levels of genital play. Because giving adequate physical affection involves the possibility of arousal, the first outsider included in our sexuality is usually a parent. How parents handle these encounters is important to the infant, and possibly to society as well. An American psychologist, James Prescott, suggests that societies which promote physical pleasure among children are peaceful. Those which punish pleasure are violent. He believes that a society can reduce future levels of war and crime by providing more physical affection between parents and children, and more sexual pleasure for children.


3 to 7 years

An explosion of sexiness follows the hazy sensuality of infancy. Now children bloom into romantics and dive joyfully into a period of unrestrained emotional and physical affection: hugging and kissing etc. Children of this age will often copy what they have seen – at home, on television, etc.. and this is when they begin to bring other kids into their sexual adventures. The game of “You show me yours and I'll show you mine” seems to be a favourite everywhere.

Cohorts get involved in cuddling, handling, and sucking each others sex organs, and attempts at intercourse – both anal and genital, hetrosexual and homosexual. Homosexuality is a normal part of growing up for both boys and girls, and is usually just a stepping stone on the way to adult hetrosexuality.

Many youngsters are often intro- duced to more advanced sexual play by slightly older children. Like so many other aspects of life, here the old teach the young. One young girl remembers “He (age II) asked me (age 5) if I wanted to play doctors. Thinking it was all in fun, I said yes. He informed me that he was the doctor and I was the patient. I was pregnant, and he was going to operate. He undid my pants, took them off, and did the same to his. He tried to have intercourse, but did not suceed”.

Another girls first experience was more scary than fun — “Bill and I, (both aged 5 years) were close friends, and the two of us went over to Tom's house to play. Tom (aged 9 years) locked us in the bedroom. We could only go if we exposed ourselves physically to each other. We undressed, and Tom immediately fondled Bill's penis, and then tried to touch my vagina. I either cried or screamed, and he stopped. I think where I became con- fused, was that at home, nakedness was common, accepted, and associated with good thoughts “.

Kindergarten age girls often try putting objects on or into their genitals. One woman recalls “Some afternoons we would lock ourselves in a bedroom and take our pants off. We took turns laying on the bed and putting pennies, marbles, etc., between our legs. Two other girls liked to pretend they were boys, and used a pencil for a penis. As the ritual became old hat. it passed out of existence”.
8 to 13 years

Until fairly recently, these years have been considered a period of sexual quiescence, a time when sexual interest takes a little time off before the big push at puberty, but in societies which allow children sexual freedom, youngsters increase their sexual activities during these years. This implies that the low levels of sexual activities expected then are more a function of old fashioned repression than of natural development. In fact, preadolescence may be a time when all we have learnt about sex comes into focus. If guilt has been the environment of sex. then fantasies of torture, masochism and sadism may erupt. Throughout these years, kids investigate every possible source of sexual pleasure. The techniques of gratification they discover are endless. “Circle jerk”, or group masturbation is a common one amongst boys. They sit in a circle, and masturbate to orgasm, often awarding special praise to those who “shoot” fastest or furthest. Climbing ropes or poles can often have a very gratifying effect!

America has produced several secret societies which foster sexual freedom between children, and between children and adults. One which has gone totally public, is the Guyon Society, whose members allow their offspring whatever sexual expression they want. The Child Sensuality Circle, a semi-public organisa- tion based in San Diego, is one of five major groups seeking sexual freedom for children, and are now broadening their focus to cover the general liberation of children – legal and social as well as sexual An American doctor sums up with a view which is slowly becoming more and more acceptable to society:

“Personally. I like the idea of adult sex without children involved, but for the child's sake, and for society's sake, we've got to start allowing our children more sexual freedom instead of con- stantly burdening them with guilt and misinformation”. **





Keith Spence

I met him at the local swimming-pool. He was by himself, practising jumping feet-first off the spring-board with a single-mindedness that suggested Olympic training. 1 guessed he was about twelve years-old – his long, coltish body was still softened by the last traces of puppy-fat, but the way he stood and moved showed that he was growing up fast. He had silver-birch-blonde hair dropping to his shoulders, and grey eyes that sparkled when he laughed. And freckles. I'm kinky for freckles. He was absolutely my kind of kid.

For half-an-hour we jumped, dived, splashed, wrestled, ducked, bombed, and generally behaved in a thoroughly irresponsible fashion: and all without speaking a word. But finally, when we had dried and changed. I decided that the time had come to put our friendship onto a more regular basis.

“Do you want a coke?” I asked.

“Ferlot?” he said. “Vad sayer du?”

“A coke” I said, pantomiming desperately. “To drink. Do you want? Do you speak English?”

“Ferlot” he repeated, “jag forstor inte. Nu maste jag go. Hcj-do”. And he grinned maddeningly, waved once, and was gone.

If you think England is frustrating for paedophiles, you should try living in Sweden for a bit.

Admittedly the problems are rather different. In England, where children are only allowed contact with adults for purposes of punishment, and can't take their socks off in public in case they start an orgy, the difficulty is to meet kids at all. Here in Sweden, making friends with them is laughably easy. The problems – - at least for a thick foreigner like me – - come from being forced to communicate almost entirely through sign-language. After three months, my Swedish vocabulary is still limited to such earth-shattering remarks as “There are three cats underneath the table” and “My hat is blue but yours is yellow”, which I'm sure will come in useful one day, but are not really very appropriate as the basis for a deep romantic relationship. The frustration is compounded by the fact that Swedish children are the most heart- shatteringly beautiful in the world: so that quite often, when walking down the street, the sight of one can literally stop you in your tracks and leave you gasping for breath. And as if this were not enough, the long-suffering paedophile visitor to Sweden also has to face the torment of various depraved Scandanavian practices, of which the most fiendish is undoubtedly the bastu or sauna. This institution is a large hot room, regularly patrolled by troops of highly uninhibited naked children. The result is that one sits there for far too long, turning the colour of raw beef, because one's physical condition makes it impossible to walk out with any degree of dignity. It's hell. I tell you! Sheer hell!

Actually, while sitting in the bastu last week, gazing at and being gazed at by a couple of faun-like children whose incipient adolescence was spectacularly in evidence, 1 found myself wondering what daft old Mrs. Whitehouse would have thought about it all. Here were two boys who, being Swedish, would have been accustomed to nakedness – - their own and other people's – - from a few months old. They would already have received a thorough, factual and liberal sexual education. They would certainly have been encouraged to question and to experiment: that is how children are normally brought up in Sweden. Yet Swedish children are not promiscuous, nor has their health and happiness been ruined by whatever nameless horrors it is that Mrs. Whitehouse so abjectly dreads (to the best of my knowledge she has ‘never exactly specified what it is that she fears from allowing children to understand and acknowledge their sexuality. Whatever it is. it hasn't happened in Sweden). On the other hand, children aren't frightened by the changes in their bodies, nor in any way ashamed of them.

I suppose the secret is that children in Sweden are respected, and their rights are acknowledged in a way they have never been in Britain. That much is obvious as soon as you step into a Swedish school. Swedish children come to school because it is fun, and because they understand that it is important for them to learn. Once there, they are not urged to be ‘better' than the other pupils – - there is no top (or bottom) of the form. Instead, the cleverer pupils help the less clever ones, and any academic achievement is the achievement of the class as a whole. Swedish school-children learn, before anything else, to co- operate, to tolerate, and to trust each other. Teachers are friends and equals, and one teacher may stay with the same class, every lesson, for two or three years. There is no compulsion, no formality. Christian names are always used, even to the headmaster. Above all, there is no fear: Sweden has a strict law that nobody – - not teachers, not police, not even parents – - may ever strike a child. A teacher who hit one of his pupils would be dismissed on the spot, and would probably appear in court. There are, in fact, no punishments at all in Swedish schools. The system isn't based on punishment, it's based on mutual respect and co-operation. And – - I'm sorry, Mr. Rhodes Boyson, but you're wrong. It works.

Of course, as a refugee from England granted asylum in Swedish schools, it has taken me a little time to get used to the way things are done here. It's a bit disconcerting to see a fifteen-year-old boy at the back of one's class contentedly smoking a pipe, for example; or to have two fourteen-year-old girls politely excuse themselves from a lesson be- cause they have to cook supper for their boy-friends. And then there- was the class of ten-year-olds who were so excited at speaking English with a real Englishman that they barricaded the door at the end of the lesson and refused to let me out. Imagine being kidnapped by 22 Swedish children! I was quite rude to the Swedish teacher who rescued me. Of course, too, the system does have its drawbacks. It is criticised for not giving enough encouragement to unusually gifted children: and for not teaching pupils ambition (a questionable virtue anyway). Also, it would fail disasterously if it didn't have total dedication from Swedish teachers- – a teacher who didn't love kids unquestioningly and unconditionally could destroy an entire class. (That doesn't happen. And a strike by Swedish teachers is unimaginable). But the few risks and disadvantages are a comparatively small price to pay for the joy of seeing a whole generation growing up free from aggression, loneliness, mistrust or fear.

In Sweden, one by one, the sacred cows of the ‘professional educators' are being quietly herded off to the knacker's yard and slaughtered. Discipline? Forget it. Rigid rules should only be needed when people can't think for themselves; here they respect kids' common sense instead. Religious instruction? That went long ago. The nuclear family? Sweden must have the world's highest proportion of unmarried and seperated parents: but because such things arc treated without rancour or guilt, the children don't often seem to suffer. Youthful innocence? Yes – - but here it means absence of shame, not absence of knowledge. And “Protection of Children?” Emphatically, yes! Swedish children are protected, by law. from violence, pain, destitution, exploitation and discrimination. I only wish the same could be said of Britain. Well – - alright. Perhaps I'm getting a bit carried away. And I can't pretend that Sweden hasn't got its problems – - they exist here as they do anywhere else. But after the joyless, loveless emotional waste-land which is childhood in Britain, the vividness and happiness of Swedish kids is strong medicine. Sweden may not have all the answers – - but it's a damn sight closer to them than any other country I've visited, and working in Swedish schools is an enthralling experience. Now all I need is a decent phrase-book. Does anyone know the Swedish for “Will you come to the cinema with me on Saturday?” **




I hope I was not the only one among us to visit the exhibition of drawings and paintings by David Remfry at the Mercury Gallery, Cork Street, London. Entitled Images of Childhood these paintings and drawings, mostly of little girls, have a calm beauty and subtle eroticism of great appeal. More often than not posed against a blank wall, barefoot on carpet, barekneed on chairs, simply dressed or not at all, playing hide and seek in a birthday suit behind the jardiniere, these children are caught, frozen in mid-dance, reclining on day beds, leaning listlessly, lost in sadness, pouring tea or simply playing, exempt from time yet dimly aware each day is one day nearer the gates of the Garden of Eden. Full of foreboding for the end of childhood, knowing they must grow up and what growing up means, these still nymphets are filled with unease and recall those many portraits of the Virgin looking wistfully at the Christ Child, as a mother protective, yet as the Mother conscious of, and resigned to, the Cross. For all their charm and apparent innocence, these paintings never lapse into sentimentality, and never do so because the subjects are clearly as aware as the painter of their potential appeal. Yet the eroticism is muted, not blatant as in Balthus' paintings of pubescent girls, curiously English, reserved, belonging indoors, unrequited. It is precisely the eroticism of paedophilia, the attraction of the unattainable, the charm of cool remote children, the yearning to touch the untouched, tenderly. The distance between us and childhood, children, is the hallmark of paedophilic yearning, the rosegrey dream which dooms us, for when it is eclipsed in intercourse, there is the worm in the bud. Despair inevitably follows, not at once in the flush of passion, but later in twilight when we dimly perceive that our dream can never be incorporated in the smooth precise flesh of any child, not because children grow up, but because they must never cease to be distant. This is our dilemma: the child possessed is no longer child. Possessed, and a sword shall pierce the heart. So Remfry's children, solitary especially in company, remain aloof, retain their distance, which is precisely their presence, and beckon us. only to ask us to go.





Both boys and girls can benefit from a responsible paedophile relationship with an adult friend that they can look up to, talk out their problems with, play with and learn from. The boy sees his man friend as a model to emulate in his self-development. The girl may see her man friend as more of a romantic hero. Likewise the lesbian paedophile relationship is based on the emulation self-development concept and the woman/boy relationship of one of romantic fulfillment. The responsible paedophile should not take advantage of this hero0worship just to satisfy sexual drives, but rather to be a supplemental teacher/parent in all phases of the child's development. This should include basic friendship, teaching of ethical values, guidance and, ideally, dealing with matters of love and sensuality. With the adult as hero, he/she has the responsibility to place the welfare of the child first. A hero must live up to his honour.




A publication of the Childhood Sensuality Circle of America, has news and views of the Childrens' Liberation Movement with an emphasis on Childrens' Sexual Freedom. Write for details to: c.s.c, P.O. Box —, San Diego, Ca. U.S.A.



Volunteers sought for exploratory interviews for serious sociological research project concerned with heterosexual paedophilia. Absolute confidentiality assured. Please contact Box 95. PIE. London.


MAGPIE aims to provide paedophiles with their own journal and tries to further the understanding and acceptance of true love for children in today's society. MAGPIE does not promote or otherwise encourage unlawful acts, sexual or otherwise. All opinions expressed are those of their respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor, or of PIE. MAGPIE welcomes~criticism. advice, contributions and comments from its readers. Reprints from MAGPIE are welcomed: please credit your source.

MAGPIE is published by the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), the national paedophile organisation and research group. Correspondence for the magazine should be addressed to the Editor, whilst all other communications should be addressed to the Secretary. Our address is: PIE, P.O. Box — London —.

Boy Says :

"Thank you for posting this. I was sexually abused by a well-known person around this time. He used EXACTLY some of the phrases and justifications in this material. I do not know if he was a Paedophile Information Exchange member or writer.

I hope that all of the PIE newsletters are still available somewhere to help prosecute the people who actively promote, justify and carry out the abuse of children.

Thanks so much."

Posted on February 16th, 2013 at 11:45 pm


Post Scriptum from the Parti Radical de France :

Our thanks to Chris Spivey from Essex, England, whose blog provided this information.

Chris Spivey.

Notre site