Chris Brand - Paedophilia Corner

What Chris Brand Said About the US Nobel Prizewinner Accused Of Under-age Sex; and What Happened When Newsies Discovered It!

What I Said

My book, 'The 'g' Factor', was withdrawn from publication by Wiley Incorporated in April, and my University began a witch-hunt against me (e.g. accusing me of insufficient use of 'visual aids'). In reaction, I have maintained by e-mail and Internet (http://www.webcom.com/zurcher/thegfactor/index.html) a regularly updated 'NewsLetter' about the affair. My particular concern is to explain, detail and defend the cause of 'race realism' (especially about IQ-type intelligence). However, I also defend other 'realistic' views, e.g. about sex differences--thus getting into trouble with what Camille Paglia has properly called 'feminazis.' From September 16, for several days, the NewsLetter carried the following item--eventually to be unearthed by a journalist and used as the basis for banner headlines such as 'FIRE BRAND!'('Daily Record', November 10). [The 'Daily Record' is the Scottish edition of the left-leaning London tabloid newspaper, the 'Daily Mirror']


Edinburgh, SEPTEMBER 16

OK, I am a race-realist and a sex-realist. But am I also a gay- and paedophilia-realist? (Now that gay 'rights' have been widely ackowledged in the West, paedophilia has manifestly become the next 'frontier.') Whether to accept some forms of paedophilia is now a particularly acute question because of the opening (on October 8) of the trial in Maryland of a 73-year-old Nobel Prizewinner, Daniel Gajdusek. In the course of DG's many researches in New Guinea--cracking 'kuru', a strange 'slow virus' form of central nervous system infection--DG's diaries show he plainly loved for a time at least twelve Melanesian and Micronesian boys and brought them to the USA as his adoptive sons. (I do not know whether an adoptive mother was also provided.) Whatever complaints may be arising today, the boys seem to have had a great time in general. For example eight of them turned up and posed cheerily with their sleeping bags for photographers at the Nobel award ceremony in Stockholm (in 1976, when DG was 53).

I offer the following reflections on whether DG should be prosecuted.

  1. It seems incredible that a court should be concerning itself with events of some twenty or thirty years ago that apparently yielded no complaint at the time.
  2. From cases of paedophilia I have known, I would incline to guess that the trial has come about primarily because of the jealousy of one of the young partners. What often happens is that the paedophile wants (among other things) to 'liberate' a partner after a few years so the youngster can go off and have girlfriends and develop normally; but then this rejected partner shops the paedophile when he takes up with a younger partner.
  3. Academic studies and my own experience suggest that non-violent paedophilia with a consenting partner over age 12 does no harm so long as the paedophiles and their partners are of above-average IQ and educational level. As lead choirboy (Decani) and soloist, I met lots of paedophiles who would press florins and half-crowns (now worth 4 pounds) into my horrid little palm at age 13. For better or worse, I never 'fancied' any of them nor did anything but allow a little fondling: on my part it was not a sexual experience. But I was never feminazistically inclined to condemn them: these men were well above average in intelligence, well educated (two were writers), amused me far more than the average geography teachers, gave me useful tips (where to find the G spot etc....) and never frightened me in the least. Indeed the only problem with them was that they they were so awfully old and sweaty and heavy-breathing and desperate-for-whatever-it-was-they-did [I tried not to look] that I much preferred their jokes to their visual aids.
  4. I find it totally disgraceful that a 73-year-old man of such distinction should be hounded by the courts and the press. I could certainly never do such work myself. (Though no special admirer of Britain's current Royals, I similarly deplored Princess Anne being arrested and summonsed for speeding in the 1970's.)

It is true that I am not an unequivocal democrat. -- Democracy needs circumscribing with respect for intelligence, otherwise it will not last long. On that 'democratic elitist' basis, I offer Daniel Gajdusek my support in his struggles. (I hope US supporters might kindly keep me in touch with this case.)


2. PRESS RELEASE by Mr Chris Brand, Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 12 xi 1996, 12 noon.


Censored yet *again*!

In April, publisher John Wiley withdrew my book, 'The 'g' Factor', from UK shops on orders from Wiley s New York HQ. Apparently, my pretty routine coverage of Black-White differences in IQ would upset politically correct neo-Stalinists and blacken Wiley s name in the academic and media circles where PeeCees have been spawning busily over the past decade. Little troubled by this censorship of my work, Edinburgh University declined to demand re-publication and threw in allegations that my views were false and personally obnoxious to its Principal, Sir Stewart Sutherland.

In reply, I did what I could to let my views be known- not least because I am optimistic that genuine educational improvements would be possible for many children if only realistic choices of 'track' were offered to parents and children within state schools. Through the summer, I put a summary of 'The 'g' Factor' and much of the source material up on the Internet for all to see; and I maintained a regular NewsLetter to explain developments and rally supporters. Soon the University wanted the NewsLetter removed from its own computer; so it was taken in by a friend in the USA. Next, the University said it would remove pointers from Edinburgh to the USA site. Finally the University closed down by Home Page -completely cutting me off from the Net and, for good measure, cut me off from e-mail as well.

Happy to collude with the censorship from Wiley and Edinburgh University, the Scottish press did its best to make sure that all that became known of my views were the sensationalistic distortions and decontextualized sound-bites that left-leaning journalists cared to provide. While accusing me of condoning paedophilia, the newspapers never provided even the short (1-page) text of what I had actually said in doubting the wisdom of the Maryland prosecution of 73-year-old Nobel Prize Winner Daniel Carleton Gajdusek for non-violent offences committed some 25 years ago. Once more, what I had actually said was the last thing that the public could be told.

The idiocy of this threefold censorship would be laughable if it were not so disturbing. A great University has proved just as hopeless as Wiley and the Scottish press in providing support for academic freedom; and all these three institutions turn out to dance chiefly to whatever tunes are called by hysterical PeeCees and the low-life AntiNazi League.

PLEASE MARK MY WORDS: IF MY BOOK IS NOT RE-PUBLISHED AND AVAILABLE IN BOOKSTORES, THE CAUSE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN THE WEST WILL BE IN A SORRY STATE. FEW ACADEMICS WOULD BE PREPARED TO SUFFER THE MANY BLOWS AND THREATS THAT I HAVE NOW ENDURED FOR SIX MONTHS. IF 'The 'g' Factor' DISAPPEARS, SO WILL OTHER SERIOUS PRODUCTS OF RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE DEEMED CONTROVERSIAL BY THE LIBERAL -LEFT.


3. Letter in 'The Herald' (Glasgow), 12 xi 1996, p. 18.

Paedophilia in context

The remarks of lecturer Chris Brand regarding paedophilia have again been taken out of context by the press for the sake of sensational, newspaper-selling copy. They were made in the context of a plea for mitigation for Nobel Prize-winner Dr Daniel Gajdusak who pleaded not guilty to a charge of molesting a 15-year-old boy in the 1970 s.

Mr Brand has specifically stated that he does not approve of or condone such behaviour, and he does not call for a change in the law on child sex.

He claims only that academic studies have shown that in certain specifically defined instances (non-violence, mutual consent, high IQ and educational level, boys over 12 years) it has been shown to do no harm.

The question an academic must ask himself in the light of such research is not, Will this information offend people if it is articulated? but Is it true? If it is true, it would not be the first time that modern research has coincided with the opinions of the ancient Greeks.

In Dr Gajdusak s case, the boys concerned came from Pacific islands where such activities are regarded as normal and healthy. The point Mr Brand is raising is that the degree of harm done to the victim in some instances is less than in others.

This consideration applies to many other aspects of the law e.g., a person accused of stealing will generally receive a lighter sentence than one who steals ,000; and the degree of injury inflicted is a relevant factor when considering punishment.

Mr Brand is saying that in the case of Dr Gajdusak, if he is proved guilty, such considerations of justice should also apply.

This is a far cry from the press claim that Chris Brand is a supporter of paedophilia. However, it shows considerable courage on his part to comment at all such a sensitive area of public opinion in the full knowledge that many will call for his dismissal. In Mr Brand's mind, he is simply doing his academic duty.

Pat Brisbane
23, Royal Park Terrace
Edinburgh.

4. Letter in 'The Guardian' (London), 14 xi 1996, p. 16 [editorial page]

'Brand Label'

"I find the reasons for the disciplinary proceedings against Chris Brand disturbing ('Lecturer in race row suspended for defending paedophile sex, November 9). The views he holds about the lower IQ of African-Americans are supported by a number of senior academics in prestigious North American, Australian and other countries' universities. The same is true for his views on paedophilia.

Qualitative research by German sociologists (who are not paedophiles themselves, I might add) has been published which supports Brand's opinion that not all paedophile sex acts actually harm the children involved. Brand is careful enough to distinguish these acts from the rape and killing that took place in Belgium, for instance.

I do not support Mr Brand's views in regard to the IQ issue and I am not even sure whether his views on paedophilia deserve serious consideration. But it seems clear to me that both of these subjects should be open to discussion, and academics should be allowed to express public support for views which are neither politically correct nor mainstream."

(Dr) Udo SCHUKLENK, Lecturer in Applied Ethics,
Centre for Professional Ethics,
University of Central Lancashire,
Preston PR21 2HE.

5. 'Times Higher' (the weekly newspaper for UK academics) covers the Gajdusek affair: Extract from 'The g Factor NEWSLETTER'

Edinburgh, NOVEMBER 16

To my delight, this week's 'Times Higher' carries full-page, sympathetic coverage of Nobel Prizewinner Daniel Carleton Gajdusek--together with an attractive visual aid featuring three semi-naked, war-painted young boys in Papua New Guinea (Tim Cornwell, 'A laureate accused', TH No 1253, 15 xi, p. 17). So what has been going on, and how has a humane and lively 73-year-old workaholic been charged with sexual abuse of children a decade ago? (1) In PNG, in the 1960's, CG discovered, like Western anthropologists, extensive practice of what he called "pederastic fellation" among growing boys and between boys and adults. PF was usually initiated by the younger partner as a sign of friendship, though it was also widely believed that drinking human semen was as helpful to growing boys as was drinking a mother's milk to babies. CG's diaries from the 1960's go into considerable detail, sometimes based on nights when he had slept in one room with several boys: he would be awoken by the sound of an adolescent boy straining for his third orgasm of the night; or he would, on entering a hut, find men and boys laid out in positions suitable for fellatio. (Sodomy was rarely mentioned by Papuans and did not seem to happen.) Yes, there was *some* sense of shame and need for secrecy: couples found together would sometimes rearrange themselves hastily when CG appeared on the scene. (2) Whether CG himself indulged is not stated in his diaries; but he plainly approved of PF as practised and was generally content and sometimes "sensually satisfied" by his experiences in PNG. What he *did* do was to look after and pay for the education of 54 boys, some of whom are now academics in US universities. It is just one of these boys, now 23, who accuses him of some (unstated) form of 'abuse' at age 14. With FBI help, this young man entrapped CG over the phone. He asked CG, "Do you know what a paedophile is?"; to which CG quietly replied, "I am one." Since CG's arrest (and overnight imprisonment in a Maryland county jail) in April, virtually all of his 'family' of boys have come forward to defend him; and his own brother [also an academic] has denounced the prosecution as "a witchhunt" and "obscene." At present, CG is on "administrative leave" from the US National Institute of Health which funded his tracing of 'kuru' ("laughing death") to a slow-acting virus, thus preparing the way for similar discoveries about Jakob-Kreuzfeld Disease and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy.

'Times Higher' coverage of my own case of administrative leave (Olga Wojtas, 'Brand Claims He Was Censored', p. 4) is equally sympathetic--allowing me to describe Edinburgh Univeresity management as "absolutely pathetic and idiotic". "[Brand] stressed that he was not urging a change in the law, and said his critics did not understand moral philosophy if they claimed he thought paedophilia was not wrong." {An action *can* be harmless but still wrong--e.g. breaking a promise that has been out-dated by events, or telling a white lie.}


Cycad Web Works Sun Jul 22 06:31:51 EDT 2018 : # 1 : last modified 22/6/118
Chris Brand viewed by user@54.92.163.188