Mommy and Daddy Were Good Little Pedophiles
By Stephen W. Cote
This essay is not a dirty story about my parents or little children. It advocates parental versus government discipline and education for children.
NOTE: That title is absolute nonsense. I usually operate under the delusion that I can take a word or phrase that the world has already given a popularly horrible definition to and find an alternate definition that means something else. In this case, it didn't happen. Pedophilia, as a word, is grade A, number 1, Olympic class nasty.
NOTE #2: The avid comedian tuners will notice I paraphrase, or simply start using some lines from George Carlin with no reference. This is not a blatant rip off - I bought all his tapes, damnit, I should be able to paraphrase - but I've listened to them so much, I actually catch myself using his words (words in coherent thoughts, not amorphous images).
NOTE #3: I don't advocate the word "pedophile" in the sense that it could possibly be used in a good way, unless we are talking about catching our children scribbling genitalia on their Barbies and Kens with a marker, and then we could possibly work it into a sentence without intentionally referring to the "official" definition.
NOTE #4: The above example was not a random thought, but taken from experience. Anyone who is disgusted at the notion of abusing a Barbie or Ken in such a fashion obviously doesn't have any children from the U.S. (or your favorite capitalist country) who had either one or both. In fact, on a side note, Barbie and Ken dolls were designed to be abused in various ways. Not quite as drastic as melting those little green "army men" on the BBQ, but not so gentle as, say, a Superstretch Armstrong. [Forgive Him Mattel, for he does knows not what he sayeth! - The Editors :)]
In the past few weeks, I have read various articles about "FBI crackdowns" and "Censorship on the Net!". Imagine that, somebody, somewhere, thought that it would be a good idea to censor the Internet. This article is explicitly directed towards censorship fans and opponents in the United States. The reason I'm excluding the rest of the world is that parents don't seem to have such a double standard of being anal about their government, children, and education all in the same breathe. In the event that an English professor or instructor somewhere reads this and decides that it might be a good idea to see how an English Literature major is using his time, I will make the thesis crystal clear. Parents are responsible for their children.
Parents in the U.S. celebrate the government sending their children into war with grand parties, ceremonies, ribbons, medals and badges. In addition, the typical middle class parent seems satisfied with a child that grows up to work with the government, whether in politics, law enforcement, or otherwise. However, when the word "education" is introduced, the government is no longer a popular entity. In fact, there is very little that parents celebrate the government for outside of money. For example, is anyone in the U.S. honestly content with the job that the United States government has done for them? If any one of you said yes, please stop lying. Parents expect the government to:
The U.S. government does not do that sort of thing, especially because parents are under the delusion that men can go through one minute of ecstasy, women through nine months of pregnancy, a few years of rearing, and then are free of any burden. Parents squawk about higher taxes, better schools, safer "zones" - and by the way, what the hell is a "zone"? For the last few years, there have actually been signs turning up that "zone" off areas. For example, there are:
Doesn't a "drug-free zone" imply that an area is not only already overrun with drug dealers, but that there may or may not be an obvious need for a little more policing and signs are required to inform drug-activated individuals that they belong in another zone? Why would a parent send a child to a school that has a "drug-free zone" sign around it, when they could send them to a school that didn't have a sign like that for miles around? I have had a police officer follow me around for almost half an hour until I drove onto the Interstate just to flash his lights and tell me that I needed to change my license tags (which were sitting back in my room). There appears to be a slight conflict of interest there. I don't think that we need more police to have our "safety zones", just more efficient police that are able to decide what is actually a crime and what is absent mindedness.
My parents were awfully good little pedophiles [sic] (I'm grossly misusing the word). They taught me to think for myself. In the process, they did lead me to question everything else they wanted me to believe blindly, but all in all, I think I turned out fairly decent. Although I do things that people wouldn't agree with and think things that will probably get me damned to hell, and have tried things that would have put hair on my mother's chest, I am still able to draw the line between right and wrong. I know that murder is morally wrong. I don't need a law to remind me. That doesn't go so far to say that I haven't really wanted to kill somebody - and I know what "turns mister hand into mister fist" (Sam Kinison). I just haven't "wanted" to go from "wanting" to "doing". That is the product of good rearing.
Suffice it to say, I'll play the devil's advocate and openly state that censorship is the product of the same pot smoking yahoos who came up with equal opportunity. Imagine that. In a country as vast and complex as the United States, the "whitey, fade gray, honkeys" are still the "cruel oppressors". If that is true, then I must have missed that day in school. I'm still waiting to make more money, drive a better car, and get a better education that a non-white - and I say that figuratively, because I know it won't happen. Forget the statistics (especially if you are re- writing auto insurance laws), and realize this single basic fact:
Back to my point. Life bites hard, and many people get special benefits at the expense of others because of something that happened to their ancestors, or what their parents did, or because their brain farts on Tuesday's just before lunch. And amongst the many things that can be done, all that most parents do is complain and gripe. Look at that nasty trash my child will be exposed to the Internet. See that big, bare buttocks on TV? My child will be scarred for life! Of course, it has occurred to no one .. at least, none of the people making the censor bills, or voting for them .. that, as parents, it is their responsibility to take charge over their children, and in that event, there wouldn't be all these problems in the first place.
You've fought a brave battle against child pornography on the Internet. I believe that, while the liberal minded, liberated artists have a point .. to a point .. that some of it could, in fact, be art, or beautiful, or whatever .. there is a very, very simple solution to solving this problem. I've emailed my senator on it, but of course, received no reply. Anyway, the hardest part is over .. you don't have to think anymore. Just ask and I'll send you my plan for stopping such nastiness .. without passing any laws, without upsetting people who want their privacy, and for computer illiterate, without using a computer yourself.
Copyrighted to Stephen W. Cote and
Fantasy Writers, LTD, 1995.
writers@mcint.com
Last Updated: March 10, 1996