you're reading...
Rape and Sexual Assault, Women's Bodies

War on Little Girls: Woman-Hating, Sex Predator’s Seattle “Girl Love” Website Was Legal


The guy in this picture here, is a sex predator who preys on little girls, ages 4-11.  He goes to places he knows he will find them, takes pictures of them, and, until last Wednesday when his website was closed down, he posted the photos on a website entitled “Seattle-Tacoma-Everett Girl Love” devoted to his unapologetic obsession.

He is 45 years old, a druggy (he devotes a lot of space on his website to his own experiences with hallucinatory drugs, in particular), is unemployed, and lives with his parents.   Police have known about his website, and about him, for a long time, but they can’t do anything about it because he hasn’t broken any laws.  Network Solutions closed his site down last Wednesday not because he was a predator openly preying on little girls and encouraging other men to do the same, but because his failure to register his site under his own name violated their Terms of Service.

From my perspective, based on the limited amount of research I’ve done (I feel such hatred and loathing for these men, it’s hard for me to spend much time reading about them), the media coddles and protects them in ways I recognize as sympathetic, in the same way that the media often portrays rapists and batterers in sympathetic ways, as though they are victims somehow.   As  part of my own refusal to participate in that, I won’t use words like “pedophilia,” which means “child love.” These men love nothing and no one but their own dickheads (either one, they are interchangeable).  Reading bleeding heart accounts of what these men do and say, the uneducated and uninformed might feel tempted to feel sorry for them, as though it’s all about their having made their peace with a lifetime of unrequited “love” for “LGs,” as they call them, meaning “Little Girls.”  In fact, these are child molesters, predators, and, based on my (again limited research), they are open misogynists and woman-haters.   While a male-dominated media either misses their misogyny or shares it, it’s clear to anyone who cares about women.

Here is an interview with this guy from the local television station.   Notice that he makes a point of saying he finds little girls a lot more attractive than women, in the way with which we, as women are so familiar, the sort of sour grapes, “she’s a stuck up slut” attitude men cop when women they target or from whom they want something won’t give it to them.  Except that in the case of these guys, their woman-hating is more dangerous and deadly than it might have been, in that they become obsessed with, target, and prey on females to whom they can gain access — vulnerable, innocent, trusting little girls — in a way they can’t gain access to adult women.

Although this guy’s site is down,  a few pages can still be accessed via a web archiving service, or could be as of this morning.  I am not going to post the link because even though his site is defunct, anyone accessing the pages will find links to other sites for men who sexually prey on little girls and no way will I participate in that.  Additionally, there are many photos of little girls on this guy’s site, and no way will I be part of their ongoing violation at the hands of perps.  However, I have the link and have also saved the pages on my hard drive.  I will provide this information to feminists with whom I’m familiar, especially anyone who wants to strategize actions against these men, these sites, these links.  You can e-mail me at  What immediately came to my mind reading through was that since this guy’s site was read widely by child molesters, it might be a good idea to write to the organizers of festivals that he lists, churches, skating rinks, etc., and to let them know they’d been offered up as venues for child predators to practice their predations so that they can beef up security, warn participants and members, and be more vigilant than they might otherwise be.  It might also be a good idea to simply circulate copies of the pages of his site to school boards and those responsible for places where children gather in an attempt to hold them accountable for seeing to it that children are safe.   If they know the way pedophiles operate, to my mind they have some responsibility to consider what they know in their efforts to ensure the safety of children in their care or on their premises.

Following are excerpts from this guy’s site (which, again, has been removed by Network Solutions).  They provide the real story, the true story about him and guys like him:  that they are obsessed with sexually assaulting little girls, that they spend huge amounts of time sharing information to help one another gain access to little girls, and that they hate, not only the little girls with whom they are obsessed, but their mothers, as well.

Although a big show is made for the mainstream media as to how what this guy does is legal and although he insists he has never broken the law, it’s clear reading these excerpts where his sympathies lie, and that if, in fact, he hasn’t broken the law (which I doubt), he has, in fact, violated children, and where the laws don’t keep him and the likes of him from violating children, they need to be changed.

Following are excerpts form retrieved from a web archiving service (remember “GL” stands for “Girl Lovers,” and “LG” stands for “Little Girls.”)  The first excerpts are this guy’s reports of events he’s attended in his quest to assault and prey on girls.

I found another great day for GL’ers! … I got more of an up-close parade experience than I had last weekend …(some of the LGs parading by me were so close that I almost could have reached out and touched them!). I didn’t see a list of the parade participants in advance, so I didn’t know if there were going to be enough (or any) LGs in this to satisfy me — but there were more than enough, and I got a good sample of them in my pics. As you can see, there were also a few LG spectators on the opposite side of the street from me. I now believe that parades are better GL picture-taking opportunities than carnivals–where I’ve kind of backed off on taking pics from inside because of paranoia about cops and other security…. I lingered there for the better part of a half hour until it started thinning, checking out the many LGs. …I could barely move at times (which wasn’t a problem if I was stuck next to LGs!). …There were lots of cute LGs in the carnival/fest area, and the crowd was so big that I didn’t feel noticeable as an unaccompanied man.


…But what the crowd lacked in size, it made up for in LGs: I saw probably 10-20 here during the next 2 hours, and most of them were above average on my 1-10 cuteness scale! A couple of them were absolutely adorable: about age 3 or 4, cautiously creeping around the rink and frequently landing on their butts. .  .


The excerpt below evidences the hatred this guy has for women.  Given that he’s 45, unemployed, and lives with his parents, we can certainly understand the self-serving nature of his righteous indignation over “consumerism;” what interests me is the misogynist subtext about those greedy golddiggers — adult women.  Since women he has targeted have frustrated him, he targets the vulnerable for his predations, someone he can use and hurt who won’t understand right away, someone he can easily overpower.

I passed a kiddie play circle but didn’t linger because there was only nearby seating within the circle, and I felt it would have drawn attention for an unaccompanied man to sit there with parents and their children. I strolled around the mall for about an hour and saw more LGs there than at the carnival…I don’t visit malls unless necessary. I think it’s partly the ubiquitous surveillance cams and security … but I’ve also grown increasingly repulsed by the phony manufactured atmosphere of consumerism-as-happiness. It also disgusts me to see the many guys strolling around malls with their girlfriends and wives, ogling rings and other expensive nonsense: why would a man want to waste time and money on such postpubescent female crap when he could hang out with more attractive, fun, and cheaper-to-please LGs?

Although the guy is an atheist, he states at one point on his website that he’s come to have a fondness for Christians, in that churches are such a great place for practicing preying on, and targeting, little girls.

…The next stop was Viewcrest Assembly of God … They had a musical act doing sort of Christian rock, and there were many LGs present… There were enough people here that I don’t think I stuck out as an unaccompanied man, and a LG of about 6 or 7 even sat next to me (we were so close that her legs occasionally touched mine…). There were a few cute LGs that I would rank in the 7 or 8 range on the 1-10 scale, and the Easter Bunny seemed to flirt with one.


There were many cars in the lot, and I saw some children inside as I drove around the building. I parked and studied an ad I had for it, but couldn’t muster the nerve to try entering because the whole scene looked too juvenile for an unaccompanied man to be loitering at–and I thought the odds were good that they either would turn me away at the entrance, kick me out after a few minutes, or call the cops to come and check on my sex offender status. … This was my third visit to this roller rink, and like the previous two, it didn’t disappoint. …There were a few LGs that I rated above-average on the 1-10 cuteness scale, but my favorite (a girl I’ve seen here before) came with her father, so I didn’t get a chance to flirt with her. Another thing I noticed here tonight was more men like myself (in their mid-20s or older) who didn’t seem to be associated with anyone, and like me, were just circling the rink with a grin on their face …The skate session closed at 10, and I left exhausted with sore feet. But the LG sightings of this marathon day weren’t over yet: I later saw two more running around the Mount Vernon Safeway.


Most of the stage stuff was amusing, but of course my main entertainment was simply enjoying the LGs! I got some nice eye contact and smiles with a dark-haired girl of about 5 who was gaily running behind me in the bleachers (she seemed to be wanting to make some sort of contact with me, but I thought her parents were nearby, so I didn’t try to talk with or hug her).


Here this guy who so “loves” girls rates them on a scale of 1-10.

This free musical by first and second-graders was 40 minutes of GL bliss! The performers were about 75% girls, and I rated most of them above-average on the 1-10 cuteness scale. A few of them even approached my ideal of LG perfection, meriting a 9 or 10.


…there were enough LGs to make me happy: one accidentally brushed my arm as she skated by me as I was sitting on the side of the rink, and said “sorry”. I thought about telling her that she could do that on every pass, but chickened-out …

In the following excerpts, he shares information about where to go to find little girls.

Public libraries
Most libraries have frequent programs and events for children, and sometimes you can get quite close to LGs there (they’ve sat next to me at Internet terminals). Libraries also have free flyers, papers, and posted announcements that list local places and events where children may be present.

Elementary schools
It might seem provocative to be hanging around elementary school playgrounds these days, but I’ve been surprised at how close you can get to some and how long you can loiter there without being noticed (or at least questioned). The best ones are those with businesses or other legitimate adult activity across the street or adjacent to the school–but don’t step on the school property unless there is some event occuring where it sounds like the general public is welcome. If the kids aren’t out on the playground, the next recess will probably be in less than 2 hours!

He cites to an article (I’ve removed the link), which he calls “58 M gets close to LGs through tutoring at Marysville elementary school,” then says:

I’ve thought about trying to get into a program like this (including volunteering for Girl Scouts), but I believe they are on high alert for pedophiles and have screening processes to weed out all but the cream of applicants. Plus, I’d probably be out of there the first time I tried to hug a LG. An e-mail correspondent recommended “mentoring” programs (I think Big Brothers/Sisters have them) where you get to pick up the child and take them on outings on a one-on-one basis, but he also said that they usually pair the adult with a child of the same sex.

Here he reviews the television series “Full House” (and provides additional woman-hating commentary).

This is arguably one the most subversive series produced by broadcast television because there were originally only 3 men and 3 prepubescent girls in the house. That situation began to deteriorate when Rebecca (Lori Loughlin) was introduced as Jesse’s (John Stamos) love interest (Tanner vs. Gibbler, Oct ’88), and completely ended when she moved in as his wife (Fuller House, Feb ’91). The trend toward conformist nuclear-family normalcy continued when she gave birth to twin boys (Happy Birthday, Babies, Nov ’91) — at which time the pussy-whipping of Stamos’ character was complete, and he had become almost unwatchable. I don’t watch the episodes later than May ’93 because Jodie is beyond my age of attraction, and I never thought the Olsen twins were that hot. Airs most days on ABC Family and Nick. Episode Guide. Nice video scans of Jodie from the first season or two

Here he wrings his hands and cries bitter tears over the “war on sex offenders.”  I think it’s completely wrong that this kind of information from his site was not provided in mainstream media coverage, because it shows where his sympathies lie– with sex offenders.  Lots of these guys view themselves as members of a persecuted minority group.  I’ll never forget reading the lengthy blog rants and screeds of Joseph Duncan, whose mission it was to draw attention to the unfairness of sexual offenders like himself having to keep authorities informed as to their whereabouts.  He blogged about that all the way up until the day he murdered two parents and their 14-year-old son by bludgeoning them to death, then kidnapped the parents’ two young children, a girl and boy, whom he sexually assaulted for weeks, murdering the boy in the presence of his sister, the little girl he continued to sexually assault until he and the girl were recognized by a sharp-eyed waitress, who called the police.

After Governor Gregoire signs these measures into law, WA will have one of the most draconian child-sex punishments on the planet: a 25-year mandatory minimum (an incredible penalty for what could just be consensual, nonviolent, painless touching by a first-time offender). As an example of how far legislators and the major media in this state have gone in demonizing sex offenders (more for their own pecuniary interests than the good of society), consider that Gary Glitter (see next story below) could be out of prison in Vietnam after serving one year. If he had been convicted in WA for fooling around with prepubescent girls after the new laws take effect shortly, he wouldn’t get out until 2031. Brace yourself, WA taxpayers: the millions approved this year for more prison space and criminal enforcement are a drop in the bucket compared to what is to come as the state’s sex offender gulag expands in the next decades.

[Citing to a newspaper story about Gary Glitter]:

I haven’t seen any news items detailing exactly what he allegedly did, but I’m assuming it was some sort of vaginal or anal touching to merit years in prison. Given the publicity this disputed case received, Vietnam will probably not be a favored GL destination for a long time (even with GL’ers like myself who stay within the laws we’re aware of). Glitter is now arguably the most famous girl-oriented pedophile of our time: his “ped-ography” also includes a UK jail sentence for child porn, a UK acquittal for sex with underage females, and an expulsion from Cambodia (a notorious child-sex destination).

He also provides a list of “International cities where unsupervised girls can be found on the streets.”  He’s clearly a racist and panders to racists, providing information about the race of all of the little girls he is fetishizing and targeting.

Buenos Aires
I saw a number of panhandling LGs (usually associated with other kids or adults) on and around Florida and Lavalle (the downtown pedestrian mall) in 2005. I talked with and cuddled several without any problems from the cops.
Tijuana (fly to San Diego)
Ciudad Juárez (fly to El Paso)
Ciudad de México (Mexico City)

For now his site is down and there is talk about writing legislation that would forbid this type of site.  Particularly egregious is his practice of taking photos of little girls and posting them for child molesters.  He seems particularly proud that he is “pushing the boundaries of free speech.”  While I hope ultimately legal prohibitions or remedies are created for what he does, I don’t feel very optimistic, given the way in the U.S., violating the bodies of women is understood to be just men, exercising their freedom of speech. 

It’s interesting, alongside his obsessions with preying on little girls and psychedelic drugs, he’s also all about the horrors of circumcision,  in the way so many men’s rights/misogynists are.  For them, it’s all about how unfair the world is to the people who run it and created it and benefit from it — men like them, especially if they are angry over their feelings of entitlement to the bodies of women remaining unassuaged — so they cast around for something, anything, to whine about.   Having said all of that, I have always opposed circumcision and didn’t have any of my sons circumcized.  I made the first decision about circumcision back in 1972 when my first son was born and feminist mothers everywhere were making that same decision, something male supremacists never seem to know about or to get.   For all their talk about what manhaters we are,  the evidence is, they are the ones who hate and hurt us, as girls and women, it’s not the other way around.

Edited to add that Kim at Bastante Already and Broken Bodies, Broken Dreams also blogged about guys like this over the last day or two.




54 thoughts on “War on Little Girls: Woman-Hating, Sex Predator’s Seattle “Girl Love” Website Was Legal

  1. Heart,

    I did a post last week about one of these sites. There is a petition currently being circulated to shut it down. I’ve also been busy reporting these child abuser’s blogs this week. Five of them have been shut down since I and others reported them to blogger. The petition to shut down Lindsay Ashford’s site (the site I blogged about) can be found here:

    Posted by Faith | April 9, 2007, 5:48 pm
  2. To me an asshole like this just shows how entitled men really feel. He does not think he should act in accordance to social standards or have to compromises his primitive instincts in order to attract a woman around his own age so he turns to an age group that is the equivalent of taking, taking and taking with ease.

    He is a sexual predator. Not only that he hates the human conditions and it can be easily assumed he would have no problem seeing it destroyed, therefore he is a psychotic sociopath.

    I would not lose a drop of sleep if this very moment he stepped out of his car and was plowed over by an eighteen-wheeler.

    Posted by chasingmoksha | April 9, 2007, 6:34 pm
  3. Makes you want to give him a proper circumcision, dun’t it?

    Posted by Heart | April 9, 2007, 6:38 pm
  4. Does anyone remember hearing about the girls in Japan who lured men into situations where they (the men) thought they were going to have sex with underage girls but instead the girls killed them? These men would usually seek out girls on the internet and set up a meeting. Then, these gangs of girls would ambush the guy, steal his money, and usually kill him in a fairly brutal way, if I recall correctly. I don’t know if a lot of that was hyped up by the media or what. I could never find any substantial information on it.

    Anyhow, I just saw the movie Hard Candy not too long ago, which also deals with a man who seeks out sexual relationships with pre-teen girls (and then kills them) but the movie switches the perpetrator/victim roles. While highly implausible, I think the movie made an profound point about the danger girls are in just because they are girls and how too often, they only have themselves to depend upon for safety.

    Not entirely on-topic, but jesus, this shit is just stomach-churning.

    Posted by Sassafras | April 9, 2007, 7:04 pm
  5. I dunno, Sass, I think it’s on topic. There are only so many police decoys available to set these guys up. Hmmm. Wheels turning.


    Posted by womensspace | April 9, 2007, 7:24 pm
  6. I am a little surprised that this mans behavior is considered legal. We have a fairly effective stalker law in this state. Unfortunately the laws don’t do us much good if they are not enforced. Here is a man stalking little girls and providing photos and locations for other stalkers, molesters, and abductors. The police say they can’t do anything? Not true. They could do the same thing they have in the past. Arrest him, Try him, then when he gets off on the basis of the behavior being marginally legal, the publicity encourages legislation. That is how we got a stalker law in this state in the first place.

    Posted by thebewilderness | April 9, 2007, 8:04 pm
  7. As repulsive as this creep is, we also need to remember that it is the predators known to the victims that are more likely to get away with it.

    Posted by stormy | April 9, 2007, 8:12 pm
  8. Thebewilderness, I know what you mean, it seems impossible that this was legal. But he really didn’t specifically stalk any of these girls specifically (that he admitted anyway). He just said he went where girls were, took their pictures, and posted them. And told other guys how to do the same thing.

    This is from a newspaper report about all of this:

    “As disturbing and offensive as we find this, there’s no evidence of a crime, or even suspicion of illegal activity,” said Rebecca Hover of the Snohomish County Sheriff’s Department.

    The man who runs it, 45-year-old Jack McClellan [not his name; the media agreed to use a fake name– Heart], has never been convicted of a sex crime, which means he can attend any family-friendly events where children are present, and take all the pictures he wants for his Web site. He also lives close to a school bus stop.

    McClellan says his purpose is to promote association, friendship and legal, consensual hugging and cuddling between men and pre-pubescent girls. He admitted to FOX News that his “age of attraction” is between 3 and 11 years old.

    “I guess the main thing is I just think they’re cute, a lot cuter than women. I admit there is kind of an erotic arousal there,” McClellan said.

    “It makes me happy simply. Like I said, I think girls are cute, beautiful, just children in general make me happy … being around lots of them. … I’m doing what anyone else would do with a hobby. If someone’s into birds they’re taking pictures of birds. I’m convinced that none of these images are illegal.”

    McClellan wants to bring pedophiles out of the closet and give them a way to get some relief, by going out and being around little girls. He suggests a number of places, such as plays at elementary schools, parks, swimming pools and libraries.

    “I really think a lot of this pedophilia hysteria is overblown. I think there are a lot of people like me. They have the attraction but they’re not going to do anything physical because of the laws. It just makes me happy to attend these events.”

    McClellan said that for pedophiles, just being around children is almost like a “legal high” that makes them happy.

    But “I can understand the fear,” he added. “I hope that what I’m doing is setting myself up as an example that it is possible to have these attractions and not be out of control.”

    But he said while it’s OK to look, it’s not OK to touch, given the many state laws in place to protect children against that.

    “I know it sounds kind of crazy, but there’s kind of a code of ethics that these pedophiles have developed and what it is … the contact has to be completely consensual, no coercion, if you’re going to do it,” McClellan said.

    Parents are understandably outraged. FOX News spoke to the mother of an 8-year-old girl whose picture appeared on the Web site. The picture was taken at a dance recital.

    “I needed to get those pictures off of there. I didn’t want the pedophile community having any visibility to my daughter or her friends or any of the children that were on that site,” said parent Ann Cialoa. “Whether it’s a physical threat, a perceived threat, whatever threat it is. It’s our jobs as parents to protect our kids from threats, and he is a threat, and people like him are a threat.”

    Some legal experts have said the best course of action for parents who see their kids’ pictures on sites like these, is to get a temporary restraining order against McClellan and demand that his Web site be taken down.

    “You have one in your face and you can’t do anything about it because there’s not a law to protect them from that,” Cialoa said. “It’s scary, and the fact that we’re going to wait around for him to violate before we do something.”

    Neighbors of McClellan’s say there’s a man who rides his bike around town at night and peeps into others’ windows. They believe that may be McClellan.

    “You’ll notice that every single person in this neighborhood has very large attack dogs,” said neighbor Melissa Henry.

    The Web site was taken down by the Internet service provider after FOX News called the company about it this week. The company is investigating whether any material on the site is illegal.

    At least one area school has sent McClellan a letter saying if he comes onto school property or attends their functions, they will consider it trespassing and will have him arrested.

    Police and prosecutors are watching him closely to see if he crosses the line. A handful of state legislators are looking at drafting a new law to deal with such Web sites. But until they do, McClellan is free to continue pushing pedophilia.


    Stormy, yeah. On his site he mentions that he doesn’t have access to any little girls via family or friends so he has to find them the way he describes. Most men, in fact, DO have access to little girls via family members, and their friends.


    Posted by womensspace | April 9, 2007, 8:23 pm
  9. No suspicion of illegal activity?! Bullshit! He emphasizes repeatedly on the website his attempts to get close enough to these girls that he can touch them.

    Not entirely on-topic, but jesus, this shit is just stomach-churning.

    No kidding. I feel physically sick now. Unfortunately that seems to happen a lot when I read about abuses of women like this.

    Posted by gingermiss | April 9, 2007, 9:33 pm
  10. I was thinking of sending e-mails to the places he mentions and to churches and other places attaching the stuff from his site and his picture so it could be circulated.


    Posted by womensspace | April 9, 2007, 9:40 pm
  11. Seriously, where IS the damn line if he hasn’t crossed it? The hell with men and their laws.

    Posted by Melissa | April 9, 2007, 9:44 pm
  12. Can’t you (patience now, my phone has holes for my finger) with your blueberries or cell phones or whatever they’re called, track him take his picture here and there, put it up on a website as a WARNING? You’re not inventing anything, you’re just moving *what he’s said about himself* to another website. You’re also not doing anything illegal if you’re on public property and he is too. You’re a freelance photog, see. You plan to post on a TRAVEL TO SEATTLE website your putting up, kind of, letting visitors know what they can expect in that fair city. What?

    And, a blitz. Post on Indy Seattle and other Seattle websites.

    Posted by Pony | April 9, 2007, 10:03 pm
  13. I think I might throw up.

    Posted by CoolAunt | April 9, 2007, 10:10 pm
  14. this is absolutely sickening. i think i may see my lunch again.

    i’m shocked that this material is legal. as gingermiss said, he repeatedly describes his intent to elicit “hugs” from the girls. also, in the article heart posted, he advocates “consensual [contact], no coercion, if you’re going to do it,” which totally ignores the fact that 3-11 year old girls CANNOT legally consent to such contact under any circumstances.

    i study frequently at the public library, and i don’t think i’ll ever look at the “unaccompanied men” there in the same way.

    if this material is legal, we need some new laws.

    Posted by ladoctorita | April 9, 2007, 10:36 pm
  15. There are only so many police decoys available to set these guys up. Hmmm. Wheels turning.

    Oooh, could we include garden-variety johns/rapists too?

    Posted by justicewalks | April 9, 2007, 10:37 pm
  16. Yeah, ladoctorita– he also says emphatically that girls 14-17 aren’t children and he doesn’t care what anybody says.

    And “consensual” contact my ass with any little girls.

    You know, justicewalks, we could include garden-variety johns/rapists, but I always think of them as more dangerous to adult women than perps like this guy, who seem like fucking cowards to me.


    Posted by womensspace | April 9, 2007, 10:56 pm
  17. When this man rapes a little girl, it will have been a completely preventable occurrence. The law enforcement in Washington are practically encouraging him to do it. Apparently he actually has to molest a child to be stopped.

    How nice that the media protected him by using a fake name. A man who takes photographs of tiny girls in public in order to place them on the internet as targets for child molesters surely deserves such a courtesy.

    I’m sure there are relatively easy ways of finding out his name.

    Heart, if you do end up doing that, I would also attach the news article you posted above. In addition to letting people know about him, people should also know that the police are ‘powerless’ to stop him.

    Posted by gingermiss | April 10, 2007, 2:07 am
  18. God, everything about his life is repellant. He’s a complete drain on society.

    Posted by gingermiss | April 10, 2007, 2:13 am
  19. When I was a “lg”, as this gentleman so fondly calls them, a man very similar to this creep (who, as it later turned out kept a collection similar to the one on this creep’s website) singled me out at a street fair near our small, coastal town. He secretly tailed us through the crowds and followed our car home over a bridge and along a section of busy highway.

    For several months afterward, he would sneak around the side of our house and look into my bedroom window. It was later revealed that he was making the rounds to several girls’ houses around town, and had a “festivals and events” list just like the website dude’s.

    No one in my family suspected anything until my father found two ladders that weren’t ours hidden in in the back garden,behind the compost shed.

    Before the incident, my parents had not treated me in a particularly gendered way. I was a nerdy kid who liked to stargaze with my “What’s Up” starfinder, ride my bike to the frog pond and camp out in the backyard trying to catch a luna moth.

    After Window Man, I was not allowed outdoors in the evening without constant (male) supervision. My parents began to worry about whether I was dressed too “provocatively” (an entirely new concept for me) in cutoffs and a t-shirt, and became extremely guarded about me interacting with any males outside of the family. This was really difficult fo a science/arts geek kid who related more to the boys her age than the girls.

    Window Man was eventually caught . He was actually stupid enough to start chasing after the daughter of a cop who lived further down our block. He was, as you can guess, one of those cowardly types who fears all adults and claims that he is interested in looking at, not touching, girls (Therefore, it was explained to me at the time, I was never in any physical danger. I didn’t buy it then, and I don’t buy it now).

    My parents claim that I had only had the degree of freedom that I did up until that point (stargazing, camp-outs, etc.) because they were too naive. Sadly, as a adult with a young daughter, I now understand this.

    However, the fact remains that it was that man’s intrusion that took away my sense of myself as an independent, curious young person and replaced it with a concept of “me” as a vulnerable female object to be claimed and looked at by random males. My self-esteem took a downward turn from which it has taken nearly 20 years to recover.

    To me, the creepiest and most upsetting thing about the man in the linked article is his clumsy attempt to compare this kind of behavior to birdwatching (“suppose you’re really into birds..”).

    The fact that he would DARE to compare us to non-sentient creatures to be observed and hunted really drives home the depth of his misogyny and sociopathy…and, speaking as the former recipient of this kind of attention, it F*N HURTS.

    Please keep me informed of any planned actions against pathetic sickos like these.

    Posted by Glaistig | April 10, 2007, 3:33 am
  20. Yikes! I guess I should clarify- That’s “please keep me informed of any planned non-violent actions…”

    Posted by Glaistig | April 10, 2007, 3:36 am
  21. The fact that this piece of excrement uses the word ‘consensual’ with regard to how he ‘relates’ to female children shows clearly he has sex in mind. It’s really easy for a touch to turn into a fondle, so I don’t for one minute buy the ‘it just makes me happy to be around them’ diarrhea coming out of his mouth.

    Working for the Public Library system in a major U.S. city, I can tell you that we DO monitor lone adult males, and many branches in the system I work for have children’s areas that are off-limits to adults, except for the kid’s parents and library staff. If a lone adult wants a J or YA book in these branches, staff has to go get it for them. It’s sad that we have to do this, but one of the prime functions of a library is as a child-friendly study-place, and we’d rather enforce an ‘adult no-fly zone’ than see any kid be accosted. Children have a right to a non-sexualized, physically safe place in which to study and do their homework, period, end of sentence.

    As for me, I would like to nail this guy’s brainless melon to the ground through the temples with one of my Phurbas, a la the number Yael did on Sissera with a tent-peg (wooden Phurba) and a hammer. May DURGA rip off his head and shit down his neck, and then tear him into little pieces and feed him to KALI-MA! I have posted Ligature instructions on my blog (Spontaneous Combustion) for the Magickally inclined (the instructions are posted in the category called ‘The Night-Tent’). If somebody finds out this walking pile of smegma’s real name, please post it, as I intend to add him to the Ligatures I am doing on the five Aussie rapists.

    Posted by akkarri | April 10, 2007, 4:22 am
  22. The laws concerning free speech are so convoluted. On one hand, it is illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater, because it is likely people would get hurt. This guy can run a web site encouraging child molestation, but the law could not touch him, because it is not a certainty children will get hurt? How does that add up? No doubt children already have been hurt by his actions, but apparently not in the eyes of the law! By that line of reasoning, a man could fondle girls to arouse his lust with impunity, unless he exposes his aroused state, or persists after being told to back off? Otherwise the law has nothing to say about it? Does the law view lustful fondling of little girls as consensual? What good are these laws? A culture that winks at this is as sick as this man is!

    Posted by Aletha | April 10, 2007, 5:25 am
  23. I think Jack McClellan is his real name, and his alias is John Hyland, but I’m not sure. I’ve found several articles online that say that McClellan is his real name, and that is the name his site was registered under.

    I want to wallpaper Seattle with his face so he’ll never be able to go near a child again.

    A few months ago, I took my daughter to the opening of the sculpture park, and she was playing with a bunch of other kids on the lawn. A man was wandering around with a fancy digital camera taking the kid’s pictures and not talking to any of the parents. I asked him who he was and why he was taking pictures and he said something about being a press photographer and quickly walked away. I went to tell security but he was long gone by then. I didn’t think too much more of it at the time, and we left soon after that, but thinking back on that now I feel so very sick.

    Posted by Beansa | April 10, 2007, 7:02 am
  24. I once had a sexual predator living next door to me. He would actually brag about his exploits to me. How he would stick curling irons up 12 year old girls’ vaginas and turn them on, often resulting in the girls being admitted to the hospital. I thought him full of it. If was doing such things, why would he be out, sitting on a porch, instead of sitting in a cage? Besides, I knew his father. I had grown up with him. He was one of the few guys I actually thought decent and I couldn’t imagine him fathering such a monster. His uncles, however, were quite a different matter…

    I got a bit nervous when this pig next door started taking an unusual interest in my then 13 and 14 year old daughters. So I decided to check out the rumors. It turns out the rumors were all true. He had done what he said he had done. Not only that, he had never even got so much as a slap on the wrist for doing it. WTF?

    Well his gf and the mother of his children also started noticing the pig’s interest in my daughters. But rather than reading him the riot act, she and her sisters took up calling my daughters sluts and whores. Tired of my daughters coming in crying, I went out and told them to knock it off and put a leash on their pig. Apparently the pig had had a confrontation with my oldest daughter, who was 19 at the time, at a party. She was in the bathroom and when she tried to come out, he blocked the doorway. He told her she couldn’t pass unless she gave him a kiss. My daughter tried to push past him, but he would’t let her pass. So she said ok, she’d give him a kiss and told him to close his eyes. He closed his eyes and she punched him dead in his face. He went down like a ton of bricks and she just nonchalantly stepped over his body. Needless to say, he quit messing with her, but now he was after my younger daughters. To make matters worse, his gf and her sisters were acting as if my daughters were responsible for his obscene behavior. Like he was some kind of freight train without any brakes, or an infant, unaccountable for his behavior.

    So they got all mad at me when I told them to cool their jets and back off of my daughters and how uncool and unfair a fight it was for adults to be attacking children. So the 4 of them got all big and bad with me and got this absurd idea in their heads that they were going to jump me and kick my ass. Until I got down in a martial arts stance. That stopped them dead in their tracks. They freaked out and ran crying into the house and called the cops on me.

    The cops came out and took me aside and told me that off the record, they personally would’ve given me a high five had I kicked their asses. They certainly would’ve had they been in the same position and it had been their daughters. But on the record, they had to pretend like it wasn’t cool. Wink, wink. No blows had happened so there was no harm done. And that was that.

    Until the pig came home.

    The pig comes over first thing in the morning and starts banging on my door. Mr. Lucky answers the door and the pig starts screaming at him, “You want a piece of me? Here I am.” Poor boy. He knew not what he was doing. Mr. Lucky is a downright psychopath. That’s no exaggeration. If anything, it’s an understatement. And here this boy is, not only messing with his daughters, but up in his face and challenging him. Not wise.

    Mr. Lucky was very calm, cool and collective. Which made me all the more nervous. That’s not his usual m.o. so I knew this pig was probably about to meet his worst nightmare. Especially when Mr. Lucky quietly said to him, “Let’s go for a walk and have a talk.”

    I paced back and forth waiting for Mr. Lucky’s return. I didn’t know what the hell to do. As far as I was concerned, if they took each other out, they’d both be doing the world a huge favor. But what were the chances of that?

    A little while later, Mr. Lucky returned. I looked him over. I didn’t see any blood. Nothing was out of place or torn. That was a good sign. So I asked him what happened. He said quietly, “He won’t be bothering the girls any more. He gave me his word. He said he wouldn’t even look at them again.” And that’s all Mr. Lucky said.

    Mr. Lucky went off to work and the next thing I know, a moving van pulls up to the house next door and the pig starts packing up and moving out in a hurry. They were completely gone by the time Mr. Lucky got home. When Mr. Lucky got home, I asked him again what he had said to the pig. All Mr. Lucky would say was, “What you don’t know, you can’t tell.”

    To this day, I don’t know what Mr. Lucky said to him. All I know is the pig went *poof* and I didn’t see him again. He apparently had moved to a different town.

    Me — I moved clear across the U.S. As far away as I could get from Mr. Lucky. But perhaps a Mr. Lucky is just what these pedophiles need in their lives. For one sick asshole to have a little talk with the other.

    Posted by Luckynkl | April 10, 2007, 8:37 am
  25. Mmmm hmmm — horrible, isn’t it?
    I’ve gone to a few other such sites over the past few days –know thine enemy and all — and find similar writings by these guys. “Missed my chance to swim in the hotel pool with two 4-year old blonde twins last night! Kicking myself!” “Bare shoulders are my thing!” etc. It’s horrible.

    My post caught two of these types (although I always look at these sort of posters as possibly mere trolls just looking to stir stuff up.) Both of them compared their “struggle for acceptance/right to love children” to feminism and believe both a “child’s right to sexuality (!!!) and their ‘right’ to love them” is the next big equality struggle.

    I responded minimally — don’t see any reasoning with them.
    They are DANGEROUS and I have little sympathy for them.
    What to do with them, I don’t have the (PC acceptable) answer, but getting this crap off the internet is a good start.

    When “free speech” is used in this way, there’s a problem.

    Posted by Kim | April 10, 2007, 8:55 am
  26. “…’child love.’ These men love nothing and no one but their own dickheads (either one, they are interchangeable). Reading bleeding heart accounts of what these men do and say, the uneducated and uninformed might feel tempted to feel sorry for them, as though it’s all about their having made their peace with a lifetime of unrequited “love” for “LGs,” as they call them, meaning “Little Girls.” In fact, these are child molesters, predators, and, based on my (again limited research), they are open misogynists and woman-haters. ”

    All true.
    Some of them are SMART. Next thing you know, even educated/smart folks find themselves thinking “Well, even if I don’t like it, he does have a right to at least write this stuff, long as he doesn’t act on it.” I see this argument, but we need to draw the line somewhere. As it seems most of society agrees child molestation is horrific, shutting down this crap is a good place to begin drawing this line.

    The internet is the worst thing to happen here: now, all these guys have a network, easily acceptable, where they can spend hours and hours telling each other “You’re okay, buddy, I know how you feel, it’s okay” etc. etc. ad nauseum etc. Perhaps, if any of them previously limited themselves to fantasy only, now they have this support network condoning this behavior, normalizing it, giving fricking TIPS, for fucksake.
    All of us who blog know how the internet can get inside your head in sometimes good, sometimes bad ways.
    Imagine these guys, encouraged by this support network next time they have an opportunity: “LG Lover One talked about a situation like this! He did it, I will too!” etc.

    It’s easy to imagine.

    Posted by Kim | April 10, 2007, 9:09 am
  27. The ‘incitement to…’ angle Aletha is a good one. Most countries have laws in place to stop ‘the incitement to create racial hatred’. That website is clearly set up to incite child molesters to go out and seek live children, and get close to them, touch them.

    Of course, in this case it is ‘little girls’, and men’s laws have a huge blindness when it comes to male sexual access to females. Presently in the UK, the issue of the age of consent is gradually being challenged/eroded, so that ’13 is the new 16′ and ’10 is the new 13′.

    If this creep’s site was encouraging the same activities towards ‘little boys’, then Johnny Law might get off his fat doughnut eating butt and shut it down.

    The ‘premature sexualisation’ of pre-pubescent girls is becoming far more commonplace. Soon ‘child sexual abuse’ will probably only be applicable to boys, as the issue of ‘consent’ by females, of any age, for male sexual access, will be considered: ‘automatically given unless specifically shown otherwise’. The ‘consent’ defence is being successfully used by rapists in the UK, they are getting off in their hundreds. Even the word of TWO women isn’t good enough to get a conviction against ONE male rapist.

    The issue of (female) ‘consent’ and the ‘age of consent’ should be back on top of the feminist agenda. Just in the last three to five years we have witnessed the process of ‘consent erosion’ in its beginnings.

    Posted by stormy | April 10, 2007, 10:08 am
  28. I found a couple of ANTI- activist blogs, most having links to other similar blogs:

    Keep up the good work!

    Posted by stormy | April 10, 2007, 10:31 am
  29. The fact that he would DARE to compare us to non-sentient creatures to be observed and hunted really drives home the depth of his misogyny and sociopathy…

    Not to be argumentative, but birds are indeed sentient. They are fully aware of their surrounds and have the ability to feel pain. They just aren’t human.

    Posted by Didi | April 10, 2007, 1:22 pm
  30. Had to skip over the quotes by this guy, just cuz. Such a great post. especially this part…


    What immediately came to my mind reading through was that since this guy’s site was read widely by child molesters, it might be a good idea to write to the organizers of festivals that he lists, churches, skating rinks, etc., and to let them know they’d been offered up as venues for child predators to practice their predations so that they can beef up security, warn participants and members, and be more vigilant than they might otherwise be.


    Brilliant! Yes this is a good strategy.
    Keep that thinking cap on, its churning out excellence!


    Posted by hazel8500 | April 10, 2007, 4:55 pm
  31. I can’t do this where I am, now but has anyone used the Wayback Machine, or Google cache to get more about his blog? I guess if we are really curious, Heart has it, along with, I assume, his name.

    I’ve read similarly themed discussions on open usenet, among well-educated men. Really very chilling. I’ve also seen sites which purport to be ‘just providing info’ nothing illegal–and that latter is unfortunately true–which tell what the age of consent is in which countries, and which travel agencies to use. Etc. Puke.

    I’ve also read men talking about — to each other — again on open internet, about their boners over 10 year olds. Just perfectly sickening.

    Again, I can’t find it now, from here, but there’s a website where people are trained to trap pedos who enter chat rooms and pretend they’re 14. More power to them.

    Still, sadly, the majority of pervs live with, or near their victims. However if we were to add up all the percentages what percentage of men would be left out, in any aspect of sexual abuse?

    Posted by Pony | April 10, 2007, 6:24 pm
  32. what percentage of men would be left out, in any aspect of sexual abuse?

    The dead ones. I’m not sure what that would be numerically.

    Posted by justicewalks | April 10, 2007, 6:43 pm
  33. “Again, I can’t find it now, from here, but there’s a website where people are trained to trap pedos who enter chat rooms and pretend they’re 14. More power to them.”

    Perverted Justice?

    Posted by Faith | April 10, 2007, 6:57 pm
  34. An FYI point: the age of consent at the Vatican (which is its own separate ‘sovereign nation’ inside Italy) is 12. Thus, it is obvious that the roman catholic church is not interested in curbing the activities of child-molesting priests and never has been. It’s institutionalized perversion, and on a grand scale. Women need to withdraw their support from ‘masculinity-worship’, across the board: male hierarchies protect and harbor a lot of abusers.

    Any attempt to erode the age of consent needs to be taken very seriously and strongly rebutted. I think that all the sexualizing of young children that we see in the media is an attempt by pervs in the media to push the age of consent lower as well as to desensitize the general populace with regard to the acceptability of sexually fetishizing children.

    With regard to pervs ‘organizing’, I don’t see the Internet as a major organizing agent, because they’ve ALWAYS BEEN organized. The ridiculously low age of consent at the Vatican has been that way for a long, long time. What the Internet is doing is allowing us to see how widely spread the sickness is, and it is clearly exposing both the widespread tendency of males to abuse, and a general male unwillingness to deal with it, because it is standard operating proceedure for loads of men in positions of power.

    The Internet is also our weapon, because we can now effectively show people that pervs network big-time, and they always have. The sheer number of sites with info on ‘how-to’ tips, age of consent around the world, etc., shows clearly that there already were ‘perv networks’ in place. Up to this point, it has been relatively easy to dismiss pedophilia rings/networks as ‘loony conspiracy theory’, but with sites popping up all over cyberspace like dandelions after a rainstorm, the evidence for both organization and prevalence is staring people in the face, with no intervening manipulation to make it seem anything other than what it is: men systematically organizing with the express purpose of abusing children.

    People REALLY need to get over the idea that fucking small children is a ‘lone sicko’ pastime…

    Posted by akkarri | April 10, 2007, 7:43 pm
  35. Oh Akkarri, I hear you!

    “Women need to withdraw their support from ‘masculinity-worship’, across the board: male hierarchies protect and harbor a lot of abusers.

    Any attempt to erode the age of consent needs to be taken very seriously and strongly rebutted. I think that all the sexualizing of young children that we see in the media is an attempt by pervs in the media to push the age of consent lower as well as to desensitize the general populace with regard to the acceptability of sexually fetishizing children.

    […] allowing us to see how widely spread the sickness is, and it is clearly exposing both the widespread tendency of males to abuse, and a general male unwillingness to deal with it, because it is standard operating proceedure for loads of men in positions of power.”

    It has become really evident in the last few years how the ‘age of consent’ has been eroded away. Also the ‘definition’ of consent (from females) is now at a stance of ‘automatically assumed’.

    This is how the whole ‘system’ works, bit by bit, eroded away. It NEVER happens all in one go. We should be alert to what is already in progress.

    Posted by stormy | April 10, 2007, 11:40 pm
  36. Stormy, I hear you, too.

    Women need to not only pull ‘real-time’ (monetary and other physical) support out of organized religion, they need to pull psychic support as well. There can be NO ‘bending of the (female) knee’ to male godforms/gurus/prophets/etc. I don’t care how nice Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, et al, sound. They’re gone as leaders/masters/paragons/saviors. Likewise out with Yahweh, Shiva, Vishnu, Brahma, Allah, Odin, Krishna, Ra, Dionysus, Moses, Abraham, Saint Paul, and the generic God-the-Father.

    Everything in patristic religions that is halfway spiritual and life-affirming was pinched from the Goddess-worshipping peoples they martyred anyhow. When power-hungry, penis-pimp priesthoods spread their poisonous slave-religions with fire, heavy weaponry, rape, murder, torture and starvation (and that’s just for starters), they show everyone quite clearly what they believe in: privileged status for themselves and their friends at everyone else’s expense, degradation and death. They are about a lot of things, none of which have to do with real Holiness, Goodness, or Divinity. So, as a Shaman/Witch who is fully Aware that the ONLY way to get to Goddess is by bringing Her out from within me (and from within ALL other Women), I practice the following spiritual disciplines:

    1. I don’t genuflect to curtain-wearing baby-fuckers.

    2. I don’t give my time and money to organizations that oppose personal soul-autonomy, or that preach doctrines deriving from a supposed ‘inherent evilness’ of female anatomy.

    3. I don’t say the prayers/mantras of ANY religious system that uses male language to describe the First Source of Creation.

    4. I do not hold as holy or as deserving of respect ANY religious group that does not allow Women equal rank, power and privilege with ALL males within said group.

    5. I ritually reclaim for all my martyred ForeMothers such things as the Phurba (the Original Tool of humanity: the First Mother’s Digging-Stick), the Bow and Arrow (invented by Women, who also invented spinning, weaving, rope-making, basket-weaving, fishing nets, hunting-snares and ceramics), Fire as a primally FEMALE Element (harnessed by Women for cooking and the aforementioned ceramics), tents/huts (developed/built by ancient Women to shelter their families) and Familiars (a.k.a. domesticated animal allies, tamed with archaic Female Patience and breast-milk). All these things have been stolen from my Mothers and twisted/degraded by greedy men, who claim them as their own inventions, and I take them back as the rightful intellectual property of Women with my Magick.

    I will also observe that this is why predation against Women/Children is so vicious– the perps want Women to forget their grandeur as the First Framers of Agriculture and early technology, and they think that if they bludgeon us hard enough that we won’t notice that all modern ‘man-made’ civilized wonder is based on the original act of Grand Theft: not only did they steal Female technology, they stole credit for its development by killing the Mothers, Daughters, and Priestesses who thought up such nifty things as calendars, written language and herbal medicine.

    The Witch-hunts of Europe were, in part, about getting rid of skilled Midwives so that know-nothing male ‘professional doctors’ could quash their popular, no-cost grassroots competition. It’s a standard male-warfare tactic: steal what you want, and then kill all the witnesses to your crime really brutally, so that those who remain are so traumatized they will never question your version of the story.

    As a Woman, the only really moral Spiritual option I have is the Witchcraft of my Beloved Mothers, which suits me just fine…

    Posted by akkarri | April 11, 2007, 4:03 am
  37. Consent from females is automatically assumed? How convenient for males. Whatever happened to the concept of freely given fully informed consent? It has been watered down so far, one might as well say consent obtained by trickery, fraud, threat, bribery, drugging, or coercion is legitimate. A slippery slope if I ever saw one. The definition of consent is supposed to be stringent because a loose definition facilitates abuse. Children cannot possibly be fully informed about the hazards of sexual activity with adults! This man said point blank, “I admit there is kind of an erotic arousal there,” so this is clearly not some innocuous form of affection he is indulging and encouraging.

    The incitement angle is on my mind partly because the article on pornography I put up on the Free Soil site and blog yesterday is mostly about the argument that porn incites violence against women.

    Posted by Aletha | April 11, 2007, 4:11 am
  38. Akkarri:

    It’s a standard male-warfare tactic: steal what you want, and then kill all the witnesses to your crime really brutally, so that those who remain are so traumatized they will never question your version of the story.

    And we have seen the tactic replayed many times over. In The Burning Times, as well as killing off the ‘popular, no-cost grassroots competition’ it was also used to kill off single, older women (which is when the term ‘spinster’ originated, as many worked spinning yarn). Many of these older women were herbalists and/or spiritual leaders, not compatible with the ‘lets conquer the competition’ male-centred christianity.


    Whatever happened to the concept of freely given fully informed consent? It has been watered down so far, one might as well say consent obtained by trickery, fraud, threat, bribery, drugging, or coercion is legitimate. A slippery slope if I ever saw one.

    We are well and truly whizzing down that slippery slope as we speak, I have no idea where we are on that slope, but it’s NOT near the top. How else, in an age where DNA evidence is regarded by men’s courts as evidence, can the conviction rate for reported rape (not all rape, reported rape) remain hovering around 5%? Because of the male mantra of “it was consensual sex”. In well over 99% of rapes, the perp does not receive any punishment.

    Not content with redefining ‘consent’ to be on men’s terms, they pervert the voice of children, but particularly female children with crap such as “she gave me that come hither look”, “she tempted me”, which plays into the male-religion view of woman-as-whore (even when ‘woman’ is a female child) and absolves men of responsibility for their actions.

    It’s all part of the same continuum.

    Posted by stormy | April 11, 2007, 9:03 am
  39. Not to be argumentative, but birds are indeed sentient. They are fully aware of their surrounds and have the ability to feel pain. They just aren’t human.

    Sorry- you’re right. That was not fair to birds at all. I just get extremely angry about being compared to something non-human in this kind of context.

    Posted by Glaistig | April 11, 2007, 7:50 pm
  40. You know what else isn’t fair? Most of the actions we are able to take against this kind of thing end up banning adults in general, including women, from participating in their children’s activities, and from places like the library mentioned here, when it is certain adult MEN who are engaging in this behavior.

    Seriously…how many women have ever even noticed Perverted Justice’s bait posters in chat rooms, let alone tried to chat them up?

    Last time I checked, Peej actually had an item in its FAQ addressing this question and explaining that, according to their (extensive) research, women simply were not trying to hook up with children online.

    They actually point out that they used to be skeptical of the idea that this was a male-only problem, but that years of investigations have turned up hundreds of men, but NO women with these kinds of issues.

    Apparently, they’d been getting a number of angry letters (I wonder who they were from?) accusing them of making men look bad and hiding evidence of an equal number of female pervs. Naturally, these letters also accused Peej of being run by “man-hating feminists”.


    Posted by Glaistig | April 11, 2007, 8:19 pm
  41. Go, Stormy!

    With your description of the assumed (but not in real fact existant) ‘come-hither look’, you have beautifully summarized what is the abcess below the surface pustule of the perv in Heart’s article. Fueling his language as quoted in the article is the extremely skewed view that what prepubescent girls ‘secretly want’ is for him to have sex with them. This is outright psychiatric delusion. Straitjacket city.

    The female toddlers he watches, some of whom he observes ‘fall on their butts’, are fully cognitively occupied with learning how to walk, and can’t even conceptualize sexual contact (let alone the idea of ‘consensual sexual contact’) because their brains are not developmentally able to. What this maniac is getting excited over is the fact that they are physically helpless and thus will not be able to stop him forcing himself on them. For him, ‘young and physically weak’ equals ‘sexually available’, and the main reason why we as mature women are so disgusted with the way he carries on is that we recognize linguistic-porn masturbation when we see it.

    The idea that his website is about free speech is a bogus one– what it IS about is a man who is verbally working himself up/deinhibiting himself in order to force himself sexually on children.

    That it is WOMEN– and not men– who initially discovered and exposed the perv, and that it is WOMEN who are raising a continued ruckus about this walking sack-of-shit and his website says it all.

    Posted by akkarri | April 11, 2007, 8:34 pm
  42. Ah Glaistig:

    They actually point out that they used to be skeptical of the idea that this was a male-only problem, but that years of investigations have turned up hundreds of men, but NO women with these kinds of issues.

    That is what radical feminists usually file under “No Shit Sherlock” ! This is why the media, on those rare cases where a mother is guilty of harming (or killing) her child are so beat up out of proportion, to make out that ‘women are just as violent/dangerous as menz’, as well as the media generally not really highlighting that is male after male that is doing most/nearly all child sexual abuse.

    akkarri, Sparkle*Matrix found a great chapter by Diana Russell on the subject:
    which is well worth a read. It includes the most common myths held by child abusers (*vomit trigger warning*):

    1. There’s nothing wrong with adult–child sex as long as children consent to it.
    2. If children behave seductively toward adults, it means “they’re asking for it.”
    3. Men who love children have sex with them to teach them about sex in a positive, caring, emotional context.
    4. Having sex with kids is good sex education for them, to prevent them from having sexual problems as adults.
    5. Since children are sexual beings with the capacity to enjoy sexual stimulation, it’s fine for an adult to provide them with this enjoyment.
    6. Children who don’t tell anyone about being molested, can’t be upset or bothered about it.
    7. If children didn’t want to have sex with adults, they would react by crying, fighting, screaming, and resisting.
    8. When children initiate sex with adults or allow themselves to be repeatedly molested by adults, it shows that they enjoy having sex with them.
    9. Sex between adult males and children is harmless unless force is involved.

    Posted by stormy | April 12, 2007, 11:18 am
  43. Great comments in here, everybody. I’ve decided (and have begun) to just send out e-mails to everybody this guy mentions on his pages asking them to forward the information to everybody who they are connected with who would be affected by it, i.e., skating rinks forward to other skating rinks, churches to churches, festival organizers to festival organizers. Churches are FABULOUS at circulating this stuff, they have phone trees on top of phone trees on top of phone trees on top of e-mail loops and you name it. I tend to wait around trying to perfect the perfect strategy when what I need to do is just get the information out there any way I can.

    I would not want to create a website, like, “This Guy is a Pedophile, Beware!” because I think that’s what he wants. I think he wants his mug in the headlines and possibly a basis for lawsuits in which to defend his “First Amendment Rights.” All I want is for kids to be protected.

    In a quiet moment in the car last night I told my youngest two that it was REALLY REALLY important that if anybody ever did anything/said anything/behaved in any way that made them even SLIGHTLY uncomfortable for ANY reason at all, even just a vague uneasy feeling in their gut, or if there was some man hanging around by himself where there were a lot of kids and it didn’t feel right, they should get away or speak up or do whatever they felt they had to do and, above all, they should NEVER worry about being “rude.”

    We send such mixed messages to kids, insisting they be “respectful” and “polite,” especially towards adults. Well, sometimes, they need to be totally rude, like when it’s a guy like this.


    Posted by womensspace | April 12, 2007, 11:39 am
  44. And of course all that stuff about the way children are supposed to be respectful and polite to adults and women are supposed to be kind and deferring is, when you get right down to it, about the preservation of a dominance hierarchy in which men are at the top. To keep that in place, there has to be all the appropriate bowing and scraping and venerating, and especially, nobody challenging men’s right to violate whoever they might feel like violating at any given time.


    Posted by womensspace | April 12, 2007, 11:44 am
  45. Heart, I agree that we teach children of both genders that we must allow physical contact with adults. How often have you heard ‘Go give your aunt a hug and kiss’ but the kid is very resistant.

    I am sorry, but if the aunt is truly mature, then they would understand they do not have the right to push any physical contact with anyone of any age. I still ask my 8 year old nephew if I can have a hug, I don’t demand one.

    Oh, and to Luckynkl. Why did you not just press charges against the guy who assaulted your daughter? You could have gotten him at the least with that and then the next time, even for something simple, the DA could have used it against him.

    Good for you that the guy left, but then he became someone else’s problem who did not know his background.

    Posted by pinky | April 12, 2007, 1:48 pm
  46. ***I tend to wait around trying to perfect the perfect strategy when what I need to do is just get the information out there any way I can.***

    This needs to be done for the overall defeat of patriarchy and the liberation of *all* women and girls from its clutches NOW. My experience of feminist online communities, esp the old Ms board, but all of them to some extent, is that somebody suggests something that would *really* start to get us out from under all this and it is attacked because it is not “perfect”. Well, nothing’s perfect, no ONE strategy is THE answer. The important thing is to DO something.

    These perverts think that hitting on little girls is like “taking candy from a baby”, they’re so small and weak. They (the perverts)have no fear at all, not even, for the most part, from the “law.” The problem though is not that they have no fear of little girls, but that they have no fear of little girls’ *mothers* either because women are “small and weak” too, remember? So it seems that as long as they are stronger, we may be obliged to resort to the Mr. Luckys of the world (with and without police badges) to send them packing. For those who think that brute strength isn’t the whole answer, you’re right, but there *was* a moving van in front of the perv’s house the next morning and the Lucky daughters were *not* raped by that perv while other women were busy bringing up the “next generation.”

    Posted by Branjor | April 12, 2007, 3:00 pm
  47. Yeah, pinky, you’ve hit on one of my WORST pet peeves, the way parents or caregivers force children to hug or kiss or in any way touch ANYBODY, and along with that, the way adults of either sex expect children to touch them and get pissed off if the child doesn’t! Including shaking hands! Nobody has to touch you, get the hell away from me if you think somebody does and if it irritates you if somebody won’t. And do you know where this is REALLY bad? In some fundie churches where everybody is EXPECTED to be all about hugging everybody that they don’t know, with who knows how many pervs getting their jollies out of the deal, not to mention the way this serves to break down any guard that might exist between innocent children and young people and women and those who would prey on them. Add to that all the bullshit in fundie churches about respecting and obeying one’s elders, and respecting and obeying and submitting to men (for girls and women) and it’s a SETUP for sexual assault or for creating a situation in which girls and women don’t know that they can say, “NO you goddamn asshole, get your hands OFF me,” including to fathers, brothers, pastors, elders, Sunday School teachers, youth group leaders, and random male assholes staking out the latest congregation (as we see that the sexual predator we’re talking about here does and urges other child rapists to do likewise.)

    It’s creepy how this is enforced, too– any woman who is reticent about hugging or being hugged is chided for it, either subtly or openly, told she doesn’t know how to hug or criticized for being stiff or cold. FUCK the assholes, every last one of them, who ever said that to me or my children. YEAH, we’re fucking cold, YEAH, we don’t know how to hug, and do you know why? Because WE’VE BEEN SEXUALLY AND PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU so get over your goddamn selves.

    ARGH. Guess this has suddenly brought up a lot of stuff for me, huh.

    I never trust any man who seems to want to touch women and children (note how they rarely are friendly with other men) or who gets his feelings hurt and calls women and children “unfriendly” or “rude” because they have boundaries.


    Posted by womensspace | April 12, 2007, 3:01 pm
  48. Reading through these comments, I have come to realize that while well intentioned, many of you are rather ignorant of abnormal psychology. Much of what you call ‘sick’ is not considered as such by the professionals, while much of what you call premeditated and controllable is actually part of a mental illness.

    I suggest that many of you read about pedophilia from a psychologist’s perspective. Not only will you be surprised at which of your assumptions are considered false by the professionals, you will gain much ammunition in your efforts to effect targeted legislation.

    Finally, a good very many men, though not the majority, who create these blogs are not pedophiles at all. They do not get their kicks from children. In fact they do not view children as sexual at all. What thrills these men is pushing the legal envelope as well as pushing your buttons. The word for these guys is ‘sociopath’.

    Making assumptions about your enemy is the surest route to being defeated by them.

    [Note: I allowed this comment through because I think it might be valuable to the writer and others reading for us to respond. — Heart]

    Posted by lurking | April 12, 2007, 5:36 pm
  49. Much of what you call ’sick’ is not considered as such by the professionals, while much of what you call premeditated and controllable is actually part of a mental illness.

    And who are these so-called professionals? Could they be men, yet again making excuses for their brethren? Could they be the same men who label “pathological” women such as those who’ve posted here because they’re angry at a world that hates them? And then prescribe medications to them in an attempt to make them docile? I think so and therefore, those professionals of whom you speak can kiss my ass. Pedophiles are sick pieces of shit who deserve no better than death.

    Posted by CoolAunt | April 12, 2007, 6:01 pm
  50. Well, that pretty much covers it, CoolAunt!

    Psychologists, the field of psychology, are no friend to women, historically, so you will excuse me, lurking, if I reject your urging me to learn about pedophiles by studying psychology. Since you have offered us some suggestions for further study, here are a couple for you. Read:

    The Female Malady by Elaine Showalter

    For Her Own Good: Two Centuries of the Experts’ Advice to Women by Barbara Ehrenreich

    Male Practice: How Doctors Manipulate Women by Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.

    Women and Madness byPhyllis Chesler

    If you are a psychologist and fancy yourself to be an expert, the problem is that built into your expertise and your field are all sorts of mechanisms designed to maintain a male heterosupremacist status quo, like the mechanisms CoolAunt mentions, for example and those which the books I’ve listed describe and analyse. There are feminist psychologists, but they wouldn’t post what you’ve posted; what you’ve posted tells me you do not have the interests of women at heart.

    I don’t care what psychologists call sick or whether pedophiles are sick by psychological definitions. Any guy who would write what this guy has written, or who would do what he’s described, is a sick fuck by MY definition, and I don’t care what his motives were. If he posted that shit because he’s a sociopath — and he could be, although he demonstrates deep love for his fellow males, if you read his site, he’s all about the menz, so misogynist works better than sociopath as an adjective — what he posted is helpful to pedophiles, benefits pedophiles, and hurts all of us, but women and girls most of all.

    Which is all to say that what you’ve said there is bullshit. I wouldn’t be surprised if you are a pedophile yourself. Of *course* pedophiles don’t want to think of themselves as “sick.” Of *course* they want to think and say that they are oh so mysterious and inscrutable and Be. Very. Afraid. and we should knock ourselves out studying, lo! the amazing intricacies of their perv-minds, as though that is going to be helpful to us in some way, shape or form.

    Uh, no. You (pedophiles, and you, lurking) can’t fool women. It’s not mysterious. It’s not intricate. It’s not hard to understand. It’s about men, fetishizing, objectifying and sexually using and abusing children because they are dangerous fucks. That’s not an assumption, it is true, and all we really need to know.


    Posted by womensspace | April 12, 2007, 6:46 pm
  51. I wouldn’t be surprised if you are a pedophile yourself.

    Yeah. His third paragraph gave him away.

    By the way, you mean ol’ radfems have taught me how to find the veiled threats in statements such as this one:

    Making assumptions about your enemy is the surest route to being defeated by them.

    Translation: “You gals need to stop thinking bad thoughts about pedophiles or the boogie man will get you.” Of course, the boogie man in this case is the pedophile, collective.

    Posted by CoolAunt | April 12, 2007, 7:06 pm
  52. Somebody up there (“Pony”?) had the right idea: Take his pic. Post his pic – everywhere. Post his address and phone. Hound his life. Put him under the same kind of dangerous spotlight he puts children. He’s currently living in Portland, Or, and being open about his “GL” proclivities. Make sure everyone knows he’s the perv next door.

    This babyraping wanabee has a new website now, and it’s just a matter of time until he acts on his ‘proclivities’.

    From today’s “Oregonian”:

    Self-proclaimed pedophile on Web
    Internet – Jack McClellan posts advice on the best places to watch girls in Portland
    Sunday, October 07, 2007
    HELEN JUNG The Oregonian Staff

    Self-described pedophile Jack McClellan, who surfaced last month in Portland after being hounded out of Washington and California, has started a Web site offering advice about the best places in the city to watch little girls.

    As with a previous site he operated in the Seattle area, he posts reviews of events in Portland where he viewed young girls.

    But he has not posted any pictures, as he did in previous cities.

    McClellan claims he is attracted to young girls and would seek a sexual relationship if it were legal, but he has never been charged with or convicted of a sex crime.

    On his new site, he said he attended last weekend’s Polish Festival in North Portland, where the “highlight was several children (including some cute LGs) doing a traditional dance competition in front of the stage.”

    He also includes suggestions about where other pedophiles can watch little girls, although it’s little more than advice to check the newspaper listings for family events and to frequent schools and places where children play.

    McClellan announced the new site Friday on a pedophilia message board. The site is registered to him and lists his cell phone number as a contact, according to Network Solutions.

    Since McClellan moved to Portland, a Police Bureau sexual assault investigator has met with him, spokesman Sgt. Brian Schmautz said. But McClellan hasn’t done anything illegal, he said, and police are not tracking him.

    “We respond to complaints of illegal activity,” Schmautz said. “But all this stuff with trying to draw attention to himself — none of that is illegal. . . . It’s not illegal to say he likes little girls and goes to festivals.”

    He added that the police don’t want to get into a position “where people can accuse us of monitoring nonillegal but unpopular speech.”

    And while McClellan has drawn a lot of media attention, many point out that child molesters most often are family members, friends or acquaintances of the victims — not strangers.

    One anti-pedophilia crusader, however, maintains that McClellan is a “ticking time bomb.”

    “He’s just an out-of-control individual,” said Xavier Von Erck, the Portland-based director of operations for the Perverted Justice Foundation, which works with law enforcement and media organizations to conduct pedophile sting operations.

    McClellan did not return e-mail or voicemail messages Friday for comment.

    Helen Jung: 503-294-7621;

    A good info-filled blog entry about Jack the Pedo:

    Posted by Chris | October 7, 2007, 4:01 pm
  53. {consistency}

    I’ve actually read a male so-called sexologist, PhD in private practice, refer to pedophilia as a “sexual orientation”.

    There. Feel better now?

    Posted by Pony | October 20, 2007, 12:27 am


  1. Pingback: stupidity. « unconventional beauty - October 19, 2007

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 2,600,338 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


The Farm at Huge Creek, Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, The Feminist Hullaballoo