Pedophiles Partner with Influential Universities to Normalize Child Abuse

Renewed public interest in Prostasia has resulted in some much-needed conversations on child safeguarding, and groups which may be wolves in sheep’s skin.

But, unfortunately, Prostasia is far from being alone in their efforts to infiltrate the narratives surrounding child protection. In fact, a slightly more nefarious contender has carried out its far-reaching, well-entrenched operations with very little scrutiny by comparison. That group is B4U-Act, yet another registered 503c charity which seeks to normalize pedophilia in its entirety.

Unlike Prostasia, B4U-Act does not attempt to outfit itself with a multi-faceted veneer of respectability, with no other focuses or campaigns beyond those centered around meeting the needs of “minor attracted people.” And, perhaps even more disturbingly, B4U-Act has an immense network of support within major Universities and academic research institutions around the world.

Founded in 2003 by convicted child molester Michael Melsheimer, the group’s ultimate raison-d’être has always been the complete and total removal of social, medical and legal stigma from pedophilic activity.

Like Prostasia, B4U-Act attempts to forward this goal beneath the very thin mask of “child safeguarding” and support for “minor attracted persons.” But that mask has cracks which are far more obvious than any with Prostasia, right down to the very founding of the organization having happened in the darkest corners of the early internet.

In 2009, the now-defunct anti-pedophilia blog Absolute Zero reported that Melsheimer was active on the pedophile forum BoyChat after he would have founded B4U-Act, and was busy dismissing concerns from fellow “boy lovers” about the mission statement of the organization.

Melsheimer was rallying fellow pedophiles around the notion that the National Association of Man-Boy Love(NAMBLA) had failed in its mission to normalize pedophilia, and a new approach focused around the appearance of “prevention” would gather more public sympathy.

In screenshots archived on Absolute Zero, Melsheimer proudly boasts that B4U-Act received approval from the well-respected NAMBLA founders.

Some pedophiles argued with Melsheimer that they were concerned that B4U-Act would seek to treat or prevent pedophilic sexual offending, an assertion Melsheimer is seen quickly shutting down, noting that B4U-Act would never attempt to prevent the sexual abuse of children and that users could “take that to the bank.”

Melsheimer committed suicide in 2010, but remains a well-respected figure within pedophile circles to this day. He is cited as a "boylove advocate" on BoyWiki, a pedophile-run, NAMBLA-affiliated Wiki for information pertinent to the interests of male adults who are sexually attracted to young boys. In B4U-Act’s eulogy for Melsheimer, his past history of child abuse is not mentioned a single time.

Melsheimer’s obvious unrepentant sexual degeneracy is a constant through B4U-Act’s entire website and all of their campaigns. Like Prostasia, it classifies pedophilia as a sexual orientation or identity, and directly affirms that it does not seek to reduce or eliminate sexual attraction towards children or even encourage pedophiles to go to therapy, but rather to combat the distress associated with being stigmatized by society.

The organization also has campaigned to change and ultimately eliminate the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual (DSM) entry on pedophilia.

At one point, a newsletter was issued which was excitedly uploaded to BoyChat discussing changes in the DSM-5 which placed pedophilia as a relative to homosexuality, and “acknowledged that the sexual attraction to children did not constitute a disorder.” As B4U-Act currently seeks primarily to inform therapists, this is particularly dangerous. In its Guide for Therapists, B4U-Act encourages those counseling pedophiles to take an “LGBT affirmative psychotherapy approach,” and treat “minor-attracted person’s sexuality” as “innate, unchangeable, and subject to personal acceptance.”

Unlike Prostasia, B4U-Act has an unfortunately robust catalogue of networks within major Universities around the world. Even on its own website, it lists institutions that have carried out research under its guidance or with its cooperation. Much of this research has to do with ending the stigmatization of “minor attracted persons.”

The University of Sheffield, for example, has been partnered with B4U-Act since 2020 for a research project centered around examining “conceptualization of pedophilia [and] child sexual abuse” with the intended goal to “challenge the stigmatizing narratives about pedophilia.” Likewise, the University of British Columbia partnered with B4U-Act in 2019, with a Doctoral student writing a dissertation on how social stigma influences “parenting intentions and decisions in the minor-attracted community.” In other words, assisting pedophiles in their decisions to become parents. These are just two of dozens of similar studies B4U-Act is guiding Universities through.

Ultimately, B4U-Act speaks for itself. Its history, its campaigns, and the communications from its own founder lay bare its intentions. And yet, despite the mountains of evidence that it is not a good-faith actor in any sense of the word, it has managed to wiggle its way into even the most prestigious spaces, such as Johns Hopkins. Naturally, the question which often follows such revelations is: Why?

While baffling, it seems indicative of a wider trend. It appears that for every claim of oppression, there is a self-righteous academic and/or activist willing to coddle the claimant in the bastardized name of progress. With pedophiles, this has been happening since the 1970s, when convicted child sex offenders began parasitically latching onto legitimate claims of oppression by lesbians and gay men, appropriating the terminology of innate sexual attraction  and applying it to their own desires to abuse children.

But the modern shift in Very Woke Liberal™ discourse towards a total lack of criticality when faced with a demand for the suspension of “stigma” has given pedophiles a never-before-seen social allowance. It has become unthinkable that some things are stigmatized for a reason– that some things should be stigmatized. Molesting children is one of them.

No matter the academics and activists who lend their credence to fawn over the fee-fees of “minor attracted people,” pedophilia will never be “destigmatized,” thus relegating “stigma” to the status of an eternal bogeyman which can be used to diminish the accountability of the so-called stigmatized individual.

When faced with that reality, groups like Prostasia and B4U-Act (as well as the wider internet-based “minor attracted” community) will cry victim, and squawk about how individuals should not and cannot be prosecuted for thoughts that they have not acted upon. And while that is true, it is a wonder how the wealth of pseudo-quack academics and activists that have decided to die on the hill of defending pedophiles have never considered that the options are not between total societal acceptance and the immediate execution of anyone who has ever thought any bad thoughts. That is a completely false dichotomy.

Never-offenders who recognize the emergence of sick thoughts towards children (perhaps as the result of a co-morbid mental illness, or their own trauma) must be treated with the end goal being the elimination of such desire.

Any individual who is truly appalled by the recognition that they have an inappropriate attraction to children, and genuinely does not want to act upon such a realization, would likely understand that. A person who truly does not want to harm a child would not be seeking community and acceptance, let alone want to have access to child-like sex dolls and child-representative pornography. It does not take a psychiatry degree to recognize that.

Thus, the alleged logic of organizations like Prostasia and B4U-Act is dead on arrival and must be dismissed to critically examine the inevitable result that would unfold if they got their way. Just as well, any collaborators forwarding their nonsense – whether that be individuals like Noah Berlatsky or major Universities, must not just be interrogated, but face a bit of stigma themselves.

Do you care about safeguarding? Help us publish female authors who bravely expose practices harmful to children! We pay our all-female staff and writers thanks to our paid subscribers. Join today!