The Wikimedia Foundation’s Erik Moller problem

Erik MollerThe Wikimedia Foundation, which you will most likely know as being the folks responsible for Wikipedia (and a whole host of other projects), has a bit of a problem on their hands. Specifically, I’m talking about their recent hire in the Deputy Director position, Erik Moller. More specifically, it seems that has a rather … deep interest in child sexuality, and some “interesting” positions on it to boot.

I’m not the first to pick up on this, either. Valleywag quotes Erik as saying “What is my position on pedophilia, then? It’s really simple. If the child doesn’t want it, is neutral or ambiguous, it’s inappropriate.” Obviously, that’s leaving something important unsaid — namely, are children really mature enough to decide if they do want sex; and if they say they do, does that make it appropriate? And then there are his rather interesting essays on the subject.

But there are some other things that haven’t come to light yet. I’ll just list them off and let his words speak for themselves.

Erik created the Wikipedia article on Child sexuality in 2003, and it was definitely not a stub article (Wikipedia’s parlance for short, introductory articles intended to be expanded upon by others).

He inserted the following text into the article on Human sexual behavior:

It is generally acknowledged that children are capable of feeling sexual pleasure, even if they are not yet able to engage in sexual intercourse with each other, and/or are not yet biologically able to reproduce.

In the article on Homosexuality and morality, he writes:

“A small minority believes that children are capable of consenting to homosexual acts with older men, but all major pro-homosexual groups have rejected that view.”

And he has a rather curious definition of pedophilia:

Again, someone who sexually abuses a minor is not necessarily a pedophile (”exclusively” ”attracted” to ”preadolescents” — emphasis on every word), but may simply be acting out of opportunity. The title “pedophiles and pederasts” is redundant — pedophilia ”includes” pederasty. This does not in any way mitigate the definitional problems of this article.

So, why am I bringing this all up? I don’t think Erik is a pedophile, but he has some very wrong and dangerous views on the subject that cannot bear to be left unopposed. There is no room for sophomore philosophizing and moralizing on such a damaging subject, nor should we allow the subject to be normalized by turning a blind eye to such outrageous claims as those made by Erik. Erik embodies one of the main problems with Wikipedia: it allows people with no real training or knowledge in a subject area to nevertheless insert their own personal views into the encyclopedia by sheer force of being a prolific Wikipedian. It’s bad enough when such a person is writing the articles, but it’s terrible when they’re #2 in the line of people running the whole place!

Erik needs to speedily retract and denounce his earlier comments on the subject, not defend them. They are indefensible. If this keeps going the way it is, it puts the Wikimedia Foundation on a collision path with a huge PR nightmare that we really do not want to face; after all, can you really think of a subject that plays more badly in the media and in the general public than pedophilia? Erik needs to get apologetic or he needs to get out, and if he does not make that decision soon, it needs to be made for him.

56 Responses to “The Wikimedia Foundation’s Erik Moller problem”

  1. ted nunky Says:

    Karin wrote — I think there is a large difference in cultural percievings of nudity in german speaking countries and the United States. In the cultural setting they were created in Eriks remarks are far from extreme.

    Exactly, it was only international armies and an international court that stopped his country from exporting genocide to the rest of the world. Among survivors of that generation, many still hold views that genocide and the compendium of cruelty that went with it are not only justifiable, but preferred directions. Now it is only laws against genocidal speech that keep his countrymen from renewing their murderous campaigns. In the cultural setting where they were created, Eriks remarks are far from the extreme indeed. Thank George Soros’ Open Society Institute for funding Erik’s residency in the United States, where he his free to express whatever dangerous, self-indulgent notion that floats to the top of his addled mind.

    Globalist socialists – the new nationalist socialist party.

  2. Andy Jönson Says:

    Ted, its too bad that your own country are top notch predators when it comes to gunning down civilians and journalists around the world. Your hypocrisy (or ignorance) is unbelievable.
    Now, we all know that Americans are pretty tied up when it comes to nudity, but some of you guys seem to have a rampant murder-fetish, so how about cleaning up your oven act before slamming the Germans for what they did some 65 years ago.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8603938.stm

  3. Gregory Kohs Says:

    Welcome to the PR nightmare you predicted:

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/27/wikipedia-child-porn-larry-sanger-fbi/

  4. Rürup Rente Vergleich Says:

    found you site over misterwong… but one question do you have twitter or facebook, where i can be connected with you blog…? thanks

  5. Andrew Morrow Says:

    I visited WikiMedia old offices at 39 Stillman Street and was lucky to encounter Erik as he was entering the building. As is my idiom, I presented him with my California Drivers License (# A9185248) and he took it into his hands and examined it. He did not ask me for a handwriting sample. He returned it to me. I offered him my hand and we shook hands in a manly fashion, but not embracing as the trust had already been established. We touched. We looked into each other’s eyes. We engaged in a calm, civil conversation. Had he been under the age of 18 and anyone could whip out of me that I touched him for erotic purposes, I could have been jailed on a California felony. In fact, I enjoyed touching him, but I did not do so for erotic satisfaction in the standard sense. I assert that the way that I touched the body of Erik was not lascivious, but you would be surprised how many of my peers might disagree simply because of their gender, their religion, their race, the age, or even their sexual orientation.

    I respect Erik’s opinion. He is mature.

    Boys like Cyde deserve to be roughly shoved through meat-grinders like http://www.shouselaw.com/lewd-conduct-minor.html so that we can entertain ourselves watching the little flecks and pieces of his life, his fortune and his honor ooze out the other end and slowly flow into the gutter and out to the Bay and far, far away from us.

    http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/9/5/s288

    You would be surprised what is legal in the California, despite how State laws like 288 are sometimes enforced by female and Jewish prosecuting attorneys and their cohort, especially in the counties around the Bay Area once those prosecutors realize who the accused is.

  6. hhh Says:

    h h h