News


Irish Presidential favorite David Norris defends underage sex interview - POLL

Writer says she found his views on sex with minors ‘deeply disturbing’


David Norris posing on a roof garden overlooking Dublin City
David Norris posing on a roof garden overlooking Dublin City
Photo by Chris Bacon

IrishCentral.com Poll

What do you make of the comments made by Norris in his 2002 interview?

They were taken out of context and do not represent Norris correctly.


He should reconsider running for President.


It was wrong for this journalist to bring this up.


Guinness PubFinder Ad
David Norris, the gay  Irish senator who is favorite to become Ireland’s next president has had to defend controversial remarks he made in a 2002 interview in Magill Magazine about sexuality and sex with minors.
 
The issue has resurfaced as Norris has become the bookmaker’s favorite to be the next president especially after the withdrawal of John Bruton, the former Prime Minister, at the weekend.
 
Writer Helen Lucey Burke who did the original interview back in 2002 went public again with it on RTE, Ireland state broacasting station on the popular Joe Duffy Show.
 
Poltics.ie which carried the original Magill story had over 21,000 comments within 24 hours, the overwhelming majority of them negative.
 
In response to the story resurfacing Norris, a Trinity College Joycean scholar, issued a statement on his web site which stated; 
 
“I was the subject of a profile in Magill Magazine conducted by the restaurant critic and columnist Helen Lucy Burke for Magill Magazine in 2002. During the course of a comprehensive conversation, Miss Burke and I engaged an academic discussion about classical Greece and sexual activity in a historical context; it was a hypothetical, intellectual conversation which should not have been seen as a considered representation of my views on some of the issues discussed over dinner. 
 
“The article did contain other valid comments from me on human rights and equality issues but the references to sexual activity were what were emphasised and subsequently picked up and taken out of context in other media.”
 
The writer of the article Helen Lucy Burke has denied that she quoted him out of context and stated in response “I found some of his views on sexual matters deeply disturbing - notably on sex with minors...”
 
She stated the main parts of the interview she objected to were the following comments made by Norris.
 
"In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it. And in terms of North African experience this is endemic. 
 
Now again, this is not something that appeals to me, although when I was younger it would most certainly have appealed to me in the sense that  I would have greatly relished the prospect of an older, attractive, mature man taking me under his wing, lovingly introducing me to sexual realities, and treating me with affection and teaching me about life - yes, I think that would be lovely; I would have enjoyed that."...
 
"But I think there is complete and utter hysteria about this subject, and there is also confusion between ... paedophilia and pederasty..."[David Norris clarified this later, explaining that genital sexual penetration of juveniles of either sex would be inappropiate and harmful]...
 
"In my opinion, the teacher, or Christian Brother, who puts his hand into a boy's pocket during a history lesson, that is one end of the spectrum. but then there is another: there is the person who attacks children of either sex, rapes them, brutalises them, and then murders them. But the way things are presented here it's almost as if they were all exactly the same and I don't think they are. And I have to tell you this -- I think that the children in some instances are more damaged by the condemnation than by the actual experience."
 
The right of unfettered sexual activity guided by the principle of mutual consent would be Norris's perception of the way things should be, with a bar only on intimidation, bullying or bribery. He did not appear to endorse any minimum age or endure any protest that a child was not capable of informed consent. "The law in this sphere should take in to account consent rather than age".
 
When I asked about incest, he hesitated, and concluded that in the case of girls a case could be made for a ban, as possible resulting pregnancy might be genetically undesirable.
--------
READ MORE:
 
More stories on David Norris
 
In the race for Irish President David Norris is the candidate to beat
 
Former PM John Bruton withdraws from Irish presidential race
--------

Nster.com


32 Comments

15 - 32 | See all comments

hollabackgurl his sexuality should not be an issue here his anti-irish rhetoric is how can he denounce Ireland for leaving the empire and castigate the 1916 leaders and expect to be elected president of a state that he denounces how hypocritical.
This article convinces me that this is a desperate smear campaign that stirring homophobia to damage the candidate from an out of context interview he gave TEN years ago - if you actually read the article and look at the man's career you can see this hateful garbage for what it is.
Come on now folks... Really, now let’s be real. David Norris is honest enough to have publicly declared during past years a few things close to his heart... his love of homosexuality, his contemptibility of women’s’ bodies, his pride in his Congolese (not Sth African) birth, his love of James Joyce, his deep regret that he “would have liked...” if some older man would have taken him under his wing in his very early childhood, his despising of the efforts of the Patriots of the 1916 Irish Easter Rising, his idea that we Irish were really silly to have left the Commonwealth of the United Kingdom of Britain and Ireland in the late 1940s and his belief that we really should rejoin it again today. Since we really left the Commonwealth and established a Republic with a President as its Head of State, why, given all he has ‘honestly’ stated he believes in, is he pursuing election to a Head of State Office that he believes should not exist? Moreover, in 2016, the next elected President of Ireland will have to stand in front of the General Post Office in Dublin where the Patriots of Ireland, at the greatest human cost, made their stand against 800 years of British Rule. Do I see, and I ask all, do you see David standing as my country’s President in front of Dublin’s GPO - and in front of all the world’s TV stations - doing that, given what he believes?? Really????
His sexuality is not the issue his integrity is.
This article has generated the most vile and hateful comments I've ever read on this site which convinces me that 1) this is a desperate smear campaign that stirring homophobia to damage the candidate and 2) the people who consider themselves moral here are actually some of the most toxic people in the nation and 3) if you actually read the article and look at the man's career you can see this hateful garbage for what it is.
Norris is a pseudo-intellectual who is not in touch with the majority of Irish people. His dislike of nationalism and his penchant for denigrating Pearse and his comrades is typical of his intellectual snobbery. Ireland needs a president who puts the people first,to be a cohesive force in these times. Norris fails miserably in this quest.
Mr. Norris ...... here's a wonderful piece of advice I recieved from a poltical office holder ..... "Never Trust Anyone Who Buys Ink By The Barrel"
Mr. Norris being gay is his business. As for the "explosive interview" it is just a paper tiger. Norris is right, Greek men in antiquity did take younger men under their wing. Greeks were not in the business of Southerly penetration though. The Romans were and you could rent children at the Coliseum. The Turks and North Africans are men you don't turn your back on. I'm not gay. With that siad, I can recognize a crock when I see it.
You do realise that this interview was commissioned by John Waters who was the editor of Magill magazine back in 2002? John Waters is a well-known religious wingnut. The 'journalist' in this case invited David Norris along to a profile interview- as far as I know the only one this former civil servant/film critic/restaurant critic has ever been asked to do and that she claims to have a tape of the interview which David Norris has challenged to air in its entirety? Needless to say it hasn't been aired. This is an attempted stitch up by an unqualified 'journalist' which has been aired for the second time since 2002 even though David Norris has issued statements rebutting the claims years ago and which is being resurrected because David Norris is 13/8 favourite in the betting for the Presidency? This 'journalist' also claimed David Norris went on holiday to Thailand with a certain emphasis- when it turns out he was part of an EU Committee investigating prostitution and child abuse? This is a stitch up and the way Irish Central has covered this is distinctly supportive of that stitch up.
I have met and listened to David Norris - he has defended childrens rights and womens rights for years before it was popular to do so. I do think he would make a good President.
This Jack guy is a fine representative of his country. Ignorant, bigoted, and foul-mouthed. I've met lots like him in Ireland! Maybe it's true that the smartest left Ireland and that the descendents of those who stayed are, shall we say, stupid.
The funny thing about this site is that all the pseudo-Irish old timers come out of their closets with their outdated bigotry and rampant homophobia........what a commentary on the ex-pats......ha ha ha, the |Ancient Order of Bigots are all coming out of the closet !!! Ha ha ha.
@moygannon: unfortunately the censors will not publish what I really say about you.......we don't need you inane comments on our country.
@george dillon : Obviously being both completely ignorant and stupid is no deterrent to you airing your nonsense.
Looks like the dirty tricks departments of the big political parties over there suddenly realized this guy could win. I heard he came first in some poll there last week. I'd probably vote for him--anyone rather than the garrulous medicority who currently occupies the Presidential Residence in Phoenix park. What a jerk tht woman is. And the Irish are so contemptible that there apparently are suggestions that the Constitution be changed so as to allow Madame Verbal Flatulence another 7 years of idle luxury. That would make 21 years in all. The Irish--they're contemptible clowns--no one respects them.




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail