This is SO wrong.

Julio's review explain it perfectly. ( )

I don't even need to read this to know this is sick, sick, sick! I want to puke. How the hell did this ever get published??? ( )

Alfie's Home by Richard A. Cohen

A crusty tale of molestation... I liked this book, as a molested person!

Had I a male child that had been molested by a bastard uncle... Wait, I would never have children, so I can just say that I enjoyed this children's (4-8 yrs) book as a form of entertainment and will not propound on the improbable. One review I read stated aptly that: "I don't think this book is an attack on homosexuality. In my opinion it separated homosexuality from the sexual confusion of a child who has been molested."

The Politically Correct Left will argue furiously that this book is as anti-gay as Christian minister and frotter George Rekers; and the Right will argue furiously it explains all gayness... I look at it as a Children's book that relates the experiences of the main character.

I propose that the problem with defining sexuality under a banner is that it inevitably creates political ideologies into which everyone must be neatly compartmentalized. Yet, when a man pleases himself with another man, we all have to come to a mutual agreement on an adjective that describes that behavior—and a politic is born to which the individual will give up his/her individuality in favor of group/mob mentality. The parallel of paradoxical paradigm is depicted between Republicans and Democrats. We are this, you are that. This and that are false paradigms of unreality.

This book may anger those who backpack (pun intended) the gay banner, nevertheless the individual experience of the child in the story cannot be blotted out as invalid; and if it is, it's strength will redouble. An example is that the repression of the gay lifestyle gave birth to gay parades.

I have questions of 1. what is love, 2. how many types of love are there (C.S. Lewis says 4, I think), 3. how many ways can it be shown, 4. how many straight people have fantasized about members of their own sex, 5. must they be stamped bi-sexual, lesbian, gay, queer, et cetera so that we as society will feel comfortable alongside them in having defined them, 6. must they all be socially recognized and given parades, and so forth.

Words are not absolute. The definition of the WORD gay will evolve many more times and have many more allegiances and parades given in the name of. I don't believe in a "Gay" or "Straight". I don't believe in WORDS. I wade to deep to remain cohesive...

Julia, my GF, thinks the book was specifically written for molested boys who are in therapy agreed upon by the participants. She's probably right. The psychologist who would refer such a book must practice within some little known field of Christian psychology.

I think that it may be simply a work of art for others to glean the knowledge the may from—a statement relating the personal experiences of the author/artist. An outside group has obviously employed the art, but for what, I'm not sure. The work of art may be a cynical work and have been created by a transgendered liberal. It may be truly intended for molested male children. I find it to be one of the few digestible postmodern works, regardless of its employment—much better than the crucifix in urine, though someone else may feel differently because they apply different political ideologies, philosophies and words to the art... We can all agree that art should be praised and never repressed, whatever it's manifestation—a small mirror of how reality should realize.

UPDATE ON AUTHOR: Richard A. Cohen ( )

Good reviews from Amazon:

The author is using this book to advocate the discredited theory that a person can change their sexual orientation through reparative therapy. Both APA's have denounced this so-called "therapy." There is not a single (much less a body of research) peer-reviewed article that proves that such therapy really does what it claims.

Cohen, and his modern-day snake-oil salesmen, consistently refuse to subject their "therapeutic methods" to scientific review and standards. Even those that have claimed to have been "cured" admit to having sexual feelings toward the same-sex (eg: John Paulik, etc.). That does not sound like a "cure" to me!
This book, based on unethical and immoral practices, should never reach the hands of children. As a parent, I will make sure my son never sees this book!