Jason Dickens, a former actor on the show Degrassi High, pleaded guilty to several child pornography offenses, including two counts of making child porn, but his female partner and accomplice, Dylan Anne McEwen, was given a much lighter sentence because, in the judge’s opinion, she did not pose a risk as a pedophile:
In all, investigators discovered 25,066 child pornography images on more than 50 electronic devices when they executed a search warrant on April 25, 2016, including 111 child porn movies.
The couple is also shown engaging in BDSM (bondage/domination/sadism/masochism) activities with other couples…
That’s who Jason Dickens and Dylan McEwen were, a man and woman joined in holy BDSM during a 2007 “collaring” ceremony — literally collaring — followed a year later by an ordinary wedding in front of family and friends.
Last week, Dickens, a former actor on Degrassi High, pleaded guilty to several child pornography offences, including two counts of making child porn, with an agreed statement of facts read into the record.
Earlier this year, McEwen also pleaded guilty to sexual assault and two child pornography offences. She was sentenced to six years. But what the presiding judge would not do was declare McEwen a dangerous offender, which the Crown had sought and with impassioned urgency.
In rejecting the long-term offender order, Justice Kathleen Caldwell weighed the various criteria that must be met, primarily a “substantial risk of re-offence.”
Caldwell determined that McEwen wasn’t such a risk, relying heavily on the evidence and psychiatric report prepared by a forensic psychiatrist with expertise in paraphilia and sexual deviancy. Dr. Mark Pearce was agreed upon as an expert witness by both the Crown and the defence when he testified in February. He diagnosed McEwen as a masochist and low-risk to reoffend.
Caldwell accepted Pearce’s conclusion that McEwen derived sexual arousal not from acts committed against children but from the “extreme humiliation” of her involvement in those acts, which fed her masochism, described as on the moderately severe end.
The judge wrote (and read aloud in court): “Dr. Pearce testified that the current research suggests that women do not suffer from paraphilic disorders apart from masochism. This fact lends further weight to the conclusion that pedophilia does not apply to you.”
Crown Attorney Lisa Henderson, the judge noted, had “rigorously challenged” Pearce on this assertion.
“(I) agree that at first blush it appears illogical that women do not suffer from other paraphilic disorders,” Caldwell continued. “Sometimes, however, that which appears reasonable is anything but and vice versa. I accept the doctor’s evidence on this point. He did agree that this conclusion might change in the future as psychiatry continues to develop, but I cannot base my conclusions on speculative potential that have yet to develop.”
But that’s the problem. It is not absolutely conclusive that women can’t be pedophiles.
There are numerous instances of women sexually assaulting children, albeit most often at the direction — many have claimed coercion — of a male partner.
In this particular case, McEwen was her husband’s slave, committed to do his bidding. Court also heard, however, that McEwen had initiated at least one of the toddler videos without her “Master” present.
And in at least two earlier instances, McEwen had obtained child pornography from two men she’d met online before she’d even met Dickens.
As for the risk-assessment testing, Caldwell acknowledged that such testing hasn’t been validated as being accurate in predicting risk with female, as opposed to male, sex offenders.
They don’t really know what they’re talking about, the experts, because they haven’t looked at the phenomenon closely enough. That doesn’t mean the phenomenon doesn’t exist.
Thus, women are more inclined to get the justice pass or, as in this case, be sprung out of the dangerous offender category…
“I’m not saying there’s no such thing as a female pedophile, but it is almost an exclusively male disorder….That’s not to say no woman has it. There may be some outliers. But women (sex offenders) usually offend for other reasons, not because of an innate sexual attraction to children.”
Yet what of female teachers who’ve become sexually involved with young students? “These are damaged, needy, lonely women,” says Pearce, “not necessarily pedophiles.”
Surely gender should not be an exculpatory factor in diagnosing pedophilia. Women have definitely preyed on children sexually.
This woman, McEwen, certainly did — on a 2-year-old.
And these may have been her proclivities before she met Dickens. McEwen may have co-operated with the police investigation, but there was nothing to suggest that she won’t be similarly drawn to a “Master” in the future or overstep the bounds of BDSM by assaulting another child.
She’ll do her time and then she’ll be free as a bird — a vulture, maybe.
One would think that the feminists would be enraged by this judge’s ruling — after all, women can do everything men can do, and do it better, including being pedophiles. But that would never happen because this ruling is completely consistent with the hypocritical contradictions peddled by feminists, especially the false premise that women are always the victims, never the victimizers. And if any women victimizes a child, it must be because a man forced her to do it. We hear the same excuses when Blacks commit horrible crimes — the perpetrator is always a victim of “racism”.
The very fact that women can be lesbians is proof that they are capable of being sexual degenerates who should not be allowed to be around children. But they would falsely deny any connection between homosexuality and pedophilia — regardless of the statistics which clearly show that 40% of pedophiles are homosexuals, who comprise only 2% of the population. With this ruling, the court has emboldened female pedophiles who now will operate under the assumption that the law does not recognize that they even exist.