"pedophilia"
#1
the topic of pedophilia is evergreen in political discourse, yet never fruitful. a lot of people have strong feelings about the subject, and most discussions involve two sides who can't agree on facts talking past each other. hopefully, by clarifying the presuppositions, we can prevent ourselves from becoming confused by our own polemics.

there are 3 different elements muddling discussions: the biological, the legal, and the conceptual.

the biological is the most straightforward, a girl is sexually mature after menarche. however, those who remember the thread on age of menarche will know it varies quite wildly--these days it is often in the single digits. talk of "she's 17 you sick fuck" is rightly ridiculed on this premise, but we should not lose sight of the fact this is a poor state of affairs. in a world of high metabolism, an individual of exceptional breeding might have her menarche as late as her early 20s.

though there was a time when the law reflected common sense, what we have now is an arbitrary number which defines the "age of consent." this is most often appealed to by leftists, who think this number is universally 18. of course, it is not, and in the civilized world it ranges between 14 and 18. even within america it differs between the states and is 16 in a considerable portion of the country. it is worth nothing that this age limit defines 'statutory rape' not pedophilia.

while a straightforward definition for "pedophilia" might be "sexual attraction to prepubescent children" this is not always how it's used. often feminists will use it to mean "male attraction to youth," making every mentally healthy man on earth a pedophile, which they do indeed assert. another common leftist definition is "sexual attraction to minors" which elevates the object of attraction's legal status over the biological. additionally, there are the terms "hebephilia" and "ephebophilia" which can influence the working definition of "pedophilia" by their inclusion or exclusion.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1543312815506735105
remember this headline? the overwhelming reaction was "children should be allowed abortions," but how could a child get an abortion if children can't get pregnant? because biological maturity and legal majority have drifted so far apart, an instinctual revulsion towards sexual acts with the sexually immature has turned into an excuse to kill the child of a sexually mature woman (and the father apparently, according to some very bright quote-tweeters).

if it was as simple as adopting the stance "menarche = adult" there would be no need for this thread, but that is not how our polemics have evolved. our present collective stance is "pedophilia is good" because we have adopted the subversive conceptual framing of our enemies. the reason this has happened is that it is a much stronger argument to post a pedophile gigachad with a harem of lolis, than it is to say "technically it's ephebophilia" because the latter cedes moral authority to the opponent. therefore i only ask that next time this topic comes up, you keep in mind what conceptual frame you adopt, and why you are doing so.
#2
I am highly skeptical of the "girls went through menarche at age 20" thing. It sounds like the type of science that is not well studied and fits a libtard worldview perfectly but conservatives eat it up out of paranoia like the microplastics thing.

If it is true that there were a bunch of prepubescent 16-18 year olds walking around I would bet that men still wanted to bang and marry them as even now girls with weak secondary sexual characteristics can still be very beautiful if they are otherwise healthy and mature. Acting like hundreds of years ago men wouldn't want to be romantic with 16 year olds because they weren't fertile yet is a delusional bromide to soothe the cognitive dissonance caused by the obviousness that all men want to bang teenagers in the 21st century. "Heh you see it is a sad state of affairs because normally girls go through puberty at age 20 (source: Reddit & 4chan). When I see a 15 year old with crazy tits and ass and a 21 inch waist I do not see a sex object, I see a poor victim of industrial agriculture and capitalism (and MILK haha even though I uncritically think whole milk is the healthiest thing ever HAHA MILK funny???). Uncle Teddy K. was right about some things HEHE. This esoteric and enlightened rational framework helps me suppress my impulses and I pray for my brothers in Christ who lack this great scientific knowledge to have the faith to deny what is right in front of theirs eyes and not be pedophiles."
#3
@BillyONare the 20 figure was a hypothetical in an idealistic future. i did not say it was ever common. please try to read more carefully, and recall the thread we previously had.
#4
(07-06-2022, 06:31 AM)gurnemanz Wrote: the biological is the most straightforward, a girl is sexually mature after menarche. however, those who remember the thread on age of menarche will know it varies quite wildly--these days it is often in the single digits. talk of "she's 17 you sick fuck" is rightly ridiculed on this premise, but we should not lose sight of the fact this is a poor state of affairs. in a world of high metabolism, an individual of exceptional breeding might have her menarche as late as her early 20s.

I don't think this should be much of a worry at the moment. I saw your other reply about a a hypothetical future, but as it stands I think women are going through puberty at a much younger age.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012...hood-onset
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020...younger%3F

In the past century we've seen women beginning their puberty many years earlier than ever before, so it seems to reason that you should, at the very minimum, defend some form of ephebophilia. A lowering of age of consent laws if not outright abolition is necessary in my opinion.
#5
(07-07-2022, 08:50 PM)Leverkühn Wrote: I don't think this should be much of a worry at the moment. I saw your other reply about a a hypothetical future, but as it stands I think women are going through puberty at a much younger age.

In the past century we've seen women beginning their puberty many years earlier than ever before, so it seems to reason that you should, at the very minimum, defend some form of ephebophilia. A lowering of age of consent laws if not outright abolition is necessary in my opinion.
clearly it is relevant for precisely the reason you said, it is also relevant in case the average age of marriage in the past comes up. i have yet to see any leftist intelligent enough to bring this up, but the average age of marriage has been relatively high throughout modernity. without the context of a later menarche this could be abused to argue for raising the age of consent, but when you consider early puberty, it would be equivalent to marrying in the late teens right now.
#6
(07-08-2022, 03:32 AM)Guest Wrote:
(07-07-2022, 08:50 PM)Leverkühn Wrote: I don't think this should be much of a worry at the moment. I saw your other reply about a a hypothetical future, but as it stands I think women are going through puberty at a much younger age.

In the past century we've seen women beginning their puberty many years earlier than ever before, so it seems to reason that you should, at the very minimum, defend some form of ephebophilia. A lowering of age of consent laws if not outright abolition is necessary in my opinion.
clearly it is relevant for precisely the reason you said, it is also relevant in case the average age of marriage in the past comes up. i have yet to see any leftist intelligent enough to bring this up, but the average age of marriage has been relatively high throughout modernity. without the context of a later menarche this could be abused to argue for raising the age of consent, but when you consider early puberty, it would be equivalent to marrying in the late teens right now.
Maybe I wasn't clear. I think the specific bit about "women not going through menarche as late as their early 20s" isn't something of much worry, at least at this point in time. I think the biological element, specifically the point at which they begin the first menarche, is incredibly relevant, if not the most relevant aspect for the discussion. I agree with you that the earlier start of menarche means (logically) people should be marrying women at a younger age than before, while as you pointed out, the opposite has been the case. The biology should be the determining factor for what separates a 'girl' form a 'woman,' rather than whatever abstract philosophical view normies use now.

As for the conceptual element, I'll leave a tweet from an account I enjoy (with relevant replies). Teenagers aren't "real," and I don't think it's a concept that's BASED in biology in any meaningful way:
https://twitter.com/sneederoctomy/status...IXUsoemtuA
#7
Wanted to share a little thread I saw on twitter that had me thinking of this thread again:
https://twitter.com/cmasonphoto/status/1...9767665664
TL;DR: A man in his mid-20s approaches this guy's 16yo sister and parents after Mass one Sunday saying he wants to marry her. Over two years of courtship and getting to know the family, and recieving the blessings of the local Church community, he marries her. And what's this guys response? ANGER AND DELUSION.

The thesis of his thread is this.
Quote:There is a culture of silence that permeates the conservative religious circles in which I was brought up. That culture, which protects abusers and shrouds their abuse in secrecy, is what leads to outcomes like my sister’s.
But really, I can't help but see NO ABUSE going on here whatsoever. I guess I've been isolated from normies for too long, because this guy's reaction, along with those in the replies, really did surprise me. Somehow this is supposed to be an example of grooming, abuse, and yes, PEDOPHILIA! He describes what is at most a 10-year difference as his sister marrying "a much older man," and feels the need to add that she is "deeply sheltered." To him, this probably just means she doesn't drink, do drugs, or engage in sexual acts with random people at her high-school, because he in no way alludes to how she's actually "sheltered." 

Libtards have really reached the point where a guy (who is at most 30) marrying an 18 year old girl with the blessings of her parents and local community is slapped with the pedophilic label. NormieLibs have created a culture where, despite the fact that women are going through puberty earlier than ever before, going after 'younger women' is dealt with as outcast behavior. I almost get the feeling this guy would rather his sister was getting railed by strangers her age then get into a marriage with an older man who had the decency to approach her parents first. While maybe a little odd, what that older guy did would have been considered gentlemanly only a few decades ago. He immediately asked her parents for their permission to court her and made his intentions known. He spent YEARS courting her until she was of legal age. All to get flamed on twitter by the faggy older brother.

Going off the '3 different elements' outlined by gurnemanz, the normie definition of pedophilia follows some incomprehensible, but purely conceptual definition of the term, where the actual biology or legality of the woman is not at all important. Hence, going after a fully physically developed, legal-age woman can still be pedophilic, if you're deemed to be "a much older man." In a sense, the girl herself matters less than the man in question when it comes to the question of whether something is 'pedophilic' or not. If the woman was 22 and the guy was 40, I'm sure this person would be making the exact same charges. It seems like if you express any kind of link between 'Youth' and 'Beauty,' these types will be ready to pounce on you as a sexual predator, I'm not sure how else to understand their views on the matter.
#8
Youth and beauty being connected is fascism DoNt YoU kNoW. This is what leftists and frankly default huemans believe. Vaush claims women peak at 30.

On the point about puberty happening earlier today. I see the mind viruses and obesity rise increasing the value of a teen Waifu. Maybe in the past a 25 year old was more mature than a 15 year old but leftism and other mind viruses make this proposition preposterous today. It’s also a fact that they have 10 more years of sugar cookies, kebabs and drinking. If we lived in BasedWorldTM the trend would be younger marriage and sex0rz.
#9
(07-10-2022, 07:42 PM)Frenjamin Wrote: Youth and beauty being connected is fascism DoNt YoU kNoW. This is what leftists and frankly default huemans believe. Vaush claims women peak at 30.
Will point out there's also an element of hypocrisy in how leftist treat this topic [for me, it's the hypocrisy...]. Blue check libs seemed to love the movie BOYHOOD when it came out some years back, it was highly praised and got a number of awards. It's a gay age-gap film. In fact this is a rather common trope in gay media: older man helps younger boy 'discover' his sexuality and come out of his shell by engaging in sexual relations. It's supposed to be romantic and a learning experience, helping the boy come to understand himself and become a man. Of course, it's the exact type of thing they'd jump on for being PEDOPHILIC if it depicted a straight couple. Seriously, imagine a film where a male grad student fucks his doctoral advisors 18yo daughter. Liberal media outlets would be crying 'pedophilia' and 'chauvinism,' etc before they even released a trailer.
#10
(07-10-2022, 05:50 PM)Leverkühn Wrote: Wanted to share a little thread I saw on twitter that had me thinking of this thread again:
https://twitter.com/cmasonphoto/status/1...9767665664
TL;DR: A man in his mid-20s approaches this guy's 16yo sister and parents after Mass one Sunday saying he wants to marry her. Over two years of courtship and getting to know the family, and recieving the blessings of the local Church community, he marries her. And what's this guys response? ANGER AND DELUSION.


It is completely bizarre how moderns view relations between the sexes and needs some investigation. As the definition of paedophilia has suffered unfathomable definition creep, to the point of not being a useful word in modern parlance, we should reassert the proper definition at every turn. Paedophilia is the attraction to pre-pubescents, to actual children. There is a reason 16-17 girls are called "jail-bait" in an American context.
It would be illegal to sleep with them, but we all know they are attractive - this is not paedophilia.

Below I'm going to digress to the more general outlook of relationships, I'll be using the words 'good' and 'evil' to describe how people feel about things - it might not be the best word, but bare with me.

(07-11-2022, 07:16 PM)Leverkühn Wrote: Will point out there's also an element of hypocrisy in how leftist treat this topic [for me, it's the hypocrisy...]. Blue check libs seemed to love the movie BOYHOOD when it came out some years back, it was highly praised and got a number of awards. It's a gay age-gap film. In fact this is a rather common trope in gay media: older man helps younger boy 'discover' his sexuality and come out of his shell by engaging in sexual relations. It's supposed to be romantic and a learning experience, helping the boy come to understand himself and become a man. Of course, it's the exact type of thing they'd jump on for being PEDOPHILIC if it depicted a straight couple. Seriously, imagine a film where a male grad student fucks his doctoral advisors 18yo daughter. Liberal media outlets would be crying 'pedophilia' and 'chauvinism,' etc before they even released a trailer.

If we pivot to homosexual relations briefly, we'll see that they are never portrayed as evil in modern mainstream media or discourse. As a result I'm ignoring them. Back to heterosexual relations.
A man who expresses interest in marrying a woman, who makes a respectable approach through the family, is deemed as evil. An 18 year old woman who sleeps with dozens of men, or engages in serial monogamy (read: dating), is good. We could even take a much older woman, a cougar, chasing after much younger men, and no one is allowed to talk negatively about it. An example to my mind would be French President Macron and his wife. Any criticism of it in recent years has been rebuked.

What is to be gleaned from all this is that normies seem to hold the position that all relationships are good, unless it is a heterosexual relationship and the man is older than the woman by some margin. What that margin is, I don't know, but it is probably smaller the younger the woman is (i.e. If she is 16, than the gap is probably only 2-3 years, if she was older, 26 say, it might stretch to 10 years.) Overall, this outlook seems to be an attack on healthy male sexuality, probably spearheaded by the increased feminisation of society. Older women don't like that men don't pay attention to them, they want the male attention, so they disparage any male attention to younger women. Obviously, there will be completely disingenuous, cucked men who side with them hoping for a crumb of pussy as a result - the quintessential male feminist, if you will.
#11
(07-11-2022, 07:16 PM)Leverkühn Wrote:
(07-10-2022, 07:42 PM)Frenjamin Wrote: Youth and beauty being connected is fascism DoNt YoU kNoW. This is what leftists and frankly default huemans believe. Vaush claims women peak at 30.
Will point out there's also an element of hypocrisy in how leftist treat this topic [for me, it's the hypocrisy...]. Blue check libs seemed to love the movie BOYHOOD when it came out some years back, it was highly praised and got a number of awards. It's a gay age-gap film. In fact this is a rather common trope in gay media: older man helps younger boy 'discover' his sexuality and come out of his shell by engaging in sexual relations. It's supposed to be romantic and a learning experience, helping the boy come to understand himself and become a man. Of course, it's the exact type of thing they'd jump on for being PEDOPHILIC if it depicted a straight couple. Seriously, imagine a film where a male grad student fucks his doctoral advisors 18yo daughter. Liberal media outlets would be crying 'pedophilia' and 'chauvinism,' etc before they even released a trailer.

This is good in the eyes of default huemanTM absolutely crushing a young man through sodomy is of course good. At the end of the day it’s the whole point of our society. TLDR we live in chyna now
#12
One could opine on this at the risk of being Cody Wilsoned. This has me thinking about Cody Wilson.

Who was fortuitously punished, not for his preference for young women, but for being a degenerate who paid women to become their "sugar daddy" for a night or whatever gay shit. I presume he has ceased that behavior as a result of his sex offender status.

Doesn't justify the law, just shows that it may at times have positive consequences.
#13
"One could opine on this at the risk of being Cody Wilsoned. This has me thinking about Cody Wilson.

Who was fortuitously punished, not for his preference for young women, but for being a degenerate who paid women to become their "sugar daddy" for a night or whatever gay shit. I presume he has ceased that behavior as a result of his sex offender status.

Doesn't justify the law, just shows that it may at times have positive consequences."

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/ThHB9kj/Jougo9-It-400x400.jpg]
#14
(08-31-2022, 03:08 PM)The_Author Wrote: One could opine on this at the risk of being Cody Wilsoned. This has me thinking about Cody Wilson.

Who was fortuitously punished, not for his preference for young women, but for being a degenerate who paid women to become their "sugar daddy" for a night or whatever gay shit. I presume he has ceased that behavior as a result of his sex offender status.

Doesn't justify the law, just shows that it may at times have positive consequences.

"The Lord works in mysterious ways." 

But seriously, having to register as a sex-offender for over a decade and go to sex therapy because you wanted to have sex with a SIXTEEN YEAR OLD is the height of absurdity.
#15
In basedworld, the earliest permissible age for marriage will be lower than 18, probably somewhere between 12 and 16 based on historical analysis. However, this will simply be a higher order effect of accomplishing more urgent objectives like anathematizing "feminism", re-legalizing marriage, and expropriating the current regime's priestly class.

Grousing against the "age of consent" is also a well-oiled trap for dissidents, although I admit the amount of asshurt provoked by lolicon imagery and rhetoric is incredibly funny.
#16
(08-31-2022, 11:53 PM)Unformed Golem Wrote: Grousing against the "age of consent" is also a well-oiled trap for dissidents.

How so? I would say the biggest trap for dissidents is watering down the truth of our convictions to the point that 95% of dissidents are backstabbing cryptoleftist feminists. Re-normalizing female and male sexual urges would go a great way to anathematizing feminism, act as a schelling point for who is truly right wing, and lower anxiety in men so that they become free thinkers (= right wing) by fixing the supply and demand imbalance in the sexual marketplace and decriminalizing their deepest desires. The fact that you get more flak for speaking about this than any other topic is a great indication that you are pushing a logos that is extremely dangerous to the power that be.
#17
(09-01-2022, 07:32 PM)BillyONare Wrote:
(08-31-2022, 11:53 PM)Unformed Golem Wrote: Grousing against the "age of consent" is also a well-oiled trap for dissidents.

How so? I would say the biggest trap for dissidents is watering down the truth of our convictions to the point that 95% of dissidents are backstabbing cryptoleftist feminists. Re-normalizing female and male sexual urges would go a great way to anathematizing feminism, act as a schelling point for who is truly right wing, and lower anxiety in men so that they become free thinkers (= right wing) by fixing the supply and demand imbalance in the sexual marketplace and decriminalizing their deepest desires. The fact that you get more flak for speaking about this than any other topic is a great indication that you are pushing a logos that is extremely dangerous to the power that be.

Because "age of consent guy", like "pedophile" and "Nazi", are identities constructed by the regime for use as foils in their propaganda narratives.  Assuming these sorts of identities "gets flak" because part of the ruling elite's political formula is ritualized violence and denunciations of these foils.   

If you want to re-normalize sexuality, then say you want to re-normalize sexuality (by the way, the imbalance in the sexual marketplace has far more to do with low birthrates and obesity than with unevenly-enforced statutory rape laws) rather than parroting the talking points of the Libertarian Party's degenerate/provocateur wing.  Likewise, if you want to end anti-white race hatred, don't drape yourself in the symbols of a foreign nationalist movement whose government was defunct before your grandparents were born. 

If you just want to be a provocateur for some reason, then by all means go ahead.  You'll get tons of attention!  You can also get a lot of attention by emptying the contents of your wallet onto the floor of a train station.
#18
I don't see things the same way. I value clarity, logos, and truth too much to be concerned with some irony leftist saying that I'm part of some type of guy. Of course in real life I don't drape myself with this stuff.
#19
(08-31-2022, 11:53 PM)Unformed Golem Wrote: In basedworld, the earliest permissible age for marriage will be lower than 18, probably somewhere between 12 and 16 based on historical analysis.  However, this will simply be a higher order effect of accomplishing more urgent objectives like anathematizing "feminism", re-legalizing marriage, and expropriating the current regime's priestly class.

Agree strongly with this last part. Expunging feminism and women's ability to take part in politics will likely do half of the work when it comes to age of consent, as it's mostly old crones who consistently complain about this thing. Take women like this or even worse, Women like THIS. Of course what needs to be emphasized is that the 'age of consent' is only half the battle. Even in areas where the age of consent is 16 years, it's not something that can be practically done without immense ostracization. And foids like the ones I linked rage over famous men dating women in their younger 20s. Entirely legal, of course, but it's behavior that will get tens of thousands of people screaming about how you're an evil predator.

(09-01-2022, 10:24 PM)Unformed Golem Wrote: "age of consent guy", like "pedophile" and "Nazi", are identities constructed by the regime for use as foils in their propaganda narratives.  Assuming these sorts of identities "gets flak" because part of the ruling elite's political formula is ritualized violence and denunciations of these foils...If you just want to be a provocateur for some reason, then by all means go ahead.  You'll get tons of attention!  You can also get a lot of attention by emptying the contents of your wallet onto the floor of a train station.

I get what you're saying here. If I get up on my soapbox in the middle of town and try to argue about how I deserve hot teen cunny and that this is actually entire normal as far as sexual desires go in the grand scheme of human history, I'm not going to win over many people. More than likely I'll get a lot of stares, and possibly get chased out of town. But on the other hand, I DO deserve hot teen cunny; it is my birth right as an aryan man and petty conventions shouldn't deny me that bliss. As BillyONare said, "the biggest trap for dissidents is watering down the truth of our convictions to the point that 95% of dissidents are backstabbing cryptoleftist feminists." It's important to stand by what we really believe here, because if we don't, we're only going to get watered down versions of already watered-down versions of what we want. You have to be forceful about what you want and not cuck, that's exactly what the Left did when they kicked and screamed for nigger rights, women's rights, etc. So a nuanced approach is required.

(09-02-2022, 08:34 PM)BillyONare Wrote: I value clarity, logos, and truth too much to be concerned with some irony leftist saying that I'm part of some type of guy. Of course in real life I don't drape myself with this stuff.

And of course this is the way to do it (imho). On an online forum or site, say twitter for instance, there is NO reason to cuck on our positions, or whatever them down. Post those lolis and call that 30 year old woman a post-wall roastie (she is, after all). Insofar as we are online, we are not politicians or mediators, we are stochastic terrorists and visionaries, and such people need to push their views forcefully. Awaken the minds of those willing to join our side and crush any dissenters with facts and logic. The issue is simple: women are going through puberty at an earlier age than ever, and yet age of consent laws are higher than ever. It's an unreasonable point and the truth of it is as clear as day. As a man of pure reason I'm not going to mold myself into a more sanitized individual online just so some young MAGA Mommy or Gun Granny doesn't find me disgusting. I am a man against time and I will create my own path. I think everyone here should as well.


[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Human Verification
Please tick the checkbox that you see below. This process is used to prevent automated spam bots.



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)