3
0

Wow, the left has promoted pedophilia for a long time


 invite response                
2021 Aug 1, 10:27am   5,100 views  98 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (60)   💰tip   ignore  

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/child-abuse-avant-garde-pedophilia-children-nambla/


When child abuse was avant-garde
The prominence of pedophilia in Sixties and Seventies thought

Last month the New Yorker published an essay about a grotesque experiment that took place in West Germany in the 1970s, in which young boys who had been taken from, or abandoned by, their parents were placed with known pedophiles.

It was no accident. It was quite deliberate. The powerful sexologist Helmet Kentler believed that pedophilic guardianship would foster an open and unashamed attitude towards sex that would preclude the development of fascistic attitudes. As the New Yorker says:

’Kentler’s goal was to develop a child-rearing philosophy for a new kind of German man. Sexual liberation, he wrote, was the best way to “prevent another Auschwitz.”’

A sensible reader could guess what happened to the boys. Those that the New Yorker spoke to report feeling depression and rage deep into adulthood.

Kentler was appalling, but he was of his time. Taboos surrounding children were being eroded. The German Green party was especially notable for its enablement of child abuse. As the Times of London reported in 2015, ‘a paedophile network was active in the Berlin branch of the Green party until the mid-1990s, with potentially hundreds of victims’.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a leading student activist in the 1968 unrest and a prominent member of the Greens, wrote fantasies about sexual contact with children which he later awkwardly described as ‘irresponsible’ and ‘a type of manifesto against the bourgeois society’. Cohn-Bendit was not, as you might assume, a hair-brained student when he wrote that filth but 30 years old. Perhaps the bourgeois society had something — at least something — to be said for it.

You could attempt to ascribe all of this to post-war German pathologies — except that enthusiasm for the potential of childhood sexuality was common throughout the counter-cultural movements of the Sixties and Seventies. It may not have been a cause to rival the campaign against the war in Vietnam but it was a major one, with powerful friends.

Some cultural figures were very much self-interested. The French author Gabriel Matzneff wrote about raping children for years before it turned out that he was, of all things, a child rapist. It took the publication of Vanessa Springora’s memoir Consent, in 2020, in which she related being abused by Matzneff, for him to face repercussions. Being able to turn a sentence, it appears, is a good way of dodging a sentence. Your crimes are attributed to artistic license.

Others were driven by ideology. French intellectuals were especially energetic in their efforts to normalize pedophilia. A who’s-who of Gallic literary figures signed a petition in 1977 that called for sex between adults and children to be decriminalized, including Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir.

Foucault, who was posthumously charged with raping Tunisian boys by his fellow writer Guy Sorman last year (charges, in fairness, that are unproven and that Foucault is unable to respond to), helpfully clarified that when he said children he meant children. In a radio conversation in 1978 he dismissed the very concept of being underage:

‘An age barrier laid down by law does not have much sense. Again, the child may be trusted to say whether or not he was subjected to violence.’

Any child who is able to express themselves, he was explicitly suggesting, is able to ‘consent’ — as if an eight-year-old and an 18-year-old have the same psychological capacity. The generous explanation of such a belief is arrant foolishness. The alternative is criminal opportunism.

But amid enthusiasm for women’s liberation, gay liberation and the sexual revolution, it was tempting for progressives to assume that kids had been constrained by the repressive systems they believed had been confining them. Allen Ginsberg, author of the poem ‘Howl’, joined NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Reportedly, Ginsberg said, ‘I’m a member of NAMBLA because I love boys too — everybody does, who has a little humanity.’ This seems a bit like saying that you are a national socialist because you like your nation and you’re very sociable.

In correspondence with Ginsberg, William Burroughs, author of The Naked Lunch, reported paying two Arabic boys to have sex with one another. Burroughs’s biographer Barry Miles claimed that Burroughs used this anecdote in The Naked Lunch ‘to purposely annoy his readers, a Swiftian gesture to reveal their prurience and to undermine their middle-class values’. It would seem more ‘Swiftian’ if Swift had actually eaten Irish kids.

Of course, all of these efforts failed. Pedophilia, thankfully, was a bridge too far for the general public — who had grown increasingly receptive to individual choice but who were not convinced by the idea that this principle could be extended to kids, or that strange, sweaty men talking about ‘man/boy love’ had any interest in the kids’ wellbeing.

Still, this dark phenomenon endures in relevance. We often hear about being on the ‘right side of history’, as if there is a natural drift of civilized societies towards a more enlightened state of being, associated, typically, with the discarding of taboos and the acceptance of new and innovative social standards. Sometimes a taboo should be discarded. But sometimes they have a damn good reason to exist and people should not feel narrow-minded or parochial for opposing change. You see, for example, the same exaggeration of childhood agency as a means of enabling exploitation in cases of so-called ‘drag kids’.

Sometimes, too, as this case reminds us, change is not inevitable and can be reversed. Foucault is still respected on the strength of other aspects of his work, but if he was demanding the end of age of consent laws nowadays he would lose his intellectual respectability before you could say ‘structuralism’.

« First        Comments 91 - 98 of 98        Search these comments

91   richwicks   2021 Dec 27, 11:39am  

Automan Empire says
richwicks says
Automan Empire says

This is the problem. Your language presupposes I voted for Biden,


No, YOUR language does.


See, you're running with the presuppositions


And yet you won't clear them up, EVER.

Guess it's everybody else's problem that you dance around explaining your viewpoints and thinking, and they're just too fucking stupid to read your mind. It's not like you're not just being difficult for absolutely no reason or something.

Somebody is trying to understand your thinking, you're going out of your way to be coy about it. Well fuck it. Who cares what you think? I don't any more.
92   Automan Empire   2021 Dec 27, 7:35pm  

richwicks says
Somebody is trying to understand your thinking, you're going out of your way to be coy about it. Well fuck it. Who cares what you think? I don't any more.


Am I supposed to just chime in casually while multiple people are engaging in this Kafka-esque excursion that is about me at great length but with 0% connection to me?

What if I was to ask you if you're still beating your wife, or if you ever ran into Rush Limbaugh in the boy-brothels of Haiti? The fact that I'm imagining you just going WTF in response is mighty suspicious now, mister!
93   richwicks   2021 Dec 27, 8:34pm  

Automan Empire says
richwicks says
Somebody is trying to understand your thinking, you're going out of your way to be coy about it. Well fuck it. Who cares what you think? I don't any more.


Am I supposed to just chime in casually while multiple people are engaging in this Kafka-esque excursion that is about me at great length but with 0% connection to me?


No what you're supposed to do is when somebody asks you "why did you vote for Biden?" and if you didn't vote for Biden, you tell them you didn't and tell them who you voted for, and if you didn't vote, explain why.

You know, so people can understand your thinking and POSSIBLY assess their own. That's what communication is for.

I didn't vote - I'm in California. My vote doesn't mean shit here. I don't believe we have an honest election system here, voting here, is a tacit indication I have ANY FUCKING BELIEF in it, and I goddamned do not. I'm in the majority. I FULLY RECOGNIZE this is not a republic, or a democracy, I'm entirely aware of the system we have. Give me somebody that isn't a piece of shit worth voting for as a protest vote, and I will do it. Trump wasn't worth a protest vote the last time around, nobody was.

I'm entirely happy that a senile pedophile corrupt pervert is president. I'm entirely happy with a JOKE for president. This is our establishment, I'm happy Trump isn't president so people can finally see the banana republic we are. I'm sick and fucking tired of civic duty negligence. I'm tired of it. Bush should have been strung up but he wasn't so we have this. This is your establishment, can it be more obviously corrupt? How fucking obvious does it have to be before people realize it's total corruption? I'm willing to go further, MUCH further, until the government starts murdering people, including me.

Automan Empire says
What if I was to ask you if you're still beating your wife,


I'd respond I wasn't married. If I was married, I would respond that I never beat my wife.

You're never restricted to a yes or no answer. This kind of game is designed for idiots. This is something a CHILD might fall for, not an adult. It's like a pickup line, it works on paper, but never in real life.
94   Misc   2021 Dec 28, 12:24am  

While the left has promoted pedophilia for a while, the right didn't want it to stop.

Before women were given the right to vote, the age of consent was about 12-13 for most states. The legislatures really didn't wanna increase that.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-raising-age-sexual-consent-taught-women-about-vote-180975658/?source=patrick.net
95   Onvacation   2021 Dec 28, 9:17am  

Automan Empire says
about me at great length but with 0% connection to me?

Wasn't expecting a cogent answer.
97   Patrick   2022 Feb 3, 2:02pm  

https://notthebee.com/article/holy-crap-professor-at-a-new-york-university-argues-that-it-isnt-obvious-that-adult-child-sex-is-wrong?source=patrick.net


Professor At A New York University Argues That It Isn't Obvious That "Adult-Child Sex" Is Wrong. For Real! ...

Stephen Kershnar is the professor and he wants us all to rethink whether or not it's wrong for adults to have sex with children.

This is going to be a long and depressing thread. There are several clips here, and they are all deeply, deeply disturbing.
98   Patrick   2022 Feb 3, 2:44pm  

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/rino-traitor-group-lincoln-project-pays-off-co-founder-who-quit-amidst-homosexual-grooming-scandal/?source=patrick.net


‘Lincoln Project’ Pays Off Co-Founder Who Quit Amidst Homosexual Grooming Scandal

Jennifer Horn, a Lincoln Project co-founder, received a hefty six-figure payout after she quit the group following a sexual grooming scandal involving one of her associates.

Campaign disclosures show that Horn received $375,000, perhaps of hush money, after resigning in February after it was alleged that co-founder John Weaver had sent harassing sexual messages to many young men in an apparent grooming attempt. ...

Big League Politics has reported on how Lincoln Project leaders knew about Weaver’s history of predatory behavior but looked the other way to line their pockets:

“A new report has claimed that Lincoln Project leadership thought of turning their super PAC into a media organization and bringing John Weaver on board, even though they knew about grooming allegations against him.

« First        Comments 91 - 98 of 98        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste