/lit/ - Literature

>>18136173

Yes but it is impossible to discuss and any debate will result in gaslighting. See also this recent New Yorker article about Loftus, who posits similar views.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/04/05/how-elizabeth-loftus-changed-the-meaning-of-memory

I usually like the New Yorker for its high quality articles, but this was a cheap hit piece because she *gasp* dared to testify for Weinstein.

>>18136173
That can certainly happen but in most cases being fingered by your uncle is traumatic in itself, pedos aren't good lovers

>>18136173
When should one use "predominant" over "dominant"?

>>18136458
interesting article, thanks

>>18136459
>but in most cases being fingered by your uncle is traumatic in itself
can you show data? because the book argues the opposite with citations of the "victims" themselves

I think it’s true at least sometimes because I think I experienced it myself.

>>18136569
what happened?

>>18136173
Damn, you again?
Go and molest your brother some more, faggot.

>>18136173
The Empire of Trauma does a deeper history on this. Childhood abuses only really came on the radar in the 70s or so. There's an inflection point where PTSD stops referring to Vietnam war vets (the diagnosis was originally designed to mean "combat trauma where part of the trauma comes from your government lying to you about why you're going into combat") and starts to encompass "being beaten bloody regularly by your parent/spouse". The inclusion of children started because of some particularly visible cases in America (the book about the White Bear Lake murder case and the story about the murder of Sylvia Likens) but the inclusion of rape and spousal abuse was a political battle between Vietnam vets and feminists. Feminists believed that the trauma from rape was the same thing as what Vietnam vets experienced (an irrevocable trauma which was permanent and where trust could not be re established) while the Vietnam vets had come up with the syndrome to specifically refer to their situation (they did not think that battle fatigue or shellshock or previous version of war trauma were their problem; they specifically thought the problem was being told to go out and fight a just but very grisly war, and then coming home to find out everyone considered you racist murderers who were depraved Nazi spinoffs) The feminists won, but part of what they won was that every rape had to be as traumatic as the most fucked up Vietnam vet. The idea of rape culture develops out of this the same way that vets conceived of being home in America as "still being in Nam"; the ever present vulnerability they experience became a more solid part of the diagnosis, not because more people experienced it and then became diagnosed, but because for something to count as a "trauma" from then out, it had to be a permanent disability, an incurable wound.
Basically, it revived the fisher king from King Arthur myths.

Damn creeps will never find new ways to machinate their perversions

>>18136732
Haven't read much have you?

>>18136732
If the thesis were in fact true, then it would be something we'd have to address if we really cared about the damage being done to kids. I think it's one of those free exchange of ideas things where, if it's false, presumably it won't hold up to scrutiny and we can all breathe easy, and if it's true, then there's no harm in having divested us of a false and presumably harmful belief

>>18136702
I'm not really knowledgeable in these things, but how does this context relate to the Europe for example? Does the PTSD as a medical category exists outside of America? And would you say that these views were exported outside of USA? thanks for the recc, will look in to it

>>18136732
your kind of thinking is actually preventing the help of the children. No one is defending the abuse here. Its an anonymous board, if someone wanted to, they would probably say it outloud.

>>18136702
I think this is a lot of nonsense (how do you fit WWI shellshock into this narrative?). However I do think that the emphasis on the "permanently broken victim" (which practically every psychologist will say is counterproductive) perhaps primes people to be more sensitive to certain events. But other things like institutional mistreatment, fractured social bonds and economic hardship probably have their role.

>>18136750
The book is mostly written from a French perspective. It deals with America because PTSD originated in America and spread from there, but it deals with the medical, insurance, political and other historical categorisation of "trauma" since around the age of the steam engine. So, it has things like people who believed they were paralysed by riding on a train, because technology made them anxious, why people mistook the chemical factory explosion in France after 9/11 as Muslims rather than poorly stored chemicals, why Medicins sans Frontieres split during the Balkan cluster fuck of the 90s between those who thought only one side needed medical attention and those who thought Serbs might not be all bad and blunt force trauma might still affect them like other humans. Basically everything that has formed and changed the idea of "trauma" and who it benefits, if it benefits anyone, since before Freud. I highly recommend it.

>>18136173
The Greeks practiced pederasty, if this caused trauma then why are there 0 sources describing a crisis of eromenoi showing signs of abuse like self-harm or suicidal tendencies?
Because most erastes-eromenos relationships weren't abusive, the eromenos would grow up into fine, upstanding citizens with wives and kids.

>>18136474
Well, let me give you an example. The phrases "predominantly white" and "dominantly white" mean two completely different things.

>>18136810
based

>>18136776
Vietnam vets didn't want to be fit into the paradigm of battle fatigue or shellshock- they had seen these things happen to people, but those people did not come home to being told they were traitors, thieves, liars, idiots, morally repugnant, and at best gullible retards who had pointlessly murdered people because they were just following orders. They thought they were separate things: both were traumatic, but the Vietnam one was traumatic as there was nobody who thought "I was just following orders" was a good reason for their war. However, of the two, PTSD, the new diagnosis, set trauma up in its name. Feminists did not adopt shellshock, because it was obvious they hadn't been shelled. Trauma is a much more malleable concept at the moment, and the vets highlighting the lack of trust for anyone, even those closest to you, in the symptoms made trauma much easier to "experience" without any physical damage, and to re-experience. The kind of symptoms the vets highlighted as unique from previous battle fatigue diagnosis became more prominent in the perception of "trauma". Before that, trauma more usually was used in the context of "sharp force trauma", "trauma surgery", but over time the idea of "trauma" began to more often mean "recurring stress". People's reactions have changed alongside the semantic shift
>1940s you: I suffered a trauma
>Holy shit get a tourniquet
>1980s you: I suffered a trauma
>Oh wow do you need a tissue?

>>18136576
Someone I knew died in a pretty terrible way. I wasn’t exactly close but I knew them well. You can liken it to like the relationship you have with an aunt or an uncle I guess. At first it was shocking but it wasn’t traumatizing but over the course of several months people started treating me differently, asking a lot of questions, walking on eggshells around me, I just started thinking about it all the time, certain scenes in movies started to bother me, and so on. The combination of my already present but latent depression and anxiety, having a hard time at school and then this thing just made me unravel basically. To this day, I don’t really know if I was being dramatic, if I just wanted attention, if I just felt traumatized because I was supposed to or what but it was pretty bad. I ended up developing a problem with prescription drugs that took me a while to kick and I did a lot of stuff I really regret during that time. It was a very confusing period of my life and now it feels kind of blurry, like I don’t even remember it.

>>18136883
hope you're doing better, anon. Life and subjectivity in particular can be a pain in the ass sometimes.

>>18136810
No, if young boys took it up the pooper, they were barred from citizenship for hubris. The trick was to do everything that didn't involve anal or blowjobs. You take anything up the butt or suck a dick or eat pussy: you are a girl and cannot vote. You fuck people up the ass, made the opposing council suck your dick: you're just a dude sticking your dick in shit, and that's normal. People who got found out for being molested and pimped out in childhood got their citizenship revoked and often had to fuck off to Sparta or an hero, yes. There are famous cases of it.

>>18136904
I don’t really know if I am or not now but I appreciate the sentiment. Thank you.

>>18136909
>if young boys took it up the pooper, they were barred from citizenship for hubris.
>People who got found out for being molested and pimped out in childhood got their citizenship revoked
Molested implies rape, and raping a freeborn boy (a serious crime in Greece) wouldn't result in the punishment of the boy, as far as I know. I'm not sure there were any legal penalties for being a passive recipient of anal sex as a youth (though it was considered unbecoming for a future citizen, and reflected poorly on the erastes). You are of course correct regarding prostitution, though. But I'm not sure if even passive adult males lost anything more than clout. I'd like to see sources.

>>18136944
>Molested implies rape, and raping a freeborn boy (a serious crime in Greece) wouldn't result in the punishment of the boy, as far as I know
It was a crime for the *child*. The crime is hubris, which loosely is translated as "impeity". It meant you could not be a citizen and could not speak in court as a lawyer. The most infamous case is where Aeschines levies charges about Timarchos, for being pimped out as a kid, because Timarchos is about to levy charges against Aeschines about taking bribes from Macedon. Getting raped as a child was a bigger crime than literally selling out Athens. Literally read anything.

>>18136974
Timarchus willingly prostituted himself, and not as a kid, but as a young man. That's why I said you're right about prostitution, because that's the primary source I'm thinking about. But where are the sources saying that being raped as a child restricted one's rights as an adult? I'm not totally incredulous, I just haven't heard of this before.

>>18136992
>willingly prostituted himself
Except no
>as a young man
That's literally a child in law.

>>18136974
Raping a free child was a crime too - corrupting the youth.
people have a misguided view of Athen's laws regarding sexuality, due to cherry picking and a desire to have a justification for one's own behaviour

>>18136173
It's definetly possible, for most of human history, marrying 12 or 13 years old girl was common place

>>18137007
>Raping a free child was a crime too
but no one is denying that, anon

>>18137007
Corrupting the youth was usually other things (promoting personal wealth or lack of duty). It's why Aristotle is an outlier in Athenian thought at the time. He thought some of the shame of the child should reflect upon the adult. But usually this is considered Aristotle being a bit Macedonian, and it is at odds with the law that held it was the child's fault.

>>18137003
>Except no
What? The whole point of Aeschines' speech is that Timarchus has poor character and loose morals and exchanged sex for money. This wouldn't apply if he had been raped or coerced.

Here are two quotes from 'Against Timarchus' which refers to a law that literally exempts the boy of responsibility for having been prostituted:
>Anyway, the law states explicitly that if any father or brother or uncle or anyone at all in the position of guardian hires a boy out as a prostitute—it does not allow an indictment to be brought against the boy in person but against the man who hired him out and the man who paid for him
and
>Please remember this too, men of Athens, that at this point the legislator is not yet addressing the boy in person but those connected with the boy—father, brother, guardian, teachers, in sum, those responsible for him. But once he is entered in the deme register and knows the city’s laws and is now able to determine right and wrong, the legislator from now on addresses nobody else but at this point the individual himself
The whole point of this set up is to point out that Timarchus was technically an adult citizen (probably an ephebe?) at the time he was selling his body.
>>18137007
>Raping a free child was a crime too - corrupting the youth.
The first part is true however 'corrupting the youth' is a phrase most commonly associated with Socrates' trial and didn't refer to any sexual misconduct on Socrates' part.

>>18137043
based actual sources connoisseur

>>18136750
>>18136799
Very interesting stuff. I think few diagnoses have undergone as much change as PTSD. When I first learned of it, it had clear diagnostic criteria, such as hypervigilance and reimagining of the event. These required an event that one could be vigilant about (e.g. tiger attack). However, things are now such that one can have PTSD about a time someone called you a "Jannie" online. Neurophysiologicallu speaking it is hard to imagine such an event causing stress enough to aberrantly store the image of that event in the rapid acces part of memory, which is a suggested modality for the phenomenology of PTSD. The trouble with PTSD and other psych issues that they are entirely clinical diagnoses so one is at the mercy of diagnostic criteria. There is no histology to it. What grinds my gears further is that EUPD, a diagnosis that in my experience is a way of writing "a human car crash" without being impolite in the notes, has been rebranded as complex PD. This is like calling alcoholism "complex poverty" as there is an overlap, sure, but one has, or used to have, a causative agent, but now it's biopsychosocial chaos.

Anyway it's not really my field but I hate it.

>>18137043
>The whole point of this set up is to point out that Timarchus was technically an adult citizen (probably an ephebe
Except to become a citizen you already had to be enrolled in the deme lists and were considered a child who could not vote if you were still in ephebe training. The reason they wouldn't prosecute him for prostitution for a transaction he made no money from is because you had to be the one receiving or giving the money. If he gives or receives money for sex as a child enrolled in the deme list, it means he gets struck off the list regardless of when this fact is found out. You'll note the guy pimping him out is mentioned by name and no charges are brought. You can show poor character which will get you struck off before becoming an adult citizen, which is why there are so many warnings to ephebes to not wear too much perfume or get too good at drinking games. The hubris law is mostly to catch people who might become unbecoming citizens, in the same way that if you were a foreigner who signed up to the deme list, the deme made sure you did two years probation with martial training before you got any citizenship rights. The youth period is a kind of trial adulthood, and you wouldn't let any of them vote. His registration is damning because it means he was trying to become a citizen, and chose to do something impious. It doesn't mean if instead of sucking dick that day he'd show up to a vote he would have been allowed in.

>>18137076
I think the EUPD/BPD->C-PTSD is in part euphemism treadmill, but also because part of what made the previous diagnoses more PC was that they did not mention trauma. Originally they were not necessarily the same car crash. If you got diagnosed as BPD in the 60s, it was probably still with the idea of "borderline between neurosis and psychosis". In the eighties it was polite because it meant you didn't have to write down "think her dad/his priest raped her/him", but usually meant they'd been raped as a child. But then for a long time it floated around as "didn't develop the social planning of a six year old and often acts like it". The C-PTSD diagnosis is to bring the focus back to why they didn't develop into less of a social trainwreck: the answer is trauma in the new paradigm, but now it counts the trauma of your parent not helping you develop in myriad ways, not the just the rapey way. In the eighties it was hard to class your parent not setting hard boundaries as "abuse" or "trauma", so BPD in that era probably caught a lot of kids who were raped but were not lacking boundaries while missing a lot of people who were never raped but were bad at social planning. It's not unsurprising that the recovered memory scandals started to break about the point BPD started to get castigated as a diagnosis for assuming rape victims act like trainwrecks.

>>18136909
Source? Syracuse had a legit homo phalanx unit. Attitudes towards homosexuality carried across classical Greece, but was generally fairly mild from what I've read.

>>18136799
>those who thought Serbs might not be all bad and blunt force trauma might still affect them like other humans.
what kind of sub humans would believe this?

but jokes aside, interesting posts.

>>18136881
>traitors, thieves, liars, idiots, morally repugnant, and at best gullible retards who had pointlessly murdered people because they were just following orders

I always found this fucking slimmy as fuck. how universities, like mine, praise all the exposing of veitnam shit and the effort of journalism and stuff (whoch is a good thing to a degree), but they never mention the slim and utter disrespect these types cast on the GI’s. its like the worst kind of people. getting holier then though, then turning around to sput on the ground.

I really enjoyed The Things They Carried portayle of the whole situation.

>>18137348
Check out the homo army Thebes used to crush Sparta "The Battle of Tegyra, in 375 BC, was the first time that the Spartans lost despite having a bigger army: 300 warriors of the Sacred Band routed 1.800 Spartan soldiers."

>>18137350
>what kind of sub humans would believe this
Unironically, the Greeks.
>>18137368
It is a weird phenomenon. Especially because vets didn't just get attacked by those who wanted to claim they knew the war was always wrong or the whole system was corrupt, they also got attacked by those who still thought the war was just and Nixon was right. The lack of trust was kind of global on a weird scale: you knew a lot of people who might have called you a coward for draft dodging were now saying that everyone should have draft dodged, you knew a lot of people who had claimed it was a just war on evidence and who now with new evidence still claimed it was a just war no matter what the evidence said, you had people who were showing the kind of inconsistency which until recently could get you killed, and some of them might have wanted you dead. Catch 22 does a good job at showing how that kind of double speak can be more difficult to navigate than bombing the enemy, but with an earlier war.

>>18137007
>>18137023
>>18137043
The point you guys are dancing around is that Athenian law was based on judging virtue, not individual behaviors. Anal sex, being an eromenos, etc. were not illegal in themselves, but could serve as evidence of bad virtue should another charge be levied (as seen in the case of Timarchus). Arguing points about whether X, Y, or Z was illegal in Ancient Greece is misguided since the only real crime was impiety, which various unvirtuous actions would be evidence for.

>>18137436
Yah, and I think the retrospect thing was especially suspect. I cant really call a draft dodger brave before the stuff got out, but then somehow they were retroactively justified due to zetgeist and circumstance rather than logic or actual moral integrity.

Wow you guys talking about Athenian law and gay phalanxes are really derailing the thread with some seriously boring and unrelated shit

>>18137562
good thing that you're on point, oh wait

>>18136459
Serious question. Would Pedophilia be traumatic if it was consensual??? If I was a young boy and I was fucked by a hot girl at the age of 10 I think that would change me for the better.

>>18137313
Thank you this is elucidatory. Where's a good source to understand this that is comprehensible to someone outside psychiatry? Is it OP's book?

>>18136458
>account required
Somebody make a pastebin

>>18137642
Me too, but it should only be applicable to little boys and not little girls.

>>18137642
>>18137642
Hebephilia as Mental Disorder? A Historical, Cross-Cultural,
Sociological, Cross-Species, Non-Clinical Empirical, and Evolutionary
Review
there is more to it, but tl dr:
>hebephillic tendencies are inborn and natural
>age of consent was 7-12 trough the history
>there is enough evidence that young people view the sex with adults more positively than adults among themselves
>pedo/hebe relations as bad is a recent historic, Western construct that damages the children

>>18137642
In theory perhaps not. It’s just that hot sane women don’t want to fuck little boys, it’s gross men who will try to stick it up your ass or sadistic women (who may also try to stick things up your ass).

>>18137728
>>18136458
https://outline.com/KFzzvr

>>18136173
“Real” traumas exist, as in cause and effect traumas where the traumatic event is the cause and the subsequent pain is the effect. But they are outnumbered by fake as fuck “traumas” that are retroactively invented for the sake of personal narrative and status

How retarded do you have to be to believe being raped or seeing gruesome death and war (ect. ect. ect) does nothing to the psyche?

>>18138082
who says that?

This was the only book I read fully last year...

>>18138120
I'm not sure. It was my strawman that I think might apply

>>18138206
well, rape and war, if symbolized as normal or socially valorized can be trauma-less I guess

>>18136173
This is broadly probably accurate. From personal experience, I think the reason men are less fucked up despite 1/4 being molested (same as women) is largely because we don't let them feel victimized in the same way. Largely, and ironically, defining someone by their sexual victimization is literally calling someone's soul a hole, which is the most demeaning rhetoric you could have.

>>18136458
>>18137824
This was actually a great read, thanks for sharing. I think the main argument of the article is that, while indeed there is an element of retroactive (re)writing of narratives as memories and that this (re)writing can be due to social/familial pressures and stimulus, it is not a rule or law of memory. That's why I think the "believe women" rhetoric as it is used in social media is flawed, because it is taken to mean "women always tell the truth, specifically about their experience of abuse, and therefore accusation equals culpability, which equals a guilty veredict, which equals punishment", when in reality it means "believe women and do a proper, unbiased investigation in order to serve justice, because historically most victims have been gaslighted or ignored". The fact that prosecutors and defendants use Loftus's work in order to serve their asses or convict wrongly/justly only muddles up the whole thing.

>>18138394
>men are less fucked up despite 1/4 being molested (same as women)
That's interesting, hadn't heard about this before. Do you have a source on that/somewhere I can look at the statistics?

>Largely, and ironically, defining someone by their sexual victimization is literally calling someone's soul a hole, which is the most demeaning rhetoric you could have.
Definitely agree with this one. Sexual abuse *can* define you, as it a traumatic experience, but only if you don't receive proper help for it. Whereas today's society (and, ironically, most variants of feminism) will tell you that sexual abuse cannot but define you completely and irremediably. Virgine Despentes writes about this in her King Kong Theory, and links it to the ethos of a mysogynist society that depicts rape and sexual abuse as something that marks and defines the lives of women, but at the same time shames those women who refuse to be treated as mere victims.

>>18137744
It's worse than that. Attraction to women mostly, or totally finished with puberty is now seen as criminal/ a mental illness.

That actress from Westworld says she was "groomed" by Marilyn Manson from when she met him at 19.

Get the fuck out of here. At 19 I had finished Basic and was soon to go to Iraq after my 20th birthday.

By 12 I knew that dating a rock star who made edgecore music would probably be retarded for a woman.

IDK, my training idol Guts got molested and I guess on an objective level he's a pretty fucked up and mean guy, but it probably also had to do with all the murder, and the demons hunting him.

Anyhow, I finally got to whatever arc is after the Tower of Conviction and he seems to be doing better mentally.

>>18136173
It's self-evident

>>18136173
>someone paid me fake money but i started to fell angry only after i discovered someone took an advantage of me >:(
not even commenting how retarded that thinking is, the whole concept aims to normalize paedophilia so fuck these subhuman faggots

>>18136563
>can you show data?
>do you maybe, just maybe have some evidence that abusing children is bad???

>>18138394
>1/4 being molested
Lol what, who told you that?

>>18138908
>>18138918
>no arguments, just appeal to emotion and common sense
contribute or gtfo

>>18138519
>>18138972
https://1in6.org/get-information/the-1-in-6-statistic/
1/6 is the baseline, but a family member who's a therapist said new research is finding it's more 1/4

>>18137504
>Sycophancy was based in the virtue of the fig stealer
>the fig stealer is merely evidence
At least we both agree the charge was not about figs

>>18139339
Sounds like nonsense, the exact kind of nonsense that the books talks about actually.

>>18139422
How so?

Fuck off pedo scumbag, you already tried this

>>18136458
speaking of Loftus, here's a bright review of one of her books on goodreads.
dare i say BTFOd ?

>>18136702
excellent post. thank you anon. you make /lit/ a great place to be.

>>18137739
That makes no sense. The spontaneous sexual domination of the adult corresponds to the one of the man in healthy (at least standard) adult relationships. A little girl would be in a less different position compared to an adult woman than for the boys. Not even mentioning noncery, a boy with an adult woman is thrown into femdom territory.

>>18138918
sex isn't inherently abusive

>>18137744
This is laughably wrong to the point you can’t help but think a piece of shit pedophile is behind this bullshit

>>18136173
That's a very old idea. Freud found it, and maybe others before him.
When the patient is young he/she doesn't have the language to symbolize and understand what the experience really means. Or the event may not even be "traumatic" in an objective sense but it can be subjectively overwhelming and when re-processed a few decades later it can become traumatic.

>>18136173
Is this the most controversial book of recent memory? I remember this shit sending people into a frothing rage. I need to read it.

>>18140820
Well pedophilia is considered to be THE gravest sin in America, makes sense that any book that even seem like it's defending it would be controversial

>>18140869
America is part of the pedo empire

>>18136458
jeez, I haven't sympathize with a woman like this in a while

>>18140250
I never said it should be heterosexual, anon.

>>18140256
it actually is.

>>18137368
I agree. One of the thing that really bothers me about some leftist discourse is how much all vets are made out to be literal stormtrooper Nazis. When the army preys upon poorer communities for recruits, it just seems weird to me to blame every soldier as somehow equally complicit.

>>18141628
just goes to show how it's really a bourgeois movement that throws all its 'class solidarity' and sympathy for the poor out the window as soon as they smell a reason to demonize and lecture them. And of course it's reserved for whites, they'd never say this stuff about any PoC who were tricked or conscripted by White Supremacy tm to fight white imperialist wars for white people.

>>18141645
100% It's excessive puritan moralism. Sometimes they'll even go as far to say some nobody fixing air planes is no different than a concentration camp guard, which is just ridiculous.
Not a fan of the U.S army, but it's like come on...

>>18140538
This, and its funny, because Clancy shits on Freud, when it is he who noticed and articulated the same phenomena altready in 1895

>>18139905
to be fair, if i got raped by some important old fart and got told by a psychiatrist that i was "making it all up" i would probably lose my shit too

the entire implanted memory shitstorm was probably just so they could get kids to shut up about being diddled by mayor mccheese and his rich friends

the BBC ran cover for their top pedos for years, so it's already out of the realm of fiction

>>18138918
>papież-soja
haha ale beka mati :DDDDDD wypierdalaj na swój karaczan

There is a high correlation between mood disorders in women and childhood sexual abuse to the point that it's predictive.

This existed before PTSD was even a thing, in the past it was called hysteria.

Also contrary to popular belief trauma is physical, there is either damaged tissue internally (e.g. vagina or cervix), an altered HPA axis or some neurologically correlated phenomena elsewhere.

This thread is a retarded travesty.

>>18142736
>There is a high correlation between mood disorders in women and childhood sexual abuse to the point that it's predictive.
who denies that?

>>18137368
>>18137436
>>18141628
>>18141645
Reminder that the "spitting on Vietnam vets" meme is a pop cultural fabrication

>Lembcke contrasts the absence of credible evidence[citation needed] of spitting by anti-war activists with the large body of evidence[citation needed] showing a mutually supportive, empathetic relationship between veterans and anti-war forces. The book documents the efforts of the Nixon Administration[citation needed] to drive a wedge between military servicemen and the anti-war movement by portraying democratic dissent as betrayal of the troops, effectively redirecting blame for failure in Vietnam onto protesters. Coupled with American society's exaggeration of medical conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)[citation needed] and drug abuse among veterans[citation needed] to the point of broadly vilifying the Vietnam veteran as mentally unfit, emotionally volatile and a "loser" and "victim", the collective memory about Vietnam has been refocused onto the veteran and away from the war. Lembcke equates this disparagement of the anti-war movement and veterans with the similar stab-in-the-back myths propagated by Germany and France after their war defeats, as an alibi for why they lost the war.[1] Lembcke details the resurrection of this myth of the spat-upon veteran by later administrations during subsequent Gulf War efforts as a way of silencing public dissent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spitting_Image

>>18142593
psychiatrists are the ones that invent the memories though

>>18142811
>(((Lembcke)))

hebephilia really really REALLY triggers some people. its the only thing you can discuss here and people regularly wish death, mutilation, torture upon you, even people who are rational in other topics. anyone have any idea why

>>18138519
>Whereas today's society (and, ironically, most variants of feminism) will tell you that sexual abuse cannot but define you completely and irremediably
That's not true at all.

>>18142874
No idea. I think it is something that got deeply hammered into the American psyche as something bad.

>>18142874
Because it's the go-to deflection of child molesters and people are tired of it.
>akshually it's hebephilia, not pedophilia

>>18142874
because hebe and pedophilia is the last possible outlet for people today to vent out their rage without any repercussions while adopting a superior moral stance at the same time.

>>18142816
or so the myth they have perpetuated claims. you can't make memories from nothing. at best you can modify them and change a victim's relationship to them. but why a random psychiatrist would be able to do this more successfully than the individual themself or someone the individual is intimate with, is nonsensical.

>>18142948
>you can't make memories from nothing.
I'm pretty sure that it's been demonstrated that you can in fact make memories from nothing.
>but why a random psychiatrist would be able to do this more successfully than the individual themself or someone the individual is intimate with, is nonsensical.
? it's not anything to do with ability necessarily, it's just that "revealing repressed memories" became trendy among some psychiatrists

>>18142948
>you can't make memories from nothing.
That is not correct.

Can psychologucal trauma exist without thought? Is it post-factum subjective narrative which is responsible for the ensuing neuroses or does actual, physical brain damage occur?

>>18142977
I'd assume that the brain damage or alteration, if it occurs, would be associated with the narrativisation or perception of the thing being bad, which may occur instantly or later as a result of socialisation.

>>18142977
I mean alterations in brain do cause shifts in psychology. But are you asking whether sexual abuse damages brain physically?

>the entire implanted memory shitstorm was probably just so they could get kids to shut up about being diddled by mayor mccheese and his rich friends
yes. specifically, it seems, to refute dissociative identity disorder / multiple personality disorder. no doubt there are some poor practices by psychiatrists too but the notion of false memories overall is conceptually pretty weak, hastily dismissive, and circular.

start here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_March
>On 20 October about 300,000 people (estimates range from 275,000 to 350,000, around 3% of Belgium's population)[1][2] marched through Brussels. Many Belgians who lived outside Brussels came to the city to take part in the march.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuPkoGGm_xQ
https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Belgium:_Dutroux_dossier_summary,_1235_pages,_2005
https://isgp-studies.com/belgian-x-dossiers-of-the-dutroux-affair
ignore the old, schizo-looking website this is very thorough and includes original translations and thumbnails of now-destroyed child pornography. it demonstrates that there was, in Belgium at least, a network of trafficking and loaning (by their families) children for sex, which included handlers that eerily seemed to systematically shape a child into having dissociative identity disorder as a way of managing them and having them continue normal life too (this may only apply to the loaned ones (rather than trafficked) but I assume all would be prepared for the customers in some way). it also demonstrates that this was protected/hidden in a concerted effort by the media, police, gendarmerie, government, and organised crime syndicates. Dutroux being kind of the (though guilty) scapegoat to stop further prying. and that it involved killings and bribes to do this.

The premise of the book is retarded because memories are irrelevant. Children are sensitive because they forming. Even the smallest thing. It's why everyone is mentally ill these days because they had broken families when they were little and didn't develop properly/healthily. Obviously any kind of abuse malforms them. Whether they remember or admit the memory of it. Additionally, the concept of memory implantation is retarded, pseudoscientific, and extremely suspicious. And in that it's still totally irrelevant.

>>18143101
>Obviously any kind of abuse malforms them.
This presupposes that all abusive behaviour is experienced as noxious when it occurs, which the book's point. Physical violence and coercive sex probably fit your description as having neurological impacts even when not remembered, but there are other abusive behaviours that might not.
>Additionally, the concept of memory implantation is retarded, pseudoscientific, and extremely suspicious.
Pseudoscientific implies that it's been scientifically discredited, when as far as I can tell it's an observable and testable phenomenon.
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/BF03196318.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_implantation

>>18137642
>Would Pedophilia be traumatic if it was consensual
Most likely. Kids basically don't have minds yet so their word means little for the end result and means they're very fragile/sensitive psychologically. It'd be pretty hard to find an adult who is normal and not a dangerous creep too to get an experience that isn't immediately damaging.

>If I was a young boy and I was fucked by a hot girl at the age of 10 I think that would change me for the better.
But you're not a young boy, you're a grown man masturbating to shota and loli. You sound like that aforementioned dangerous creep with the way that even in a hypothetical you propose to decide a child's consent for yourself.

It's not uncommon for kids to be sexually aware and interested as soon as they hit puberty (although many are not) but this is as much overexposure to sexual material everywhere (most likely hardcore porn already for boys) as it is natural instinct / sudden change. And it says nothing about whether or not sex with an adult will leave them undamaged or that this is socially a good idea. It's also a bit different when it's two of the same age tentatively experimenting because it's the same pace and a different understanding of sex than an adult.

>>18143101
t. havent read even the description of the book and dismisses it outright because it hurts your fefes

>>18143143
nice armchair theories you have here. When will retards realize you cant just make stuff about certain topics when there exists actual literature with data you can read
>they're very fragile/sensitive psychologically.
no, youre just parroting the predominant ideology, not the real facts. Children are not sensitive, they just dont know what is happening, which results in confusion and not trauma
>It's not uncommon for kids to be sexually aware and interested as soon as they hit puberty (although many are not)
fetuses masturbate already in wombs, its common that the child will be sexually curious before puberty. Again, youre parroting feminist ideology that the porno is what causes "oversexualizing" of the children.

>>18143126
>Pseudoscientific implies that it's been scientifically discredited, when as far as I can tell it's an observable and testable phenomenon.
>https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/BF03196318.pdf
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_implantation
None of this constitutes the ability to implant a memory of sexual abuse that did not occur at all. Which is the intention of all this. It is not memory implantation, it is memory influence which is trivial and self-evident in the mechanics of memory. No one has entirely accurate memory but it doesn't come from nothing. In the example, being lost is a familiar feeling and anyone is familiar with malls. Most likely the people have been lost in a mall before too. It's such a common thing that they won't even remember it in the sense of calling up a specific instance. This is very different to total implantation of something never experienced in any way. I see no example of actual implantation, only making new instances of preexisting memories or influencing preexisting memories.

BOARD MEMBERS OF THE FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME FOUNDATION WERE PEDOS
THE FOUNDERS OF THE FOUNDATION ABUSED THEIR DAUGHTER AND WERE SHUT OFF FROM THE REST OF THEIR FAMILY, CREATING THE FOUNDATION IN RETALIATION SO THEY CAN PUT EXPERTS IN WITNESS BOXES AND SAY THAT THE KIDS ARE JUST REMEMBERING THINGS THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN

>>18143204
>None of this constitutes the ability to implant a memory of sexual abuse that did not occur at all.
They literally describe "complete memory fabrication" in the shit I linked. There is even a case of someone being implanted with a memory of themselves as a perpetrator of abuse.

>>18143192
Kill yourself

>>18143217
Oh, I guess its you who is sensitive psychologically and project your affects unto the others lol

>>18143220
Nah I can just spot a sicko when I see one
Thats why I go tranny bashing on Thursday nights

>>18143225
you sound fragile and resentful. Focus on yourself my man, its more productive.

>>18143192
>Again, youre parroting feminist ideology that the porno is what causes "oversexualizing" of the children.
children are bombarded by sexual material from birth. this is different in an environment without this. stop seeking out shitty material to morally justify yourself and escape the self-evident. accept yourself.

>which results in confusion and not trauma
so the books claims from nothing. trauma results from emotional and sensory stress. confusion can be involved.

https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/0465022111?filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar

>>18143238
>children are bombarded by sexual material from birth
true, but what is also true is that there is shitload of data about child sexuality even before the onset of itnernet and the spread of pornography, e.g. The Sexual Life Of CHILDREN by Floyd M. Martinson (the book is written in 90's but the data is from earlier times)
>so the books claims from nothing. trauma results from emotional and sensory stress. confusion can be involved.
I dont have access to the article, but the abstract of it says
>Only 7% of the group described the abuse as traumatic at the time it occurred
now, either the APA editors are blind idiots, or the random commentator from the amazon is lying.

What about geotrauma?

>>18142657
wypierdalam twoją matke :)

>>18142977
You can get "flashbacks" of worse times, imagine yourself just waking up from a nightmare.

As far as i understand trauma is "cue,
craving, response, and reward".
The cue can be that something goes wrong, someone says a word that you immediately recognize, someone has a certain way of speaking, visually similar, gunshots etc.

The cue immediately makes you physically tense and makes it hard to breathe, completely takes you out of what you're doing, and the only craving you have is to avoid this feeling.
Which isn't something you can "do" anything about, resulting in a response that always makes the feeling worse, and you get no reward, instead you're punished.

The usual result of this is that you now also associate what you were doing with how you just felt, so if you were doing something fun and enjoyable you're not more likely to repeat this incident.
This could be your only hobby, when you go to sleep or any other situation.

It's very difficult to handle when you have a very real physical reaction to your intrusive thoughts.

The solution is "simple" though it's just to avoid thinking about it, and get a sense of control through other means.
Getting a "routine" going, actions you don't think about but just do is what makes you able to relax.

You hear it all the time "it's better if i have something to do" when something bad has happened, and it ties into why war veterans usually only go crazy when they come back home and have time to think and nothing to do.

Groomers and pedos love this book because it gives them ammo to fuck kids

There is no "togetherness" about fucking children.
It will always be exploitation.

>>18143679
what do you think about the ancient greece and the fact that the age of consent was 7-12 trough the history?

>>18143679
Stop sperging out. Why do people get so angry about this topic? There is a lot of nuance.

>>18136748
Pedos like it because it puts the "alarm status" of the exploitation done unto them a lot lower on their radar.
It also normalizes the behavior when it is not deemed as bad or wrong.
Something like one third of abused go on to be abuses themselves. Much higher than the norm whom haven't been abused.
So if there is no inherent feeling of wrongness, I see that number only rising.

What OP posits is not wrong, but he's not doing it for the sake of kids and their trauma. He's doing it to normalize pedophilia. He is an admitted pedophile and he constantly comes in here trying to mind fuck you into accepting this because like all pedophiles, he's a groomer.

Again
There is no togetherness about sex between and child and adult. It is only exploitation.
While we do not need to install fear in the child, we should be culturally firm that exploiting young literal children for the desires of older men is something we won't tolerate. Full stop.

>>18138039
The issue is that these "fake traumas" all look and quack like ducks
They are, by all measures, authentic and real, as the person is genuinely experiencing them and suffering just the same, even if it is self inflicted or for some objective means. It loses its "for show" and embeds itself as a legitimate reoccurring experience

>>18143719
You thinking is narrow. You just want to keep everything as it is, when it is bad for the children. You seem to be uncapable of thinking outside "either full blown pedo apologia or pedo hysteria that damages the victims" box.

>>18143685
I think we don't live in ancient Greece. The context and surrounding processes were significantly different.
Main one being they had significantly more social cohesion.
I'm not going to get into a discussion about ancient Greece because I'm sure you have a full canister of pedo munitions fueled by the terabytes of child porn on your computer youd love to make a reality through social normalization

It won't happen because of people like me. I can smell groomers light years away and your posts wreak of manipulator.
You don't make these threads for kids. Well, you do, but for your own gain.
If you didn't have wads of spunk behind this conversation, it'd be a different story.

My sincere input on the matter is that this is a moral discussion that should be left entirely in the hands of women as they cannot have a desire bias riding on the topic.
If you convinced women en masse to let you fuck kids then id concede.

>>18143759
holy fuck you're dumb, I'm not even touching this post

>>18143746
>You thinking is narrow.
You keep saying shit like this.
Last time you posted this you tried to assault my "manhood", saying that I was intellectually weak or something equally prodding. Par for the course for a groomer

I'm just going to state again that this guy cares less about child trauma and more about his own fun time.
I can tell by every post you make how much you enjoy the idea of essentially programming others towards your own favor.
Such is life.
I'll level with you. The child will be taken care of and not treated with reactionary trauma, and you will get a silent bullet behind closed doors

>>18143768
Next, try not touching little kids

>>18143775
meds. now.

>>18143783
Seems like you're the one getting touched now

>>18143790
if you are so scared about people reading le ebil trauma myth book then why are you even bumping this thread you schizo?

>>18143805
I'm not "scared"
This is yet another way to lure me into an arena that, Again, you have major desire and incentive to normalize.
It's challenging me by making me appear or feel weak so I "prove" myself.
I remember flirting with girls like this when I was 10.
You display your groomer tendencies every single post.

Stop trying to make pedophilia happen and go jack off to something else.
Anything can be normalized weeooo wow welcome to thousands and thousands years old Indian philosophy.
My response is, no. Im not normalizing pedophilia. You will suffer the response.

>>18143831
what the fuck lmao

>>18143845
Last time you said "be a man" towards having this conversation
I'm aware of the debate there's thousands of you frothing at the mouth to convince culture to accept your behavior.
All you do is lure people into questioning and being open to it so you can plant seeds of normalization.
You aren't doing this for kids mental health. That's the ruse you prop up for your own deviancy

>>18143857
so, if "we" are did this not for out own sake, but for the health of the children you would be ok with that?

>>18143878
You aren't, so it's a moot discussion. This is just another weasel tactic. If you have ever once thought about engaging in sexual acts with children, your bias is too self involved to have a genuine conversation, and you've already admitted to doing more than that.
Like I said, this topic is entirely on women to decide. Your argument lay with them.

>>18143895
so you accept what Clancy says? she is a woman after all. Would you support her thought that we should minimize the hysteria around abuse?

>>18143904
I think people should have very strong negative reactions to child abuse and child abusers.

>>18143209
Considering they were discounting things the kids said like "Satan was there" and "but since she's magic she reattached my leg after she sawed it off" or "I grew a new head after they ate it ritualistically" or "5000 people could easily party in my 20sqft basement", I'm thinking some modicum of doubt applied would behoove an adult.
>>18143204
There's a book called Making Monsters which details the satanic panic and its decline. You can very easily convince a lot of people they are victims of abuse, and if you're a psychiatric professional, if you cannot convince your client of a false memory, you can claim that their lack of memory is a symptom which makes them a risk to others.
People are very credulous and depend more on social motivation than rational review for their worldview. Nobody going into Scientology believes L Ron is an alien spirit reincarnation of the Buddha, but a couple years and couple hundred thousand in, it's pretty common.
False accusations aren't limited to people making them for themselves. There's a horrific season 2 with language boards for kids with autism to communicate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j0TAaDWrxU
One thing that unifies the two is the impression of the therapist, that regardless of discipline, they are most helpful, in their view, if the person they are "helping" is abused.

>>18143911
me too

>>18143687
Literally no nuance to fucking 7 year olds, it's always wrong.

>>18143932
you have to hardline all of this stuff with them because they will find any crack and just let it all ooze in
they will turn your "openness" into ambiguity into confusion into normalization, and all while feigning virtuosity "it's best for the kids".
it's thinly veiled selfish intent

>>18144040
>>18143932
You guys are bizarre. Arguing for something does not mean wanting to practice it. Who is even talking about fucking 7 year olds? You are like emotional monkeys. What are you even doing on /lit/ if you can not entertain controversial thought.

>>18144073
its probably some middle aged woman who cant seethe at their local customer service because of the quarantine so has to come on the internet to vent out at imaginary evildoers

>>18136458
>60 years later, woman still misses her mum
god damn it ;_;

>>18143746
>Just let me fuck your kids, bro. Why you being so stingy.
When this piece of shit country collapses, I hope someone disembowels you and leaves you mewling in a pile of your own detritus. It's the best you deserve.

>>18144073
>Arguing for something does not mean wanting to practice it
Sure, but that's not what's happening here
This person has already admitted to having sexual relations with YOUNG boys, and comes in here constantly trying to normalize this shit

But go ahead, let him "intellectually challenge" you

>>18144073
Die in a house fire.

>>18144088
you reading comprehension is below retard level, kys

>>18144099
>This person has already admitted to having sexual relations with YOUNG boys
who?

>>18144073
>>18144085
Didn't say you wanted to fuck kids retard, just said it was wrong. Also, I was referencing this comment >>18143685 which talked about an age of concent from 7-12 years of age. I get that your emotionally defensive about this topic but there's no reason to say that I'm some middle aged woman or whatever lol.

>>18144102
My reading comprehension is fine. Are you on the sex offender registry? Militias are probably going to be using it as a targeting list.

>>18144110
>>18144099

I made three posts ITT
>>18144073
>>18143687
>>18136458
I have no idea where the debate is at right now and I do not care. The only thing I see is someone sperging out. With this topic, some people really seem to easily get triggered and are unable to maintain distance in a discussion. They turn into shit-flinging monkeys like this dude
>>18144100

That is actually also what annoyed me about the New Yorker article. Loftus maintained an interesting position and they were constantly trying to insinuate she was doing this because of trauma. That she is unable to think clearly, otherwise she would never come to these conclusions. Really unpleasant arguing technique.

>>18144102
>uncapable
Okay, Captain Dunning-Kruger.

I dont even know what the fuck is happening anymore, we had a decent conversation with arguments and sources until some sensitive schizo moralfag came and started accusing everyone of being a blown out sex offender. Could you please fuck off to twitter or reddit? Present good arguments, sources etc. and stop strawmanning.

>>18144153
>With this topic, some people really seem to easily get triggered and are unable to maintain distance in a discussion
I have no problems having this discussion with people who aren't trying to fuck kids.
Learn the difference.

Do you think heroin dealers will give you a legitimate intellectual discussion on reducing the hysteria centered around hard drug sales?
They have incentive.
Just as OP, who, again, has admitted to engaging in sexual acts with young boys, has incentive to normalize these ideas.
The reason they're interested in reducing alarm responses is so its less "on the radar", and it becomes less "bad". Slowly but surely I watch him inch the conversation more towards normalizing pedophilia.

The guy making these posts is not having "good faith intellectual arguments". He's agitating the discourse to plant seeds of normalization for his own kiddie fuck fantasies.

>>18144181
Nah. We're good here pedophile. Ply your goods down the road.

>>18144153
>they were constantly trying to insinuate she was doing this because of trauma. That she is unable to think clearly, otherwise she would never come to these conclusions. Really unpleasant arguing technique.
It's not just unpleasant arguing technique. It also shows their need to dominate the narrative of victims: it paints the abused as incapable of forming their own thoughts, as being duplicitous, as illogical, because of a narcissistic saviour complex. They're a different type of abuser, and shouldn't be left near the vulnerable.

>>18144189
Yahtzee.

>>18136173
I believe in the idea that the mind can be emotionally damaged. Extreme stress, especially during critical development periods in childhood, can trigger drastic changes to how the brain develops and the functioning of its circuits. It warps the fight or flight response, kindles poor coping mechanism and makes it easier for meltdowns to occur when stressful events happen in the future.

However I disagree with how trauma is normally dealt with especially in a psychiatric or therapeutic session. It is counterproductive to dwell on past trauma, because all that does is activate and reinforce the connections of the associated maladaptive circuits. The best way to deal with it is not to ruminate but to strengthen new connectivity patterns which overwrite the warped self-image that trauma and abuse causes. This is not easy, especially for early trauma, because the earlier something happens the more fixed the underlying structure. But ruminating simply asserts those flawed patterns.

>>18144189
k

>>18144192
>Yeah, I buttfucked a five year old, but you're the real abuser for defending him.

>>18144215
Extreme stress in early development for example is thought to be an epigenetic trigger for bipolar disorder and other mental illnesses. In other words someone who did not experience heightened levels of childhood stress would otherwise not exhibit their latent susceptibility toward these disorders.

>>18144230
what do you think about victims themselves admitting that they enjoyed the sex with the adult as a child, or didnt view it negatively?

>>18144230
The presence of one abuser does not preclude you from being a second abuser. I'm glad you realise this and hope you stay the fuck away from kids, prisoners, patients, or anyone vulnerable, as you will violate the duty of care due them to pretend to yourself you are a superhero.

>>18144181
The more you rationalize it, the more you normalize it.
I will say this every time this thread gets posted.
The person posting this has already admitted to their own personal desire and ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT with pedophilia.
They are not speaking about this without skin in this game.
If you guys want to open up this discussion, then so too is the position I'm speaking on just as meritorious, because you need to be completely cognizant that these guys aren't doing this "for the kids". They're doing it because if the kid is alright with it, there's a higher chance they'll satiate their desires.
There is less of a negative social response, or the response is not as high on the ladder.

If you cannot accept this as a legitimate part of the conversation you're an utter fool.
This isn't a conversation to swing around. These guys spend incredible amounts of time allocating hoards of child porn, and aid the child trafficking network through their desires. They are pure groomers, and that absolutely transfers to these types of "debates" you enjoy entertaining. They are completely aware of when they are "gaining ground" with their target, because they're constantly attempting it with children.
Once you open yourself up to these discussions WITH THESE GUYS, you open up the ideas in yourself and THEY become the ones planting ideas from specific angles, ones that are pipelines that fuel their own interests

If you want to have these discussions with your intellectual sphere that have no desire to fuck children, that's a completely different ballgame.
Groomers groom. That's what they do. That's what these conversations are for them, because they're grooming you. While you may be having good faith arguments, they aren't. They're questing for normalization, and you're part of enabling that.

This is an active side of the conversation, and if you can't take that, then you are also failing to have a "good faith argument"

>>18144266
>The person posting this has already admitted to their own personal desire and ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT with pedophilia
They haven't though. You've just called them a pedo a lot. There's a difference.

>>18144266
You keep repeating the same thing over and over, are you literally brain damaged or what? We heard you, okay, someone is trying to legitimize their pedophilia, we get it. Jesus fucking christ. You're not in twitter. Lets say I'm pedo and fucked 1000 children. Who cares?

>>18144248
>Just let kids make their own decisions.
No. Children are incapable of making their own decisions. That is why parents have legal authority over them. They are not developed or wise enough to make good long term choices. You take advantage of this weakness and naiveté for your own ends, which is one of the most grave crimes I can think of. I'm glad those children aren't all fucked up over it, but you should be beheaded on live TV, ala Islam.

>>18144288
>not over 9000
Oprah ain't got time for that pissant shit

>>18144261
>Please stay away from all of my potential victims, so I can do fucked up shit to them.
No.

>>18144291
>People stay kids for ever if they're abused
If you're going to argue against pedophilia, you might not want to portray it as the fountain of youth.

>>18144304
>Just let me fuck kids bro. They will grow up later. It's cool.
Jewish hands typed this.

>>18144299
You do realise that people are telling you your treatment of victims is abusive and to stay away from them because they are concerned for the victim and not your abusive impulse to commandeer their narrative for your own ends? What kind of sick fuck are you that you want to dominate people who are de facto vulnerable? That's like people who chose to abuse kids because of their greater physical vulnerability, except you're choosing your victims because of their greater physical *and* social vulnerability.

>>18144328
lol and I'm thinking to myself, whats with the sudden paranoia in the thead. go back to /pol/, rats.

>>18144291
>ala Islam.
the civilisation that marry 9 year old and practice pederasty ?

>>18144328
Are you really trying this when the risk to children from ultra orthodox Jewish isolation is a major discussion point in safeguarding children against abuse? Are the kids that are abused within that community exiled as Jews in your opinion? What kind of retarded idiot troll are you?

>>18144338
Yet, you didn't deny it. Post nose.

>>18144331
>Destroying things that harm children is harming the children
It's really not. It's only harming you.

>>18144248
>what do you think about victims themselves admitting that they enjoyed the sex with the adult as a child, or didnt view it negatively?
Stimulating experiences coupled with the feelings of "nurture" can result in "enjoyment"

People get validated for behavior on the internet all the time. Should we socially accept it?
Why do they enjoy it in the first place? Positive stimuli. What are the end results?

Sex is an extremely stimulating experience. One that can easily hijack the brain. Many people who were molested or had early sexual experiences go on to be, essentially, "addicted" to this early stimuli.

And this is the crux of what pedos and groomers as a whole want to do. They want to normalize processes, actions, behaviors early on for their own desires.

So if they're imposing themselves on children like this, the rest of you need to ask, do you intend to impose yourself in any way on this exchange.

My position on all of this is that kids ought to naturally engage in these things in their own environments, free from cultural conditioning, media stimuli, etc.
If sexuality were to arise in them as children, they can explore it together.
An adult figuring out how to fuck a kid and leave him feeling positive about it is still personal exploitation. There is no togetherness because the kid has not come to explore their own identity, and these events come to largely shape it for them.
The groomer then becomes embedded within them psychologically, potentially for life.
Positive or negative, doesn't matter. This person has now left their mark and they are, essentially, bonded for life.
The child is not yet a person, and essentially has no real say in the matter. The child, at this point, with no identity, is simply riding off biology and sensory impulse that it's completely unaware of, but the groomer is completely cognizant.
Kids have "positive" responses to flashy, fast, absurd, sporadic cartoons. They also have ADD.

>>18144357
>please fall for my kafkatrap
how's double digit iq doing for you?

>>18144277
>They haven't though. You've just called them a pedo a lot. There's a difference.
He has made this thread numerous times. Feel free to check archives.

>>18144381
>He
how do you know its one person, when its an anonymous board?
>>18144373
armchair psychology that has nothing to do with reality

>>18144376
Pretty good. I make good money and have a lot of kids, so I thought I would fuck up a pedo thread while my sql query is running. How's the pedophilia treating you?

Some kids who are abused or neglected try to seek attention by acting in socially abhorrent ways. They perceive other victims as potential rivals for resources, from the abuser or society, and will do anything to keep the focus on themselves and to cast their needs as prosocial. I think we should keep that in mind for the troll. Rape victims will trigger him because they are likely to take the focus off his hot takes.

>>18140256
children aren't designed to have sex, wtf are you retards talking about? pedophilia is highly traumatic for the victims.

>>18144393
>How's the pedophilia treating you?
good, just molested a kid of some guy who is a computer geek

>>18144304
>If you're going to argue against pedophilia, you might not want to portray it as the fountain of youth.
yeah dude stunting people into age regression. totally a fountain of youth.
i've seen a number of molested girls that have this problem and they're all not having a good time

>>18144369
You may think victims of abuse are not judging you and putting you in the same pile as other abusers, but they are. Since, you know, they can think independently of you and that scares your abusive ass to death.

Pretty sure age of consent used to be young but it was mostly young people marrying other young people (though large age differentials did exist at times). Pederasty and other things mostly happened to teenagers (13 and up) and while that's still fucked up and degenerate (older men touching dudes < 16) it's not as bad as the pedos here want you to believe so that they can justify other stuff.

>>18144397
>children aren't designed to have sex
wrong, age of consent was 7-12 trough the history, because 11-12 y/o was the time of puberty. It was aligned with the natures need to procreate.

>>18144407
Great. Looks like you aren't using a VPN. Kinda weird with the amount of pedo shit you're talking.

>>18144393
You’re definitely seething though and accidentally got baited into thinking about this for the next few hours

>>18144391
>how do you know its one person, when its an anonymous board?
Because hes already outed himself and he makes this thread constantly
You all take the bait every time thinking you're engaging in some high tier intellectualism when it's really just some kiddie fucker getting you to normalize these ideas.
Groomers should really unveil what "debate" truly is to you. Everyone with any brains is just arguing their own position. You can rationalize and be contrarian against literally anything. It's based on values and normalization, and anything can be normalized.

>>18144408
So are you saying that people who don't become immature were not abused? How do you explain the people who are not "stunted" as you put it? Are they lying about abuse, or lying about their life not being a train wreck? Or do you just not get to know them, preferring to target those with maturity issues?

>>18144411
>The kid I fucked thinks you're a dick.
Mkay.

>>18144440
>and anything can be normalized.
glad we agree on some things

>>18144444
How abusive on a scale of one to ten would you rate calling a victim of abuse the perpetrator instead? Because I'm thinking you're a ten.

>>18144419
It was not seven retard, holy shit, it was variable and based on whether you were judged to have gone through puberty (which usually starts at 11-13 for women). Most women would have children at 15 or 16 though, which is when they are actually developed. Christ, I really hope you don't think seven year old girls are made for you to have sex with.

>>18144435
or you know, the shadowpeople in your head that you project might not be what is actually real

>>18143687
Lol. No there is fucking not.

>>18144441
>So are you saying that people who don't become immature were not abused? How do you explain the people who are not "stunted" as you put it?
>whataboutism
And yet people still get stuck in these early cycles of high stimuli because this is when character is being developed. High dopamine rushes become drugs that the brain expects is "normal" and thus seeks out activities that will supply that level of stimuli. I've read and witnessed plenty accounts of people who were sexualized early become porn and sex addicts, diving deeper into riskier behavior. This is no longer exploration to them but satiating a drug fix.
As I said, over 30% of abused go on the be abusers themselves.

>You all take the bait every time thinking you're engaging in some high tier intellectualism when it's really just some kiddie fucker getting you to normalize these ideas.
Case in point you midwits
>>18144447

>>18144477
So you're saying you disregarded all the people who were victims but did not fit your narrative of them being depraved?

>>18144459
yes, mostly it was 11-13, but the girl could be married off at the earlier age (ancient romans even wanted to lower the age of marriage, because they thought 7 was too high at one point). So 7 was rare, but it existed.

>>18144419
These people were also marrying and procreating for life. This is not the same as old men and male children.
They weren't jacking off to child porn either

>>18144436
Not really. My kids are aware of pedophiles and how they operate. They go to a private school and we are actually present in their lives. So, the probability of one of you retards getting ahold of them is about zero. You look for kids whose parents aren't around, generally.

>this kills the moralfag

>>18144522
>These people were also marrying and procreating for life. This is not the same as old men and male children.
Not that anon but age-disparate homosexuality is the most common type of homosexuality you come across in most historical societies. Though for instance in Greece typically wasn't old men and children but young men in their 20s and teenagers.

>>18144457
>But I was abused too. Feel bad for me.
No. You passed it on. Fuck you.

>>18144522
>They weren't jacking off to child porn either
I wonder why lol
>These people were also marrying and procreating for life.
sounds based, I'm in

>>18144497
I'm pretty sure you're conflating the age of marriage and the age of consent which is what we're talking about here. Age of consent was always something like 12 and up. Marriage, on the other hand, could be accepted as legitimate even between two one year-olds in some places if the families agreed. The Romans didn't want to lower the age of consent to bang 7 year olds.

>>18144471
Nice non-sequitur. Do you have any other actual points than "let me fuck your kid".

>>18144539
Your need to lie about me is another reason you're abusive.

>>18144524
>Some people a long time ago fucked kids. Let me fuck kids, bro.

>>18144524
What the fuck is with the appeal to traditionalism? Traditionally humans have done all kinds of dumb shit, if your only reason to continue that behaviour is simply because "that's how we used to do it" you should unironically kill yourself.

>>18144547
yeah, you're a reactive retard and should kys

>>18144555
>>18144557
I'm just saying the narrative, that sex with 11~ year old is automatically traumatic is dumb, or else we should hold that the majority of women were traumatized in history

>>18144494
I'm saying this happens and it's more the common than the
>whataboutism
you want to engage in.
When a childs brain gets associated with a drug rush centered around X, then they favor seeking out X to satiate. This largely comes to shape their identity.
So you can ask yourself if you want to create a society where children are extremely high in sex drive. That their reward systems are highjacked and they find less or little validation from life elsewhere but satiating this vice.
There's children 8 years of age now being treated for porn addictions.

Anyway, congratulations, you've discovered you can be contrarian about anything. See the "aCkSHuaLLy" pic above.
At the end of the day what is happening on either side of this discussion is imposition about what we should socially engage in and/or tolerate. That's it.
There is no ultimate right or wrong answer to this. You guys can side with enabling pedophiles all you want if it strokes your intellect

>>18144547
>>18144539
>>18144477
>the anti-pedo guy thinks the victims are the problem as much as the pedos
Anyone else think this guy has pictures of his kids on his phone that the feds should be concerned about?

>>18144546
>Usually if a girl was betrothed before she had her first menses, the couple were to wait for this before consummating the marriage which can be regarded as the age of consent. But such a delay was not necessarily enforceable and was not always observed . It was only late in the Empire that it became law that children must be able to understand what they were consenting to if they married, and this came to be accepted as occurring by age seven

>>18144579
>I'm just saying the narrative, that sex with 11~ year old is automatically traumatic is dumb
No you didn't, you specifically posted something that appeals to traditionalism, which is retarded. Nice moving the goalposts.

>>18144579
Motherfucker, have you ever read ANYTHING about ancient history. The whole thing is one big trauma response.

>>18144535
>Not that anon but age-disparate homosexuality is the most common type of homosexuality you come across in most historical societies
That's not the same argument as "the age of consent was 7-12"
These were ages that men would marry their daughters off to other men so they would begin their own families.
Yes age gaps have always been large in the gay community, but that's not the same discussion.

From what I've seen/read/heard in my social circles, it is, but I'm willing to change my perception around it.

>>18144584
No, you're telling me those are the victims you like to get to know, and then try to tell me they are more common. I think you like to get to know those types of victims because it helps the narrative you have about victims. You dismiss other victims as whataboutism or so rare as to effectively not exist, because the only victims that count for you are the depraved ones. The rest of the victims you want to handwave.

>>18144605
I posted without claiming anything lmao, you project whateber you want into it. Calm down, sweaty. current morals on AOC are 200 year old~, whereas in whole history of mankind it was very different. Just be a bit humble and less emotional.

>>18144595
I don't think "victims are the problem". The cycle expands upon that problem and causes the (1 in 3) abused to repeat the same behavior that they experienced. Exploiting kids.

>this kills the moralfag

>>18144632
It's not even 200 years. Victorian England still held aoc at 13, and that means it was law for most of the world under their empire.

>>18144595
>No u guys are the pedos
Mkay, bro.

>>18144651
well yeah, it started to change only at the end of XIX century. My bad.

>>18144615
I'm talking about things like institutionalised pederasty in Greece though, where custom and law dictated the way relationships worked.

It's possible in principle for a non-traumatic sexual experience to occur between a child and adult. However the odds of that occurring seem very low, given the kinds of people who would be seeking out such an encounter. If the culture shifted where more well-adjusted people were in the distribution, then maybe that would change the odds, though it still doesn't seem worth it.

If a child gets raped or abused, it's probably best practice to treat them like they're normal and not permanently ruined. In that sense the narrative is important, and victimhood mindset counterproductive. Catastrophizing and essentializing from potentially traumatic experiences is not the optimal strategy for development.

>>18144644
You don't seem to have anything nice to say about victims and think they are abusive and drug addicts and that kids who know how pedos operate are safe from them and think all victims who don't turn out that way are liars. Def think you have pictures on your phone which any sane person would want you locked up for. You're into wump.

>>18144631
>No, you're telling me those are the victims you like to get to know, and then try to tell me they are more common. I think you like to get to know those types of victims because it helps the narrative you have about victims
I don't "like to get to know" these victims
They are people I've come across and stories I've found.
Yes I've read accounts on others who haven't had adverse reactions. The data on percentages is never going to reflect reality because so much of it goes unreported, different communities approach it differently, etc.

What's your point, exactly?
That it's okay because some of them report "enjoying it"
Some women report "enjoying" (non-consensual) rape too. Should we normalize that?

>>18144416
There was a trend towards an age gap but it wasn't usually something like a 30 year old dude going after a 13 year old girl for example.

>Though Gratian, the influential founder of Canon law in the twelfth century, accepted the traditional age of puberty (12 for girls and 14 for boys) for marriage, he also said consent was meaningful if the children were older than seven.
>When Magnus Hirschfeld surveyed the age of consent of some 50 countries at the beginning of the twentieth century, he found it to be 12 in fifteen countries (including Scotland), 13 in seven, 14 in five, 15 in four, and 16 in five. In the remaining countries it remained unclear (Hirschfeld, 2000). The Vatican was one of those with age 12, an age it still maintains, which means that technically most of the priests in the U.S. being accused of having sex with pubescent youth, were not doing anything illegal by Vatican standards except for violating their vows of clerical celibacy.
this kills the moralfag

>>18144650
Yeah man, Foucault. A literal outed child fucker
Dang. Really blew everyone out of the water

>>18144681
>it wasn't usually something like a 30 year old dude going after a 13 year old girl for example.
Not that I'm saying this is a good thing kek but in ancient Greece this was the usual case, since men didn't tend to get married until they were 30, while their brides tended to be 13 and 14.

>>18144691
Shocker.

>>18144680
You get to know the ones that are fucked up and only read accounts of the ones that don't. You like your victims to be fucked up, and those are the ones you get involved with, not the ones you relegate to reading accounts. That is why you handwave the others as not existing and try to promote the narrative that victims are the way you like them to be (which is depraved and stunted). That's you seeking a type of victim, not actually victims as a whole.

People really think we just became reasonable suddenly in the western world about the sex with teenagers and the current trauma hysteria doesnt serve overblown feminist interests lol

>>18142895
From what I've seen/read/heard in my social circles, it is, but I'm willing to change my perception around it.

>>18144678
>You don't seem to have anything nice to say about victims and think they are abusive and drug addicts
I don't have anything bad to say about victims.
I don't think a drug addict is a bad person. I'm saying that many accounts show people who spiral into addictions. I don't think they're "bad people" for these issues. I think they were exploited and abused
>and think all victims who don't turn out that way are liars
I never said nor implied any of this.
Your argument is basically "but some of them are fine"
And you're saying I'm not concerned with the victims

This is seriously the most retarded reddit tier conversation

>>18144708
>You get to know the ones that are fucked up and only read accounts of the ones that don't. You like your victims to be fucked up, and those are the ones you get involved with,
I'm asexual. Try again armchair projectionist. I have zero interest in controlling or preying on people.

>>18144691
>In 1977, along with Jean-Paul Sartre, Jacques Derrida, and other intellectuals, Foucault signed a petition to the French parliament calling for the decriminalization of all "consensual" sexual relations between adults and minors below the age of fifteen, the age of consent in France.
WTF? How did I miss this...

>>18144732
>I'm asexual.
Unironically pedos say this all the time to cover their arses

>>18144734
Postmodernists are tradfags? Wtf I love french intellectuals now

>>18144734
Yeah keep pulling that thread and see what else you find.

>>18144485
Calm down, you are being emotional.

>>18144715
>I don't have anything bad to say about victims.
>I don't think a drug addict is a bad person
Did you skim over the part where you accused a third of them of being abusers. And the part where you told a victim of abuse ITT that you didn't care about their opinion because they
>>18144539
>passed it on. Fuck you.
That alleged victim is accusing you of lying about them being an abuser. You like your victims to be depraved and stunted and call victims who don't agree not just depraved and stunted but abusers.
Are you going to tell me now that calling them an abuser didn't imply they were a "bad person" either? Stop being intellectually dishonest and admit you have a problem which is hurting people who don't need more shit.

>>18144734
>Americans learning about moral standards different from his own
Tale as old as time. Hint: Age of consent is 14 in most European countries.

>>18144732
I didn't mention sexual pleasure from getting to know those types of victims. I just said that you only like to get to know the ones that are fucked up, since you told me those were the ones you knew and that you didn't get to know the ones that turned out normal.

>>18144771
>Did you skim over the part where you accused a third of them of being abusers
It's not an "accusation"
Those are the stats we have, you can look them up
Once they make that choice, they become exploiters and abusers themselves.
Its like blaming all your problems on your parents and your environment. At some point, you are the one that's accountable for your actions.
That person needs intervention. I don't agree with enabling the continued exploitation of children

Also

>>18144715 (You)
>I don't have anything bad to say about victims.
>I don't think a drug addict is a bad person
Did you skim over the part where you accused a third of them of being abusers. And the part where you told a victim of abuse ITT that you didn't care about their opinion because they
>>18144539
>passed it on. Fuck you.
That alleged victim is accusing you of lying about them being an abuser.

You're responding to two different people. At this point it just sounds like you're projecting your own interests

>>18144810
>Once they make that choice, they become exploiters and abusers themselves.
>Its like blaming all your problems on your parents and your environment. At some point, you are the one that's accountable for your actions.
kek, anon, isn't that kinda fucked? if 1/3 of people who experience some brain-changing experience end up performing a certain behaviour, I think the idea of free will is pretty compromised in that situation.

>>18144787
>I just said that you only like to get to know the ones that are fucked up, since you told me those were the ones you knew and that you didn't get to know the ones that turned out normal.
The fuck are you even talking about
I haven't come into personal contact with anyone whose outright told me "yeah I enjoyed my molestation" in my own personal anecdotes.
I've read stories on both sides

>>18144816
>kek, anon, isn't that kinda fucked? if 1/3 of people who experience some brain-changing experience end up performing a certain behaviour, I think the idea of free will is pretty compromised in that situation.
Free will exists in the cognizance of your pattern behavior and your awareness of both other paths and how to condition yourself towards them
What we have is more like freedom of choice

>>18144810
You responded to the quote chain I highlighted. Here >>18144595 and you seem to have no issue with the victim getting accused of abuse, just with it not being attributed to another anon. Let's pretend it's not (You): is the anon accusing victim anon of being an abuser being
A) abusive without cause; or
B) just listening to the stats?

I just wanted to talk about the book, what the fuck happened

>>18144829

>>18144547
>>18144539
>>18144477 (You)
>the anti-pedo guy thinks the victims are the problem as much as the pedos
Anyone else think this guy has pictures of his kids on his phone that the feds should be concerned about?

My (You) was
>And yet people still get stuck in these early cycles of high stimuli because this is when character is being developed. High dopamine rushes become drugs that the brain expects is "normal" and thus seeks out activities that will supply that level of stimuli. I've read and witnessed plenty accounts of people who were sexualized early become porn and sex addicts, diving deeper into riskier behavior. This is no longer exploration to them but satiating a drug fix.
>As I said, over 30% of abused go on the be abusers themselves.

I listed stats
Where am I victim blaming

>>18144821
I'm talking about how I didn't bring up sexual pleasure from getting to know them so you bringing up being asexual and projection were probably thoughts you had first, and didn't originate with me.
I'm also pointing out your interest in this focuses largely on depraved victims and that you tend to handwave the victims who don't fit your depraved narrative because you personally got to know the type of victim you prefer the narrative revolve around. Which is the same conversation we've been having for a while, except for the bit where you brought up projection and your personal sexuality.

Triggered /pol/tards who went too deep into the global pedo conspiracy rabbit hole. They always show up out of nowhere. Can't discuss anything because they tend to chimp out.

>>18136810
>The Greeks practiced pederasty, if this caused trauma then why are there 0 sources describing a crisis of eromenoi showing signs of abuse like self-harm or suicidal tendencies?

most of them were teens (around 15 and older) and were consensual (the older man had to ask his parents were ok with it)

>>18144856
>and projection were probably thoughts you had first,
K

>I'm also pointing out your interest in this focuses largely on depraved victims
Because they're the abused who go on to lead troubled lives? Like why the fuck would I not focus on this when the topic at hand is concern around the abused
This is an active part of the discussion, is it not? Both the troubled and non-trouble exist, thats been established.
The narrative revolving around them is because they're the ones struggling. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend. How do you even come to the correlation that I have some desire for this?
I'm concerned for these people, and the response to these issues is largely pedophiles saying
>just normalize it bro

>>18144775
Lol, shut the fuck up you retarded nonce. Age of consent doesn't equal average age of consent (nor avg. age of marriage) and it says nothing about the average age differential between partners (for example, IIRC, age of consent in Shakespeare's time was low but most people married around 20 years old; Shakespeare himself married a 26 year old Anne Hathaway when he was 18.); both of those thing are the main objectionable points to pedophilia along with the development argument. Personally I think 16 is the best age of consent but even 14 is a world of difference from fucking 7 years old (like some other literal pedo is talking about in this thread) and N O N E A T A L L like the postmodern leftist philolsophers wanted.

>>18144852
Your (you) post in it's entirety>>18144477
>>So are you saying that people who don't become immature were not abused? How do you explain the people who are not "stunted" as you put it?
>>whataboutism
>And yet people still get stuck in these early cycles of high stimuli because this is when character is being developed. High dopamine rushes become drugs that the brain expects is "normal" and thus seeks out activities that will supply that level of stimuli. I've read and witnessed plenty accounts of people who were sexualized early become porn and sex addicts, diving deeper into riskier behavior. This is no longer exploration to them but satiating a drug fix.
>As I said, over 30% of abused go on the be abusers themselves.
Dismisses those victims that are not stunted and depraved as "whataboutism" and then raises the ante with a stat that supports anon's victim blaming.
Also, do you not know how multiple choice works?
>>18144829
You seem to be providing an argument that anon who called a victim an abuser for not following your narrative about victims being drug addicted, abusers, stunted or depraved was just following the stats like you, if you are trying to answer my question. But since you didn't say B) explicitly maybe you are trying not to explicitly defend the anon who thinks victims are lying abusers.

>>18144899
Are you Anglo?

>>18144888
The nontroubled being told they do not count because you have a propaganda image of them you need to use to feel you are helping the victims that need more care is probably not untroubling to those that don't want to be protrayed as depraved and stunted.

>>18144899
so are you blind or did you just happen to skip
>>18144685
>>18144601
Age of consent varies across time and culture, no amount of moralfaggotry and NPC views will change that lmao

>>18144909
>Dismisses those victims that are not stunted and depraved
It doesn't
> a stat that supports
Because it shows a significant difference between would be abusers who were abused who go on to be abusers
And non-abused who go on to be abusers
Yes they are victims, but once they decide to engage in the act, they are the aggressor/exploiter.
In either case they should seek therapy.

>>18142906
good example of my point. there is a clear distinction between hebe and pedo philia. ehebe is normal ofc. arguably hebe is normally and its mostly situation contextual

>>18144935
>still doesn't answer the question
How do you feel about people who tacitly support abusers by their inaction?
>It doesn't
I think most accusations of "whataboutism" are designed to handwave things and dismiss them as not relevant, and in your post you seem to respond to the idea of victims of abuse who are not depraved or stunted with
>whataboutism
So, yeah. I'm thinking it does dismiss those victims as mere
>whataboutism

>>18144926
Holy shit you are actually fucking retarded. It's like you didn't even read my comment at all. I don't care what happens in different cultures throughout time, human-sacrifice happened in different cultures throughout time. I care about the law setting reasonable restrictions to what humans can do in accordance to a rational set of ethics and morals. I don't pretend like it's perfect, and I prefer no laws when it's possible, but I happen to think things like incest, bestiality, pedophilia, necrophilia, etc. are wrong. If you want to call me a moral fag because I have a moral system at ALL which allows me to say statements like:
>No, I don't think a father can have sex with there 7 year old child and call it love. That's just wrong.
Then so be it. You're the warped and demented one, not me.
>>18144919
My nationality is American.

>>18144979
I've read your comment, but your point that the avg. marriage and consent year differs from aoc and ergo its some kind of an argument against aoc is a non sequitur.
>blabla I have morals
cool, everyone does. The point is to argue rationally about them and not just say "its bad because I say so!". Appeal to common sense just makes you look like a midwit.

>>18144957
>handwave things and dismiss them as not relevant
If you haven't clued in, that's what you've been doing. I have acknowledged those whom have adjusted or gone on without a hitch. I'm sure there are many factors behind this response.
You've not once acknowledged the struggling abused.

Those struggling from their experience are those whom require intervention.
The whole point of this book is that if those other victims haven't experience trauma, show no signs of abuse-response reactionary behavior, feel no negative connotation towards the event, and do not also become abusers themselves, then should people cause alarm in them.
Are you trying to make the point that these people should be on high offense against this behavior (child molestation)? Because I think that's how we should socially treat it. If they wanted to personally avoid the matter entirely, I wouldn't blame them.

They're still victims. The book makes the comment that if we treat them like victims, that's what can create the painful responses in otherwise "well-adjusted" people.

I don't think normalizing it is the response, but if those individuals don't have averse reactions and it hasn't interfered with an otherwise "normal" development, then I don't see the reason to agitate these emotions in them.

ignore the sperg in the thread. I was reading a book recently about sexual life in the European middle ages and there's significant evidence children were 'around' sexual activity openly almost as soon as they were born. The book said it was very normal for adults to 'have fun' with kids and it was essentially viewed as harmless unless it was violent rape. also, traditionally the Church has always set 'the age of reason' at 7 years old for a variety of reasons. the whole 'children must be separated from the society of adults' is a new thing.

read 'the end of childhood' by postman. excellent book

>>18144979
>morals

>>18145035
I've read similar stuff, Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life. It was kind of shocking to find out how maturely children were treated from the early age

>>18145035
That is because families were bunched up all together in one house. No chance for private life. I think a lot of modern morals have been moulded around the American puritan mindset, as evidences by the sperg.
European attitude towards sexuality is a lot more healthy, or at least used to be. But nowadays all cultures are muddled, we are all living in America.

>>18145035
>The book said it was very normal for adults to 'have fun' with kids and it was essentially viewed as harmless
There's a difference between this sort of social and familial cohesion, and the commodity and desire-centric mentality of the modern west
That's part of why laws like this are a struggle. Sex to one couple can be union. Sex to another can be commodity.
I would default that the family should decide, but in the west, the child spends significantly less time around the family than in the distant past, and the parents have less control over what they're exposed to.

>>18145004
It's not a non-sequitur when you literally make an appeal to a natural age of consent. In this sense, an average may not be the default position but it gives a good indicator of what the natural disposition of most people's attitudes are socially. I gave the example of England and northern Europe in early-modern-times when age of consent was young and most people still married at about 20. Furthermore, most age of consent laws where set at puberty ages (11/13 and up), but people still had children at closer to the modern age of 15 or 16 and up. Also, my point about "I have morals" was in response to you calling me a moralfag like it meant anything lmao.

>>18145082
>That is because families were bunched up all together in one house. No chance for private life. I think a lot of modern morals have been moulded around the American puritan mindset, as evidences by the sperg.
>European attitude towards sexuality is a lot more healthy, or at least used to be
Can you not see the drastic difference here
The kid has no private life, meaning everything was in, or dictated by the family. When it comes to the kids choice being dictated beyond themselves, the family is the most reasonable default.
It doesn't have to do with puritanism. The west is significantly more socially disjointed and far more materialistic. Couple that with the topic of child sexuality.
It's not even remotely the same ballpark.

>>18145099
>an average may not be the default position but it gives a good indicator of what the natural disposition of most people's attitudes are socially
and how is that an argument against lower aoc? Higher and lower ages can co-exist without conflict. And there is a natural predisposition to it (hebephilic and teleiophilic tendencies are both inborn and constitute separate portions of people). Thats why I called you a moral fag, because the argument follows only if you have implicit morals against lower aoc.

>>18145016
I don't think the struggling abused are best described as depraved and stunted as you do, and I don't think anyone reasonable would take that to mean I don't acknowledge them. You on the other hand seem to think that if they are not depraved and stunted then they don't warrant care, as you're perfectly willing to accuse those that are not so as being "whataboutism". You are the person that the book talks about: a social pressure to conceive of these people as largely depraved and stunted, often to the point of being abusers themselves. I don't think that is caring for victims who need more care or who do not need more care.

>>18144979
>My nationality is American.
Of course it is.

>>18145153
>I don't think the struggling abused are best described as depraved and stunted
You're emotionally leaning into these words
I never used the word depraved. You're the only one who used that word.
I'm saying that they are used to high sexual stimuli. Their brain grows around this response input coupled with the act itself. Meaning they know they can receive this stimuli from that act. It's like turning the volume down on everything else.
It tends to lean into riskier behavior, is what I said, because it becomes a drug fix.
I'm talking biology here, I'm not applying negative connotation emotional words to these people. You are.
My use of the word "stunted" was in part due to those high drug rushes overriding the rest of their experience, as well as keeping them age regressed, "child-like", or simply lacking a "normal" development because of this fixation on sex and pornography, which is not uncommon for people who were molested.

>You on the other hand seem to think that if they are not depraved and stunted then they don't warrant care
No, again, THE BOOK argues that these people don't warrant "hysteria"
Care is obviously there if they need to seek it out. A number of people who had these experiences respond that it hasn't affected them in any significant way, and they go on to lead "normal" relationship and sex lives. They acknowledge that the act was wrong but it hasn't caused them any "damage" of note. The book argues that if we say "whoa whoa whoa, that's not the response you're supposed to have, that was awful, you should feel traumatized", then we can be part of the process of creating trauma in the individual.

ctrl+f - deprave and look how many times you've written this word
I don't think there's a problem with sexual promiscuity if the person isn't having personal problems and isn't miserable, if that's what you're getting at.
Many of them turn to risky behavior and struggle with interpersonal relationships, though there are many methods to assist them if that's the issue.

Again, once they molest children, they're abusers.
You can understand the cycle, but they still engage in it.
There are plenty of people who are attracted to children who withhold action. Once they abuse, they get put in an extra category of abuser.

I have already expressed that these people whom were abused whom also abuse, need therapy.
What they don't need is to seek enablers who are willing to normalize child exploitation to embolden their fantasy and abuse,

>>18145150
I get what you're saying but it was more of an argument against the natural age of consent argument that people where using in this thread. A 40 year old man having sex with an 11 year old girl is just strange and perverted for obvious reasons; young people should be marrying early and procreating with each other, as was and is the norm, but sex shouldn't begin just as soon as someone bleeds or whatever but until they become a grown adult (which, sure, changes in different context, but imo the difference between an ~11 year old and a ~17 year old is obvious and has culturally been understood throughout history). Anything younger than puberty is undoubtedly an actual crime though.

>>18145253
illegal ≠ "wrong"

>>18145167
>Of course it is.
Because I'm not a pedo? I'm flattered that you think that about my country but we actually have tons of pedos (some are even in office, a lot are even celebrated).
Not once did I overreact though, and literally the most I said was
>I have morals
>the age of consent should be about 16 years old
If you have a problem with that then God help (You).

>>18145296
>Because I'm not a pedo? I'm flattered that you think that about my country but we actually have tons of pedos (some are even in office, a lot are even celebrated).
/pol/ schizo confirmed

>>18145271
Never said it was, by crime I meant it was a moral crime. Do I honestly have to insult your intelligence by telling you why it's not okay to diddle 3 year olds? I get that sex is no longer held as sacred but there are substantial developmental, psychological, as well as physical damages associated with that kind of relation. It's not okay to fuck 5 year olds dude, they are quite literally not ready for it -_-

>>18145253
>obvious reasons
>undoubtedly
only if you look at it trough recent morality. Which is a narrow and kind of stupid view. You cant ground your morals in anything else other than "ew" and "but that illegal!". Cringe.

>>18145329
/pol/ schizo? Are you sure your ok?
Yeah, I think I'm done arguing with pedos on 4chinz. I'm not sure what I expected but this is just as retarded as it is degenerate.

>>18145340
>40 year olds should have sex with 11 year olds
>What's the problem with that? I bet you're just saying that cuz u think it's "icky" looool
>Having sex with a 6 year old is undoubtedly a moral crime
>Loooool idiot, don't you know the law doesn't equal morals. It's a lot more nuanced than that in real life. What if the 6 year old consents?
Yup, no point.

>>18145340
Not that anon but as I said
The culture is completely different. Materialistic, socially disjointed, peak desire modern western culture is not the same as familial, high social cohesion antique Europe

You can engage in the same act with two totally different mindsets and approaches and it becomes different things

>>18145347
I am not a pedo. I just think it is funny how offended you are.

>>18145363
so, are you going to act like a twitter girl or are you going to present your arguments? Let's say the minimal age is 7, no penetrative sex until puberty and no coercion/harm is involved. Whats wrong?
>psychical trauma
its only produced because of the predominant narratives as the ops book shows. Lets say we no longer view it bad. So whats fundamentally wrong with it?

>>18145379
Well yes, thats why I wouldnt be for abolishing AOC, because the morals would sitll produce traumas, because most of people view the adult-child sex negatively.

>>18136173

Here's how you figure this one out
Instead of studying the kids study the people who are so adamant about protecting the kids
Because what you will find 9 times out of 10 is that they're the ones who are really messed up

>>18145234
I'm taking up the phrase depraved and stunted because it's what you were responding to before I entered the thread. Addiction might be an explanation you chose for that depraved and stunted behaviour you want to highlight in abuse victims, but the reason you highlight it is prone to the same biological concerns as your explanation. There is a reason you want them to be perceived as stunted, to compare them to drug addicts, and there is a reason that kind of behaviour on your part should be viewed as potentially detrimental to them.
I know you think you are helping them by comparing them to drug addicts, and calling them stunted, and giving long pseudoscientific explanations of how they cannot help being like drug addicts in order to justify your help, while also dismissing those that don't act like drug addicts. But you are the social pressure to accept that world view, and it is a world view which dismisses those that do not adhere to your beliefs about victims as morally or biologically flawed.
I'm also going to point out the only evidence you have the abused anon had actually molested anyone was the anon who thinks deviations from that narrative is a sign of an abuser, and you are consistently skirting addressing that. The fact you only address what should happen if abused anon turns out to be a molester, rather than twice victimised by someone who shares your view of victimhood, makes it hard to believe you are taking into account the victim's view, and makes it look like you are relying on the biological stunting of victims (which does not exist as a medical fact, at all) as a reason to dismiss victims who do not fit your fantasy of them and imply they ought to be treated as either ill or abusive regardless of whether they want to participate in your fantasy.

>>18145395
Do you know what a seven year old is? They aren't mini-adults, you can't just make them suck your dick.
I'm not acting like a twitter girl, this argument is just stupid and I happen to have better things to do then argue about this online. If you like, you can consider this a win. Here's your W champ :)

>>18145408
>because most of people view the adult-child sex negatively.
because most people engage in it out of desire

>>18145395
this is why hebe/pedo is essentially just another sexual sin like sodomy, masturbation, porn, etc. its not bad BECAUSE it's young people, its bad because all extramartial sex objectifies the other and is contrary to theology of the body. all of it can be forgiven in congestion anyway. once again the Church is the only sane rational reasoned voice in the room.

>>18145423
K
Study the people adamant on having sex with kids

>>18145430
read the thread. there's vast social and historical evidence they ARE miniadults. childhood is a spook

>>18145433
well, obviously. Why else would they engage in sex? You probably mean that its exploitative relation without any greater ideals (marriage, education)? But this can be easily changed. For example passing of a law that would allow adult child sex with the consent of the parents. Of course its only theoretical, since in practice a lot would have to change for this to happen currently.
>>18145430
>They aren't mini-adults, you can't just make them suck your dick.
I'm just saying that there could exist (and they existed) a hypothetical society were such relations could be viewed positively and ergo would not be harmful/traumatic for the child.

>>18145440

you can do that too if you want but I'll tell you it won't be as interesting

>>18145425
>drug addicts
Repeat pattern behavior and inability to separate oneself is a drug addiction. It doesn't matter if its ice cream. If it is established that it's causing problems, and the individual cannot separate themselves from the behavior, it's addiction. If it impedes their development in other "normal" ways, then it's problematic.
Pornography can be a useful tool or it can be a drug addiction. Masturbation can be a drug addiction.
Because it's repeat pattern behavior that hijacks dopamine, serotonin, and reward systems that the individual is unable to break themselves from, and causes turmoil in the rest of their lives.
I'm not "comparing them to drug addicts". What they have is an addiction to neurochemicals. It's the same process as a drug addiction.

I don't "want them to be perceived as...". Many of them are age regressed because it hijacked development in other areas through preoccupation with feeding into that addiction.

I'm not dismissing the other types. Therapy is always there for them. My point is that they're not spiraling. You wouldn't even know if someone was well adjusted and had been molested unless they told you. Pattern behavior of people who spiral into increasingly risky or pronounced sexual behavior as a result of molestation is a common report by the abused.
Again, if those other types need help, they should receive the treatment they need.

I also never said they were flawed. I err on the side of caution of expressing a "standardized human", hence why I continually put "normal" development in quotations.
These people need to find avenues that work for them. I am friends with a few dominatrix that were abused and found avenues to channel that energy while receiving therapy.

I use the term problematic when the individual is A. stuck in habits that B. lead to turmoil in their lives that they express a want to change. Misery is also a strong indicator that the routine behavior is not the right fit for the individual, and misery is easy to spot. I would take this approach to any behavioral pattern in dissecting people who obviously need assistance. Others don't express so obviously, but these are no-brainers.

That anon has expressed in past threads, openly, that they've sexually engaged with very young boys.
As I said, once the victim becomes the abuser, they're not categorized as both. They have now chosen to pose threat unto other children.
I side with would-be abused children first. Ending or reducing the cycle of abuse should be the goal.

I had a girlfriend who used to slap me, punch me in the face. While I'm sure I frustrated her, we both participated in these arguments, were both frustrated, but only she was physically abusive.
Her mother used to abuse her. So I acknowledge her as a victim, but she maintains that behavior.
After my relationship with her, I was more aggressive in my arguments with people (still wouldn't hit), uncommon for me. I acknowledged the behavior as not to propagate it.

>>18145425
>biological stunting of victims (which does not exist as a medical fact, at all)
Demonstrably false
I've read of, and encountered girls who have age regressed into essentially a child-state mimicking the typical behavior around the age of their abuse.

I can't standardize was "mature behavior" is. I'm implying very generalized social norms by todays immediate standards.

I have no "fantasy" of them. I feel like you're projecting a lot.

Again I default that if a person is stuck in repeat pattern behavior that impedes other faculties of their life, they're unable to dissociate from these patterns, and it's causing misery, that this one chain of clear indication that someone is struggling and needs assistance.
I've run into this numerous times for various reasons (not subject exclusive to abuse) and find it a fair response.
Generally if someone can channel these behaviors appropriately, I find is the best way to use them. Otherwise there's this Freudian projection that the person "helping" knows how they're "supposed" to be. I would rather help them find symbiotic environments.
Many of the people I know who have gone through early abuse tend to find symbiotic environments that work for them to channel that behavior or impulse to learn better how to manage.

My implication with "stunted" was meant more like they are hardly able to engage in anything else than these very stimulating experiences they had at a young age. It hinders the rest of their growth, I assume because it's far too distracting.

>>18145462
>well, obviously. Why else would they engage in sex?
...Union
This is the most fucked up part of our perception of sexuality
I'm not trying to be puritan about this but the whole symbiotic and fusion nature of sexuality is completely lost on people in our culture.
That's what this "familial play" would resemble. It's not a thing of desire. It's a thing of integration and commune.

>>18145546
When you select victims which are engaged in repetitive behaviour, and test them for repetitive behaviour, they do tend to show repetitive behaviour. This selection bias is exactly what I'm talking about for your pseudoscientific justifications, which dismisses that the victims who aren't engaged in repetitive behaviour don't show them. And you should be aware that drug addicts and addiction in general are social pejoratives, and just because you would not mind being compared to one, it might be an explanation which appeals far more to you than any victim.
There is a reason you're telling me about your friend's job, and why you probably wouldn't be friends with her if she was a secretary. You have a personal bias here which you want victims to accept as a kind of gospel, since you keep telling me the same pseudoscience which ignores more "normal" lines of development like not engaging in harmful repetitive behaviours as a direct biological consequence of childhood sexual abuse. There is no such direct biological consequence. That is just your prophecy for them, which is likely harmful. And potentially based in personal relationships you chose to pursue with people when your relationship might be a way of both of you engaging in harmful repetitive behaviours. Enabling is a thing, anon, and you should look into it as a matter of urgency.

>>18145546
>As I said, once the victim becomes the abuser, they're now*** categorized as both.

>>18145632
Well, then we agree on this. I never implied care-free sex with children. My own "ideal" situation would be something like ancient greece, where the relation was subordinated to education and was done with consent of parents.

>>18145634
>This selection bias is exactly what I'm talking about for your pseudoscientific justifications, which dismisses that the victims who aren't engaged in repetitive behaviour don't show them
I already addressed this
>Others don't express so obviously
I don't know how you expect me to walk up to someone and ask if they were molested. What's your context.
Again I already said they should seek therapy and help. If they aren't expressing any type of response that would indicate they need assistance, I don't know what you would expect me to personally do in that situation.
Therapy should still be open and available to them if they need it. I'd still be willing to help in some way if they asked.

It's different than the people who are clearly spiraling. Someone going off the rails with drugs, partying, heavy promiscuity, all while expressing misery is pretty obvious, and this is seriously not uncommon for people who have been abused.

>And you should be aware that drug addicts and addiction in general are social pejoratives, and just because you would not mind being compared to one, it might be an explanation which appeals far more to you than any victim.
Fair enough, I'll acknowledge the language.

>There is a reason you're telling me about your friend's job, and why you probably wouldn't be friends with her if she was a secretary
What?
I've known these people long before they had jobs or got into any dominatrix work.
"There's a reason" you seriously ought to address your projection because your comments are loaded with it and they're way off bat.

>There is no such direct biological consequence.
If you're willing to acknowledge that certain behavior becomes "consequence", then yeah, there is. A lot of early childhood experience shapes the individual. Are you arguing that? Most of us routinely carry a lot of adolescent conditioning forward throughout our whole lives. Any of it can be changed, but maintaining the trend is common.

>. You have a personal bias here which you want victims to accept as a kind of gospel, since you keep telling me the same pseudoscience which ignores more "normal" lines of development like not engaging in harmful repetitive behaviours as a direct biological consequence of childhood sexual abuse
I really don't know what you're trying to put forward here
Is there any embodied result of our childhood experiences or not. These patterns reflect in the shaping and strength of neural pathways. Stimulation happens, people also get "addicted" to abuse.
Shock and trauma have strong neurological effects in conditioning behavior.
You can tune in to any nightly MSM to see trauma-based nervous system training at play.
Any experience one (the individual) receives as, themselves, a potent one, is going to stand out in their development.
If the same experience to another individual produces no trauma or potent experience, there is, quite literally biologically, less representation of it in their body.

>>18145692
>My own "ideal" situation would be something like ancient greece, where the relation was subordinated to education and was done with consent of parents.
This isn't what I'm talking about

I really don't have an issue with what youve said in the modern day with late teens and someone who isn't absurdly older than this person, with respect to this teens autonomy and life experience. Meaning they weren't some shut in that has no idea what's going on. Ideally someone who has already participated in their own sexual exploration.

Parental blessing nowadays is often more like tolerance than a genuine agreement.
The kid basically says they're going to do whatever they want, and the parents are essentially powerless to stop it.

This still seems like a fixation on grooming.
If the individual has had their own experiences before ANY of your own interference, then I wager they've had some reasonable life experience. I still believe they should be at, or nearing adulthood. Obviously things are moving fast now.

This issue with teens who haven't had sex is essentially the same debate with a lot of virgin women being given up to marriage.
They simply have no idea about what else is going on out there. The difference is that marriage with these virgin women was seen as for-life.
A groomer becomes the center of a virgins world. The most illuminating thing they've experienced just by default.
I still acknowledge this as abusive and selfish.

>>18145896
>I really don't have an issue with what youve said in the modern day with late teens and someone who isn't absurdly older than this person
well, then you're not talking about anything controversial, since this happens today, and pretty often.

And I never talked solely about late teens. I was talking about 7 to puberty no penetration and puberty and over with penetration. My point is that those cant happen without some regulation. Educatory process (like in ancient greece) and parental consent would be a such regulation. It would not be marriage of a virgin to someone for life and would happen only if the child wanted it, felt attraction to the mentor. It would not need to be long term, and it wasnt in ancient greece. Children would grow up and build new relations.

>>18145993
>I was talking about 7 to puberty no penetration
nope

>Educatory process
Any education is projection about what you think is right, and since motive is involved, it will always bias your "Educatory process".
Again, parental consent means nothing nowadays.

>would happen only if the child wanted it, felt attraction to the mentor
How many times have I heard this story about children in hollywood with stars in their eyes


You simply can't make "good faith" decisions on something like this when you have desire and incentive involved.
And you can't keep reference ancient greece because it is not, and will never be the same conditions.

A youth should first have their own experiences (plural) with other youth first.

>>18146016
>Any education is projection about what you think is right, and since motive is involved, it will always bias your "Educatory process".
well yes, how is that a bad thing? All education is like this. Teachers/mentor are biased and channel the information in their own way.
>Again, parental consent means nothing nowadays.
well I'm not talking about our time, but about theoretical situation of what could be. In this situation parental consent would have its function.
>You simply can't make "good faith" decisions on something like this when you have desire and incentive involved.
why not? you seem to automatically imply desire/motive = bad. It can be sublimated to good, thats what greek educational system was all about. Harness drives to make something good out of them.
>And you can't keep reference ancient greece because it is not, and will never be the same conditions.
of course, but things change. I honestly think its possible that some kind of adult-child sex could be permissible if we tackled the problem OP's book talks about. Informing children about sex to prevent abuse and to let themselves decide is one way out of the problem of retroactive trauma. Sex could be viewed in a positive light in certain situations and it would be good for children and for hebephiles.
>A youth should first have their own experiences (plural) with other youth first.
strong should with no base. Other youth can be more manipulative and irresponsible than some kind of adult that reports back to you and that can be held accountable.

>>18146075
>well yes, how is that a bad thing? All education is like this. Teachers/mentor are biased and channel the information in their own way.
Sure, but the difference is that they have no sexual desire overriding their direction.
I already take enough issue with the amount of political indoctrination people go through in the education system when teachers should be moderate.

>well I'm not talking about our time, but about theoretical situation of what could be.
Idealism is nice. Pragmatism is now.
Parents are only losing more "say" in what their children do.

>why not? you seem to automatically imply desire/motive = bad
Because if you remove the desire, your whole process changes. Your education is still going to suit your desire.

I think people should learn about sexuality through experience with people their own age and listening to other stories on the internet.
Not a singular, horse-blinder channel of a "mentor". Its patent grooming.

>I honestly think its possible that some kind of adult-child sex could be permissible if we tackled the problem OP's book talks about. Informing children about sex to prevent abuse and to let themselves decide is one way out of the problem of retroactive trauma.
I think we need a lot of people expressing their experiences so the person has some general understanding of what they're getting into without it being fed down a centralized tube.

>strong should with no base. Other youth can be more manipulative and irresponsible than some kind of adult that reports back to you and that can be held accountable.
This is what I mean about your own bias interference. To me I just hear rationality about why you should receive spoils and why others should not be trifled with

And this is the crux of the problem, is that you have innate design and agency over this other beings perception of good and bad.
You are quite literally engaging in the manipulation process but brand it as education.
If the person doesn't first access their sexuality in an environment with someone who isn't also equally as new to the experience, then there is way too much power imbalance. Same with them being unable to have any type of experiences beforehand.
In fact I think it should be morally leaned into that the person should first seek out people their own age to explore with first before treading deeper waters.

Also you're treating this person like property. It's never going to fly.
That's not how things work today. You don't have command over this person, they can leave whenever they want, and if they tell you to fuck off, you respect them and end communication, which I doubt would happen.

You're just proving that they're more a toy and a tool for your own machinations than a person to care for.

You're trying to shape your design around something pre-established as if it lends virtue to what you're doing.
Youth, women, people in general are not property.
If the person hasn't first established their own agency, its exploitation

>>18146158
>Sure, but the difference is that they have no sexual desire overriding their direction.
why you have to exaggerate desire so much? Why it has to override and not help the direction with additional motivation? Your view of desire as some bad surplus is christian in its essence. I think desire can be harnessed, tamed, sublimated and subordinated. You seem to avoid this kind of concept of desire. My kind of mentor is someone who is capable of controling himself and is not overreaching.
>Not a singular, horse-blinder channel of a "mentor". Its patent grooming.
I never said that the mentor/teacher would be the only possible lover of the child. He could engage with other children/teenagers, he could refuse the advances of the mentor. It's purely optional and not some kind of centralized grooming system you are painting it out to be. The child is not some kind of property.
>and if they tell you to fuck off, you respect them and end communication, which I doubt would happen.
thats why parental supervision would be necessary and it would keep the mentors in check

Power imbalances are not in itself bad, they are bad when misused. And the implementation of regulations would keep them in check. I have no intent of harm to children, and i would not be despotic imposition of sexuality unto the child. All that would change is that the child would know about sex earlier than know and could engage in some kind of sex play if he wanted to, thats all. This could be used for learning motivation and would function as the prevention of serious abuse.

>>18136173