/lit/ - Literature

Does he argue for actual pedophilia (younger than 11) or just underage sex in general?

>>19035240
Anti-pedophilia is one of those holy cows that are unquestionable and universally agreed upon along with disdain towards Hitler and love of black people. A lot of smart non-conformist people realise that it is not founded upon anything, but it acts as a trap for possible dissidents by incentivising them to speak out and get boxed in with the most hated groups, society’s lowest of the low. There is no reason to partake in that discussion, you are not going to win anything, it is pointless and only exists to trap you and associate you with the undesirables.

>>19035396
If nobody speaks up the overton window will keep being moved to the opposite direction. If things continue as they are fucking girls 2 years younger than you will soon be considered a grave sin.

@anonymous1 Not sure but wikipedia suggests he argues for actual pedophilia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_O'Carroll#Paedophilia:_The_Radical_Case

>>19035240
I'm more of a hebephille, I can imagine lowering AOC to 12-13~, but I don't conceive how could actual pedophilia be legalized. Does O'Carroll present some kind of theory on how it is possible, or is he just against the prevailing norms that mystify and prohibit it, without any positive alternatives?

i alwayshad in my mind how in some societies fucking a 13 year old was normal and those girls actually agree and encorague that to happen.
we had a case in argentina of a 13 years old girl who lived in an indigenous community in chaco who was impregnated by one of the tribe members and she accepted this and agree in multiple terms that she wasn´t raped.

this blows my mind guys, the trauma of someone being raped as a minor actually comes from socio-cultural reasons rather than biologicals? i would like someone to help me with this

>>19035471
>the trauma of someone being raped as a minor actually comes from socio-cultural reasons rather than biologicals? i would like someone to help me with this
this book is about it

>>19035396
>it is not founded upon anything
Of course its founded on something otherwise it wouldnt be a social norm.

>>19035521
Are you implying there's no nonsensical social norms? This seems like an insane belief, especially in our day and age where a new insane social norm is born every weekend.

>>19035471
there is a difference of indescribable magnitude between this crime at 5 and 13. That's not an endorsement of the latter either any more than pointing out how much worse murder is than assault

>>19035396
this

>>19035471
From what I observe most so called traumas only become so when a specific, negative, interpretation of the event is incepted into the victim by society in repetitive fashion. e.g you don't care about being abused until everyone tells you about how much being abused is awful.

You can apply this logic to war trauma. I think many soldiers only develop traumas after coming back home because what was previously perceived as natural by his group is evaluated as monstrous under the influence of the civilized world.

>>19035240
It is a case by case basis, it is not inherently cultural but it is greatly affected by the culture around it, especially in regards to what is viewed as a proper development cycle and what puberty reflects in terms of values. Even on a biological basis, pedophilia is wrong if you believe that puberty prepares one for sex. Recently pubescent persons are also still considered children today (read: mid to late teens) as first world cultures have started to discover the boundaries of individual development, but this is based not on sex, but on one's critical thinking, development of the individual and of the brain.

>>19035537
Modern norms based on wishful thinking are nonsense, but religious and "traditional" rituals were conceived specifically to keep the community healthy and able to survive.
Societies that get comfortable and abandon these rituals in favor of promiscuity and moral deconstruction quickly collapse in on themselves and are replaced by those who dont do this.

>>19035570
>>19035599
>everything is relative bro
Filtered

>>19035604
>Filtered
Oh yes. The perception of an individual about certain events is definitely not influenced by how the group he's part of views them.

>>19035604
I didn't claim everything was relative at all, only that some things are.

>>19035626
Nothing is relative. We're finite fixtures, not infinite indexers. Get over yourself.

>>19035678
brianlet

>>19035692
Sorry, but you're a dullard. Middle-school myopia isn't impressive.

>>19035714
its embarassing when midwits try to cover up their lack of iq with big words. Just stop it.

>>19035619
If you dont talk to people about their sorrows then they wont reveal them to you, just like how the people you pass by on the street every day have their own worries, fears, hopes and regrets but they are hidden to you out of a lack of communication.
But when you confront them about it then they will feel a need to confront these "traumas" themselves and turn neurotic. However this has nothing to do with the fact that they were confronted with it, you are just mistaking correlation with causation.

>>19035721
Impressive isn't a big word

Pedophiles should be hanged and will burn in hell where they belong.

>>19035359
actual pedophilia

>>19035468
he unironically is a pedophile and thinks there is nothing wrong about it

>>19035728
This has nothing to do with what I said.
Question: do you think someone's perception is or is not likely to change based on how his group thinks?

>>19035721
>Midwit
>lack of IQ
...

>>19035758
well and I agree with him. Its not inherently wrong and we can imagine situations where it could be good. My question is whether he conceptualizes what kind of situations would make it possible or is just seething against norms in 68's style.

>>19035604
>Modern norms based on wishful thinking are nonsense, but religious and "traditional" rituals were conceived specifically to keep the community healthy and able to survive.
It's strange how people get the idea that everything in the past was the product of evolutionary sociology with ultimate survival ends but everything in the present is just "wishful thinking" and categorically different.

>>19035779
What group?

>>19035796
Any group. You think that Timmy is more likely to think bullying is bad coexisting with other bullies or in a group of moralfags? Or do you think there's no difference?

>>19035786
Neither socialism nor fascism were in any way shape or form fruitful and liberalism is taking a straight nosedive back into hell as we speak.

Meanwhile the Middle Ages went on for a 1000 years.

>>19035785
his worldview is that relationships between adults and children can proceed largely similarly to how they do between adults, by the progressive exchange of signals and indicators of interest. he doesn't advocate for like violent rape or whatever

>>19035809
If Billy is strong minded he wont be influenced, if he is weak minded he will.
However since the division between strong and weak minded people happen a priori to socialization I have to say no.

>>19035827
>yes, people will be influences, but the conclusion is self-evident, no
what?

>>19035821
Have you actually met and talked to a child at some point in your life? They are more interested in fortnite or their coming birthday party than a relationship.

>>19035837
this is just you announcing that you don't share the worldview of the author in OP, which is moral grandstanding, also called virtue signaling. good for you

>>19035835
There is always opportunists and Mitläufer but this mindset is developed independently of society. Then of course there is mass psychology, its easier to make a million people do what you want than making one.

That said I dont know what point you are trying to make.

>>19035848
>virtue signalling
And thats bad because?

>>19035468
>I'm more of a hebephille, I can imagine lowering AOC to 12-13~, but I don't conceive how could actual pedophilia be legalized. Does O'Carroll present some kind of theory on how it is possible, or is he just against the prevailing norms that mystify and prohibit it, without any positive alternatives?

He seems to talk about reform in his book. I haven't finished the book so I can't describe his plan in detail. This book is available on the Internet, so you can easily find out more for free.

>>19035521
yeah it's founded on feminists trash.

>>19035396
>it is not founded upon anything,
they only cared about puberty of the girl in the past
why do you think child marriage was so widespread brainlet

>>19035827
First off, things are not so clear cut. Even strong-minded individuals as you call them are susceptible to group influence to some degree. Secondly, society doesn't distribute itself in perfect distinctions of individuals who are not influenced on one side and the ones who are at the other; that's just delusion; even if they did organized like that and only weak-minded people had the potential to be swayed the point would still stand that most have their perception altered by group as most people are weak-minded to begin with.

More relevant to the point we are arguing: the groups with most influence in society, like media, universities, parents, social media influencers, actors, you name it, constantly hammer the point that sexual abuse is the worst thing in existence. Even if I accept your bullshit dichotomy this would be a clear cut example of strong people influencing weak ones (general population).

>>19035837
I don't know about that. I was pretty horny as a kid.

>>19035515
>>19035570
Can you differentiate Yungbluth's Clarissa
https://www.whatisdeepfried.com/comic/clarissa/
from Madoc's The Flower Children (not linking, look it up on Baraag)? Read through them, I want you to think about the framing. If you can.

>>19035570
What a load of shit. Trauma can be used as a behavior modifier. Ritualize trauama and give social assent to it,and the abused individual will be forced to accept it. It might be "normalized" and thus the harm wont be immediately seen. But that isnt to say there is no trauma or grieving process

>>19035863
>That said I dont know what point you are trying to make.
The first guy who replied to you isn't me. My point is that living in a environment which has an extremely negative perception of a event will shape your perception of the event to that side. Namely, if you got abused in a society that cares little about abuse you'll care less about being abused than if it happened in a society that cares a lot about it.

>>19035619
That doesnt mean the groups view is valid

>>19035821
Thats fucking sick. Only a deeply perverted person will see signals like that.

>>19035987
there are areas of life, like sexuality, that are more dependend on societal interpretations than others, trauma exists, but which acts and situations constitute it changes from culture to culture. No one is saying that trauma or giref doesnt exists as a psychical process.

>>19036004
child sexuality is a well documented phenomena

>>19035988
Take a look at people who grow up in abusive hoseholds. They will often think the experience is normal and standard. They might even think it's good. But they are still objectively affected by it. Their entire interpersonal capacities will be modified. Their sense of self will be changed. You seem to be conflating the perception of what is normal with the establishment of actual normative claims. And thats the fallacy every relativist commits.

>>19035240
Meh, it's 2021 and we can see footage of men accused and convicted of pedophilia. They are faggy freaks or weaselly little psychos. Hardly examples of moral rectitude in any sense. You could blah blah blah talk about any nasty bullshit that makes you come and try to justify it. I don't care, I see what kind of men they are.

>>19036015
It seems to me that you're saying a psycholgical experience is wholly contingent on social norms.

>>19036032
>But they are still objectively affected by it.
source? do studies exist that compare victims perception of the "abusive" situation and its objective aftermath, separated from the victims interpretation of it? or do you just assume that "abusive" situation leads to objective changes as a fact?

>>19035871
Nobody cares about the good boy points you rack up under the username "Anonymous" on 4chan dot org. This is one place we can actually seek the truth free of social mores and moral prejudice

>>19035946
I think you overestimate they sway the media has over society, most people dont agree with the absolute state of the west but they are just powerless to do anything about it.

>hammer the point that sexual abuse is the worst thing in existence
The worst thing? Definitely not and radfem bitches have done their very best to water down the words "abuse" "grooming" and "rape" into a mockery of itself in the last few years alone. But its still a bad thing that can only be tolerated by a weak and declining society, child fucking is globally looked down upon and it wasnt all that common "in history" either.
That criminals or terrorists, or heaven forbid incels, might fuck some cummy only reinforces my opposition, these are marginal people who should be opposed not imitated.
Cant really think about any piece of classical literature where sympathetic characters lust over some teenage girl.

>>19035988
The point you are making is "out of sight out of mind", that we should just let neurotics be neurotic in private instead of letting them resolve their inner turmoil.

>>19036043
Of course they're affected. Thats what social conditioning is. You mean to tell me that a person's family relationships have no impact of a persons behavior and relationships in the future?

>>19036042
I didnt say "wholly", since societal norms is not the only perspective from which things can be interpreted

>>19036044
We still virtue signal to ourselves here though. As in we're in denial

>>19036054
>You mean to tell me that a person's family relationships have no impact of a persons behavior and relationships in the future?
I'm saying that acts that could be seen as "abusive" from third person perspective and are interpreted as "normal" by the victim probably would no to little harm.

>>19036044
>waaaah stop saying things I dont want to hear, this is my personal safe space accept me!
Kys you dumb pedo incel.

>>19036065
Stop posting.

Appeal to tradition fallacy

>>19036034
How do you explain all the rich and famous pedophiles? Lots of celebrities and very successful people are caught as pedophiles.

>>19036056
I'm sure it's beyond the scope of this thread but I'd really like to know the relationship between individual and group on perception of an event and the actual effect the event has. I'd also hesitate to say that even a thorough analysis of that could even lead to establishing a normative claim about such behaviour. I think we should be sure we aren't wrongly deriving an ought from an is.
And again this goes back to what appears to me as the main critique of the position. That the position the author is advocating entails a moral relativism which particularly uses divergent social norms to establish normative claims.
If you point to some country where such acts are performed as claim it validates the act, then why can't i do the reverse, and point to this country where the act is reprehensible, and with equal validity, declare the act to be wrong?

>>19036079
there were societies where literal rape of women was normalized and did no psychological damage, there are societies where religious rituals include cumming into little childrens mouths and it does not harm, on the contrary, is seen as good. No amount of moralfag seething will refute the fact that people are highly symbolic creatures.

>>19036032
The perception of what's normal affects people's emotional response to it. That's just a fact. British people care more about their soccer team losing than Americans since soccer is more valued in the UK. Women who grew up in Muslim countries are less negatively affected, emotionally, by patriarchal norms applied to their lives than liberal women. Even if you want to make a case the women ''are still negatively affected'' - assumption - you would have to be insane to deny they are not less affected.

I'm not saying everything is about social conditioning, but a lot certainly is. Even if you want to stand ground on the idea that sexual abuse affects everyone emotionally regardless of circumstance - which I find insane - you have to at least concede the effects can be boosted by social environment.

>>19036092
>there were societies where literal rape of women was normalized and did no psychological damage
How do you know that
>there are societies where religious rituals include cumming into little childrens mouths and it does not harm, on the contrary
Tribal jungle ooga boogas are not societies, also how do you know that

>>19036065
Define harm. What does psychological harm look like? How does it manifest? Or is that also relative?

>>19036098
To what degree is an emotional reaction intrinsic? Are we blank slates?

>>19036043
>objective aftermath
What is self-report? What is biasing? That you point to an aftermath suggests a shift in situation that's implicitly polysemic, unless you're actually suggesting that psychosocial dynamics are some kind of Baudrillardian screen. That's stupid.
>>19036065
Step back for a moment and actually think about what you're describing in a non-bait fashion. Observation is recursive (quis custodiet ipsos custodes), there is no omnipotent observer; when everything about you is the byproduct of social circumstance, everything matters.

>>19036004
Well that's basically the disagreement I guess. Some people do think children can signal sexual interest. Others think that either they do not understand the context and so the signal is not meaningful, or that the power imbalance between them and the adult renders the signal illegitimate. The latter is a feminist view and uses their typical power-structure logic, the former is a question of psychological development and probably more worthy of comment.

>>19036099
>How do you know that
I read before arriving at my opinions, unlike you. Read about rape status in Renaissance's Italy. Read about Sambia.
>>19036100
I meant psychological harm, which results in traumas. Bad psychological conditions like depression, bipolar, anxiety disorders etc. >>19036110

>>19036087
Nta but most of these celebrities have horrible or controversial past and I'm pretty sure the most famous cases are related to underage girls in like 14, 15, 16 not literal little children.

>>19036110
reformulate your point in a way I can understand if you want a reply

>>19036109
The quickest route to answer this is probably that emotional reaction is dictated partly by natural predilection and partly by environmental influence. How much of each is dependent on circumstance and probably impossible to measure in precision.

As far as natural predilection goes, It both varies according to individual and doesn't. In other words, some things affect everyone (naturally) in a similar fashion, albeit the degree to which it does differs, while others don't.

>>19036124
Do you think that psycholgical harm from trauma is purely bheavioural? That it's distinct from somatic disorders? And that we are just blank slates, making our behaviour a product of social condition alone? Thereby making trauma nothing more than social experience?

>>19036058
Some do, because they have not yet transcended their socialization

>>19036124
You read bullshit sources and arrive at stupid conclusions?
Did anybody actually ask those women who were raped? Did they ask them on neutral ground where they wouldnt have to fear repercussion? Or maybe you read the account of the perpetrators and are just to fucking stupid to realize how biased your source is, which is why you come here to propose we should let young boys suck us off for our semen because the Ooga boogas of Papua New Guinea are some sort of model society everybody should strive towards, and you do this with the fullest conviction that you are right and a smug satisfaction that you did your research, however disingenuous and sloppy.

>>19036139
>>19036109
Feeling discomfort from listening to a baby cry would be an example of a more or less universal reaction. But even then, people's level of discomfort isn't the same.

>>19036141
no I dont, thats why I said that there exist CERTAIN areas of life, in which people are more prone to the aftereffects of symbolic interpretations

>>19036157
Now imagine the level of discomfort that knowing a baby is being molested causes.

>>19036160
Seems like deciding sexual experiences as a kid isn't one of those areas of life is a purely arbitrary decision. Your view point seems very ill defined

>>19036173
Funnily enough we'd probably feel more discomfort knowing this ourselves than the baby considering he won't even remember.

When your inclinations make a sizeable part of an otherwise well adjusted and peaceful population want to bash your head in, then maybe you should stop trying to justify it and start to ponder if you are the problem.

>>19036215
Oh true, angry mobs are usually correct and reasonable

>>19036154
there are third person accounts of the rape aftereffects of women in renaissance, where no bad symptoms could be read out. E.g. after an attempt of rape, the woman continues to hang out with a man etc. Read The Boundaries of Eros: Sex Crime and Sexuality. If you want first person sources about how interpretation can change the effects of the deed read >>19035515
>>19036192
>purely arbitrary decision
good thing I didnt say that

>>19036087
I'm sure some celebrities don't have the kind of inclination towards it that you see in criminals, but they get peer pressured into it by people around them who do. I imagine they feel above the law and above conventional morality due to their money and status, and that they're indulging in these practices as a sort of extreme decadence.
But why do you need that explained to you, are you retarded? Would you see Jason Moma or some good looking person being a pedo and think "oh maybe I actually want to be like that." Like what you say is so packed full of retardation there's actually a lot to unpack. You're getting into conspiracy theory territory where ultra rich people may or may not be using the practice of child abuse as initiation into upper echelons of elite cliques or for other such purposes. It's not exactly relevant to nor mutually exclusive to what I said.

>>19036235
I dont care if you didnt say it. Your decision is arbitrary

>>19036260
what decision?

>>19036272
Oh now you're playing dumb. Just hurry up and rope yourself

>>19036294
what are you so angry? have a good day man, take care of your nerves

>>19036214
>he won't even remember
Yeah...I remember the abuse I suffered as a toddler (not technically a baby, but still). Physical abuse (typically beaten for being too loud) and sexual abuse by my older sister. I remember these things very vividly. These events stunted my emotional development and accelerated me sexually. I'm still (technically) a virgin, and I still jerk it to the memory of my sister molesting me (I always feel disgusted with myself afterwards). My Therapist says that this is common for male victims - I never acted out any of the behaviors (animal abuse, violence) that are the flipside of victimhood, I just regressed as I aged and avoided peers as an adolescent. Now, as an adult, I despise children, but underneath that loathing, there's a sick, grasping sort of nostalgia that never really goes away. I don't think it's pedophilia, but it certainly feels like it's adjacent.

The real reason for the paedo hysteria is that everyone can see the writing on the wall.
You didn’t think the advance of liberalism would end at tranny rights did you?
In the march to integrate every sexual identity to the consoom cycle it was natural that pedophiles would come up at some point.
According to liberal logic, one sexual identity is just as valid as another.
Both normal people and liberals have realized this, which is the reason why there’s so much pushback towards it.
Even the most ardent liberals always make a point to bash pedophilia whenever the topic comes up.
They really do believe that they can stop progress at tranny rights.
But that obviously won’t happen. The logic of progress dictates that pedos get rights too.
Sincerely religious objections have been discredited, and morality has been made subjective, it doesn’t make sense that 9-year olds can consent to HRT and sex-change ops but they can’t consent to sex.
The only way to stop the march is to regress, but that would mean that tranny rights would be called into question and discredited, and liberals are unwilling to go back on LGBT rights because that would be “being on the wrong side of history”.
But don’t worry, these liberals will change their tune when their corporate masters order it so.
Prepare to see the bread tube community making pedo apologetics in the coming years, already Vaush has made comments in that direction while there was a controversial tweet that went viral that said “pedophilia is a morally neutral action”. Expect to see more pedo normalization in the media, which can already be seen in music videos and the release of Cuties this year.
Pedochads, we never imagined it would be this way but we’re going to win eventually. Cunny for everybody!

>>19035240
here’s my case: attractive and upstanding women & men should be allowed to diddle boys, young girls are off-limits. this would solve a lot of modern social problems

>>19036484
I'm more sceptical about this. Sure, the logic of accepting sexual identities does foreshadow that new identities will have to be considered of being accepted, since this basic scheme has to regenerate itself. But you forget the idol of our version of liberalism, the unthinkable, the stop point of all moral speculations - notion of harm. And pedophilia is viewed as inherently harmful, which is a myth, like all moral myths that universalize thing as wholly "bad". Look how LGBT distances itself from any pedo activism, they always appeal to harm when it comes to explaining why pedophilia isnt in their camp. We, the cunnyseuirs, have to demolish this idol of harm.

>>19036034
communists and nazis also look like that. its just that fringe things attract that kind of people. more attractive and intelligent people know how to follow their master

>>19036034
I'm a pedophile and a literal model

>>19035963
so was i, but it's about the power dynamic. someone who is older and more aware of the world vs someone who is impressionable and impulsive and doesn't understand things as well due to less time being exposed to them (as many children are) are much more easily manipulated. anyone who tries to justify pedophilia as anything that isn't literally just someone preying on something much weaker than them is delusional.

>>19037577
sorry, I fucked up that middle sentence. the older, more knowledgeable, more experienced party obviously has an unfair advantage in a similar way than a child does. a lot of children also go along with what adults tend to say, too (obviously this is not always the case, i was a pretty obstinate and unruly kid myself). It's much easier to coerce or take advantage of a child and it would be nearly impossible to regulate the "well intentioned, consensual pedos" vs the ones who just manipulate or coerce children. you can not seriously believe that most pedophiles would not (or do not, as pedophiles exist whether or not we accept them) take advantage of the fact that kids are generally less experienced and easier to mislead.

>>19036484
Liberalism isn't so bad desu

Just like people don't question the idea of "paedophilia bad" they don't question the idea of "sexual liberation good".
Not only is paedophilia bad, sex before some kind of established unity, e.g. marriage, is bad. Sex isn't supposed to be just fucking around.
>But what if the paedophile marries the child and isn't just trying to have sex?
A relationship with children is simply retarded, because kids are just retards which slowly become more intelligent. Young people are not only more stupid in the "general intelligence" sense, they're also less experienced, and if one makes the decision on their part to get into a relationship he is abusing them. Practically tricking them. Only later can they realise what they have been a part of.

>>19036484
The "liberalism" (progressivism) is what banned "pedophilia" in the first place through feminism.
It might eventually be handed back, except it will be as a consumer brand through a state approved channel, with the surgical removal of any soul. The aim will not be to form marriages with girls still uncorrupted, but to extend the corruption to younger ages.
It will be a trannified parody, not the life of a sneedville cunnysseur.