It’s PLEDGE DRIVE time again! WHTM is ad free and entirely dependent on folks like you for its continued existence. If you can afford it, please DONATE HERE NOW! Thanks!
By David Futrelle
Homophobes and transphobes do so love their slippery slope arguments.
If you give rights to gay people, or trans people, they claim, its only a few short steps to accepting pedophiles as a legitimate “lifestyle choice.” Then it’s on to cats marrying dogs and people marrying toasters.
Trouble is, more than a few of the “traditionalist” types who yell the loudest about the imaginary SJW push to normalize pedophilia also think that it’s perfectly normal — if not God’s will — for adult men to marry girls in their early teens.
In their minds, “real” pedophilia is a Satanic evil, but “hebephilia” and “ephebophilia” — sexual attraction to adolescents — is basically what God and nature intended.
Now some of these galaxy-brained “jailbait” obsessives have even begun to argue that the only way to fight “real” pedophilia is to set the age of consent at puberty and give men like them free reign.
In a thread on “Red Pill sexuality” on the Holla Forums, one jailbait theorist called Nathaniel Butler argues that age of consent laws should only protect pre-pubescent children.
“The true red pill is simple,” he writes.
Only heterosexuality should be legal and it should be full heterosexuality not the current restricted heterosexuality.
Nothing good could possibly follow an assertion like that.
That means it should be heterosexuality as God/nature intended so that the age of consent law should … simply be [that] pre-pubescent=illegal and people should not only be allowed to have sex from the start of puberty but they should also be allowed to get married then if they want too.
Later in the discussion, one Levi Torres (who sounds suspiciously like a socjkpuppet of Mr. Butler) went a bit further.
Agreeing with another commenter who suggested that “pedophilia [will be] the next big thing pushed by the left,” Torres suggested that age of consent laws set at age 16 or higher actually help pedophiles because they allegedly confuse the public into lumping the bad pephoophiles in with the (allegedly) good hebephiles and ephebophiles like him.
The left, Torres claims, has
already successfully blue-pilled … too many people into believing a false definition of paedophilia. The REAL SCIENTIFIC definition of paedophilia is sexual attraction to PRE-PUBESCENT CHILDREN, not sexual attraction to young adults under an unnatural government-created [Age of Consent].
Dude, as I’m sure you’re well aware, girls typically hit puberty between the ages of 11 and 14, if not younger. These are not “young adults.” They are still children.
The reason they’ve got people to believe the false definition is so that they can create so many repressed heterosexuals who believe that they’re actually paedophiles so will eventually support the legalisation of paedophilia.
I’ll let Leslie Jones respond for me here:
Torres continues:
The way to stop paedophilia being legalised is to change the [age of consent] to pre-pubescent=illegal and red-pill everyone on the FACT that only those attracted to pre-pubescent children are paedophiles and that all other heterosexuals are normal.
Being attracted to girls under 16 but not pre-pubescent is 100% normal and is the natural way of things and had been regarded as such since the first humans up until quite recently.
Dude, that’s enough computer for you today, you piece of shit.
If you need me I’ll be here quietly banging my head on my desk.
Latsot,
I don’t think anyone here is opposed to medicine and psychology trying to understand pedophilia or abuse.
But again, every damn conversation on the internet disapproving of pro child abuse people or groups seems to have people piping up to say “not all pedophiles” and some of us are fucking sick of it. There’s nothing wrong with wanting a post to not derail into talk of poor oppressed pedophiles. I can’t even discuss my own experiences of being treated like a prey object by adult men as soon as I started showing signs of puberty, experiences that I know are shared with a lot of other people here, experiences that were traumatizing, because the conversation is all about how we have to watch ourselves to make sure we’re not stigmatizing the ones who aren’t acting on it.
It may not be intended as a way to silence the victims of patriarchy’s fetization of young girls, but it sure feels that way.
@weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee:
If someone did cause you trauma, than we are safly away from thought into the actioncatagory.
If there is a victim we should listen.
Of course to topic is rage-indicting, and if I ever hear anyone saying thinks like Nathaniel Butler in real live there would be urgh.
Sorry the post that hit me hardest in the tread was from Bina(who did nothing wrong), about 3year old maried of, because I have a 3,5 year old niece.
Sure, but if every time the topic of child sexual abuse comes up, people rush into the thread to talk about how the poor non-active pedophiles are so hard done by, it doesn’t really feel like listening. It feels like #notallpedos. It feels like an effort to shift the topic away from listening to the victims.
Catalpa:
My natural response to treads like this is stay away from, because that is depresing and hard to write somethink here.
It is a very dark topic and can get very emotianal. (I think that here child-rape may be one of the few crimes that has a chance to get a majority for the deathpenality)
So in this we have got voices that try to make a distinction here (and for others the fact that the people who hurt children are doing this because they made the choice to do it, is important)
If you think certain post go to far, remind the people of the comments policy and if you think somethink was completly out of the line mail David.
Hurting victims is the last think that I think regulars here want.
@weirwoodtreehugger and Catalpa
You know…this post IS about pedophiles, for the most part, so talking about them isn’t exactly off topic. I didn’t see anyone respond to any comments about childhood abuse to say “but what about the abusers?” Nobody here is trying to take attention away from your experiences, do we not have just as much a right to share our own? Cause I hinted at mine earlier, including the trauma in my past, and the direct response was entirely negative and dismissive, but I didn’t see anyone do the same to you. If I wasn’t so dead inside I’d probably be upset, but it’s to be expected, I only get annoyed when my point is misinterpreted though. As it probably will be again right now. I guess I just love punishment.
The post is about assholes who want to legalize the rape of children.
Coming in to talk about the folks who have urges which they contain and fight against seems fairly off topic. To me, it seems like either it’s unfair to the people who struggle with the desires while knowing that they are absolutely wrong, because you’re lumping them in with the fuckwads who want to abuse children without any consequences, or it’s an attempt to shift the focus away from the assholes, a la #notallpedos.
I did, but David already deleted it. The poster in question said we need to sympathize with and admire people who are attracted to children. Yours was very much in that vein, though. Not quite as bad, but for fuck’s sake just stop.
@kupo
Deal. I think I’m done with this place in general. I was obviously mistaken in thinking you were an understanding and empathetic crowd, not to the wrong kind of abuse victim at least. As usual my trauma is invalid, last time I try opening up to people.
@Airblester
I would say thoughts are rational occurences, not because they have necessarily a rational basis but more in the sense that you can mostly translate them into words.
Urges, instead, are impulses, they belong more in the category of emotions. In certain cases people can be literally unable to control them. But there are ways to both be able to get a grip when they happen, and to create a mindset in which they do not emerge at all. It takes work, help, and mostly the will to do the change.
I’ll stay out of this thread now, since I feel I’m feeding the derail and it’s not my intention. And also the discussion is making me feel really bad and I need to quit it for now.
At the risk of stating the obvious, you are on a website dedicated to pointing out and mocking horrible people, most of whom have abusive mindsets. Almost every article is about the worst examples of behavior that result from such a mindset. Your comments are embedded in the greater context of the article itself, and there are zero articles here that require nor support defenses of abusers or abusive mindsets, nor apologia for the same. Coming here unbidden to do so only makes people uncomfortable and angry, and you should not at all be surprised at this outcome.
I had an online conversation with a man who said that 12 year old were not children, they were developing adult s. Yes he was in favour of sex between ‘developing adults’ and adults.
He said that they – girls only, of course – were ‘very provocative’. I disagreed, and said that IF they ARE being deliberately provocative it is for the attention of 14&15yo boys.
He shut up after that.
I did try to have civil exchanges with these men because I wanted to have a better understanding of how best to protect children, particularly girls.
They seem to interpret children’s actions in very different ways than most adults. Basically they project their desires and I suppose this is to make themselves feel OK about what they want to do.
@Gaebolga:
My (admittedly layman’s) understanding is that while people normally associate PTSD with big obvious trauma (as with the old name of ‘shell shock’) that isn’t a requirement. Relentless pressure over an extended period of time can also cause it; basically anything that can trigger anxiety or panic that you can’t get away from. It doesn’t have to be (and often isn’t) any one specific incident.
@ jenora
At the risk of doing the vegan propaganda thing; there’s really high incidences of PTSD in abbatoir workers. This paper makes reference to something called ‘cumulative trauma disorder’; which apparently is universally applicable to people who have long term exposure to a background level of trauma.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841092/
@Jenna and Alan
Thank you for that insight, and that would make a lot of sense; growing up not knowing I was on the spectrum — and in a cultural context where autism was relatively unknown — coupled with the fact that my parents moved to a new state or country every two or three years, made my entire childhood essentially a two-decade-long exposure to long-term trauma.
Re Ellesar:
While I wouldn’t not call a 14year old a child (at last not to her face) but they are not adults yet.
Puperty is one of the most dificult times for familys, because of modeswings.
re “being provocative”: Are we talking about behavior here, or how girls dress? (I somhow got an impresion that it is about the second but it would fit the first also)
There are 2 reasons besides impresing other teenangers:
1. Shocking there parents
2. They don’t have the experience yet for nuance and they are trying things.
One question is in my mind in the whole discusion: Do those guy know any teenangers and have they completly forgotten how it was to be young?
@who?
Idk. When I was a teenager. 15 or so specifically I remembered talking to my school counselor who carried for me a lot and sharing her my shame that I didn’t know how to deal with the aftermath of my abuse and rape. That I felt like I didn’t have a grip on realty and I blamed myself for it and she looked at me said and
“Of course you don’t know how to deal with it. This is something grown adult women don’t know how to deal with, your just a kid” and it was that moment that helped me a lot because I was still a kid who had a very adult traumatic thing happen to them and I had forgotten that I wasn’t an adult yet. Having some take that burden of not being able to deal with it off my shoulders helped a lot because I had a lot of adults blame me for not know how to deal. Sometimes it’s good to remind kids that they are in fact kids.
@Lainy:
In this situation, kudos to your school counselor, she seemed to have found the exact right words in the exact right moment.
The masage you are young, it is imposible to have completly lifeexperience yet is a good one.
What I meaned (and remember from my youth) that for many people in that agegroup it is a strugle for respect and becoming their own person.
“I don’t want to be treaded as a child” and “I want to be respected as my own person who makes their own decisions” is stuff that played a big role for teenangers, from what I can remember (both genders).
My picture was also that from a relative who meets the 14year old ones or twice a year so not really near. (Happened yesterday interesting enough)
So it is a different situation that was in my mind.
@Who?
It’s hard to find the right balance of becoming more mature so should have more responsibility and freedom and be able to make some mistakes to learn from them and then also remembering that lack of experience and still growing. Adults have to find the balance of respecting and empathizing with a kid going through puberty and the teenager years, while still being the adult and knowing when to so the kid doesn’t get in over their head.
@Gaebolga:
You’re welcome. Of course, the minimization of PTSD caused by people who assume that only soldiers could get it can just add to the problems. Add misogyny on top of that, and things get nastier.
(How I originally learned about this: Melody Hensley made an attempt at dealing with MRAs in the atheist community after the infamous ‘Elevatorgate’; this led to a couple of years of consistent abuse and rape/murder threats, which in turn led to her diagnosis with PTSD. Note that as a director for a largely public relations organization at the time, ‘don’t go online’ would have meant ‘be unable to do your job’. Of course, the fact of the PTSD diagnosis just led to even more abuse. There are unfortunately a lot of MRA atheists, with a whole lot of the ‘I’m a more rational person than you!’ attitude coming through on both sides.)
@Alan:
I can believe that. It’s certainly not a job I’d want to have.
Not vegan or vegetarian myself, but also not one of the ‘carnivore rah!’ types. If there’s one guiding principle to my diet, it would be ‘variety’. I do think we need to reduce the amount of meat eaten on average for environmental sustainability reasons if nothing else.
My sister tried going vegetarian at one point. Unfortunately, she’s also Celiac, which makes restricting her diet further a lot more difficult.
Dr. Thang, Ariblester is unfortunately right. This place is a Two Minutes Hate, that attracts commenters who enjoy hearing about bad people and being outraged. Nuance and broad compassion are not their thing.
I’m having a lot of difficulty with this myself. I stumbled upon one nutrient a wheat free diet is lacking, but there’s something else I’m missing when I cut out meat, so until I solve that I’m kinda stuck.
@Itsabeast
Nice try using such language in support of pedophiles.
@Dr Thang, if you’re still here
…I went back through the posts you’ve made on this thread, and it’s possible that my reading comprehension is just rubbish, but I didn’t see anything in them that hinted at your past traumatic experiences? Let alone anyone being negative and dismissive about those experiences. Is this the hint you were referring to?
I can definitely read an implication in there, but the (don’t ask why) seems to suggest you are uncomfortable with talking about it.
It seems unfair of you to expect the commentariat to express sympathy for your hinted experiences when you’ve made clear that you wish to avoid the topic with regard to yourself.
The negative comments you received were not said with regard to your experiences, but with regard to the sympathy you tried to evoke for pedophiles on a post regarding assholes advocating for the legalization of child rape.
Claiming that your trauma doesn’t count here seems a bit emotionally blackmail-ish, especially since you merely hinted at it but apparently expect us to disregard the entire rest of your post and the context around it in order to be sensitive about your trauma. To be clear, I’m not claiming that you’re required to share anything you’re uncomfortable with, merely that you can’t expect us to operate on information we have no way of knowing, and that traumatic experiences do not exempt you from being disagreed with on other topics.
That’s not what I meant, and you can fuck off for twisting my words in that way.
What I actually meant was that any defense of pedophilia in the comments on this site is invariably a derail, and furthermore is ultimately counter-productive, as it forces the defenses to be read in the light of the words and actions of horrible abusers, which either minimizes the harm of the abuse and/or stigmatizes those whom you are trying to defend.
I knew that @Itsabeast sounded familiar.
From a previous post (for those who remember, it was the second long drawn out debate about being “pro-life”):
Note that @Itsabeast didn’t actually know (much less care) what was being discussed; this was just their reflexive argument.