>>806401The problem is that this exception is only applied to sex, but not to bullying nor physical assault, especially in countries like the USA where a parent can assault their child under the excuse of “physical discipline” and where parental orgs have managed to enshrine children as their serfs under the excuse of “parental rights” BS, leading to a generation full of psychos or estranged from their families, and this will only get worse as people living with their parents for longer means parental abuse can’t be brushed off as easily as before.
This kind of weird parental exceptionalism exist elsewhere where even a teen having sex with another teen is criminalised in places like India, and yet they can’t vote nor have other basic rights due to infantilising presumptions.
Similar dynamics in my place of origin.
So I fail to see how it’s anything other than a double standard, especially as most of the west is funding Israel’s mass infanticide of Palestinian children.
Just saying: I don’t buy the notion that society universally hates pedos because they care for children’s welfare, when society is willing to overlook at things that do more damage to kids.
>>806619I see. Not gonna single him out for that, but I often notice the kind of faux-pas nihilism that masquerades a deep-seated selective moralism in sorts like him, like when he spouts pedophobic slop, made worse when said slop intersects with race.
Nonetheless, he does make good points about:
- Being sexually strict when dealing with a faction that is sexually libertine only results in the latter’s victory, regardless of political alignments
- Leftists who question the so-called “grooming gangs” whilst pushing Epstein conspiratard slop are hypocrites
I just wish he was more sceptical when it comes to pedophobic slop of all stripes instead of pushing a select few when politically expedient, considering how the cited numbers for the gruming gangz seem to be bull if this chud statistician is to be trusted, and that’s coming from someone who is on board with Michael Tracey when it comes to Epstein:
https://hereticalinsights.substack.com/p/were-250000-english-girls-raped-byIdk what to say if the right is that indifferent to the truth. Moving on, if I had to make an analogy, it would be like pushing the “Monarch project” every time someone brings up the MKUltra CIA operations.
Yes, MKUltra did happen and probably still ongoing given how shady the CIA is wrt clandestine ops. Yes, sexual abuse did happen in Hollywood’s close circles. But does it follow some massive conspiracy involving mind control via sexual abuse to make celebs perform some bizarre occult gesture? No. Pushing it just poisons the well IMO and doesn’t do anything to advance the discussion.
I think it’s just a pattern in conspiratard circles where anything that has a sexual aspect is consoomed by the lumpen both because it elicits their sexual envy and because humanity in general seems to hold a special place for sex in an idealist way. No doubt the men virtue signalling about it are probably closeted rapists or pedos, like the various cops in the news that get charged for owning CP LOL.
In that sense, you could say that both the Epstein and grooming gang inadvertently function as a form of lumpenised class consciousness since it manages to bring lumpenprole together around sexual disgust, which is probably why they aren’t fazed by the truth.
In the gruming gang case, while it is true that reports in some localities were dismissed due to racism it maintaining racial harmony, it overall seems like ad hoc reasoning that doesn’t apply universally as 1990s and 2000s UK wasn’t that PC compared to 2010s UK (afaik, then again I’m not a bong) considering how said reasoning seem to be made up by chuds and grifters at tabloid press and doesn’t account for the fact that prior to the 1990s British police was more lax on adult-minor sex, considering how nude 16 yo used to be featured in British tabloids, underage groupies were looked at the other way when having sex with adult rock stars like Russell Brand, and said police used to treat juvenile prostitution mildly compared to today. In fact, the ascendance of the NSPCC, the satanic panic and the general instability of the 1990s seem to have led Britain to embrace the same hysteria about age-gaps as America. It seems to cross racial divides as well, since the same moralfags still whine about Gary Glitter and Jimmy Saville, despite the latter’s allegations being based on an unscrupulous inquiry.
I think, in all honesty, the failure to question the dogma on sex crimes is what partially led to the rise of the alt-right. Like, the left supported MeToo but when a brown or black man rapes a woman the left would at best bring up “To Kill a Mockingbird” and question the construction of sex crimes hoping that it sticks which, even if they were right, would be unconvincing to bystanders. Basically, it’s a problem of political correctness, true, but also coherency. And I don’t think the right wing as exemplified by Zion Don and the MUSKrat are doing any favors by pushing their own hegemonic political correctness in the form of “anti-woke” wherein “communism” has replaced “white supremacy” as the nebulous boogeyman to be fought against.
I think I’m straying too much for the topic, but yh, I don’t think this issue will get any better as long as the status quo remains.
>>806633I would agree, if it wasn’t for the fact that normies are spending more time online, leading to the internet seeping into the offline realm. That’s one of my issues with being told to “touch grass and get a life”: The internet is real life as people mostly communicate, share a culture, coexist, and work in cyberspace. Online censorship wouldn’t even be an issue if it wasn’t for the fact that public outreach is now primarily done online.
Unless 99.99% of online content is just AI and bots, or Silicon Valley decides to rape all of us with subscription taxes, I don’t think you’ll see a mass return to grass-touching.