This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This top level post about pedophilia was actually meant to be the reply at this link. Please reply there if interested.
Well, how I disagree with you is that I don't even just believe that "pedophiles exist" but rather that at least some (much more than comfortable for your average person to admit or acknowledge in themselves or others) pedophilic attraction is nearly universal (at least in masculine sexuality). (I do agree with you that most avowed pedophiles are not only interested in prepubescents, but they are significantly (and usually primarily) interested in them enough that they're not going to give up on sexually indulging in them without a fight you can't win, and since the essence of male sexual attraction is variety anyway it hardly matters if they're only secondarily interested in them too.)
To justify that (other than some seriously buried studies that I'll probably drag out if I can take the effort to find them again), I use plain and simple historical fact. Plenty of historical sources will attest to the fact that most ancient sexual marauders, pillagers, rampagers, etc. acting as perhaps the purest expression of (again, at least masculine) sexuality and vastly under"fed" in regards to any "messaging and content" in comparison to your modern man (who, it seems to me, is the one actually influenced to artificially attempt to tilt his sexuality in an anti-pedophilic direction by "messaging and content"), pretty much had sex with (that is, raped (actual rape, not "statutory rape") by our modern standards, not that I think they thought of it that way or cared) attractive females regardless of age, tending to lean younger (probably more towards early teens, the freshly fertile, but hardly excluding prepubescents).
(And this also applies/applied to somewhat modern but still less modern men, like those participating in the Rape of Nanking for example, or those in modern African conflicts. Really, it seems like whenever men can get away with it (with conflict situations being the easiest avenues), they have a lot of sex with a lot of young girls, including very young ones, in a widespread fashion. I'm not sure how else you explain that other than it being a widely possessed and merely widely suppressed desire.)
What are you going to do about all of the sexy children walking around in real life then? (Based on my experience in pedo etc. communities over the years, this is at least as common if not more common of a "pedopill" than any media consumption for people.) Universal age-based dress codes (which would probably have to be niqabs to fully frustrate attraction, though that's just going to tempt people more in a different way with the forbidden nature of it)?
And, again, how are you going to stop people from consuming any content without the exact same infrastructure and techniques immediately shutting down all other heterodox communications you care about (presuming you care about at lesat some if you're on here)? Or are you willing to throw everything else on that funeral pyre?
(I will await you trying to stop it though, same as thousands of other people online over the years who have made the same proclamation.)
[insert "We own guns too."-esque slogan.]
The "Great Day of the Rope" may yet belong to we pedofascists, not our "agecuck" (as is the lingo) counterparts.
How do you plan on enforcing that? If it's with objective, involuntary measurements of arousal like penile plethysmography and even half-decent content (especially if you plan on criminalizing attraction to anyone under the age of 18, or even just under the age of 16), then I hope you're prepared to either seriously fudge things/render your own scheme arbitrary and dishonest or lose a significant portion of your male population (like so much that they will probably all just rebel and overthrow you anyway).
(Many underage girls online who post primarily sexualized content have millions of subscribers/followers, and this is with all of the inevitable deplatforming/(shadow)banning etc. of their content, along with that their main audience is often reluctant to explicitly subscribe to/follow them or often even make an account at all. If you actually seriously tried to enforce what you're proposing on a fair, universal basis, again you would soon find yourself overwhelmed with dissenters and rebels (forced into it by the threat of involuntary confinement). It's probably the best guaranteed recipe for regime change I can think of, which is why as an aspiring supporter of a pedofascist regime I kind of wish it would be tried.)
Explain please. What were you doing, who were you engaging with?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link