If anyone has paid attention in recent years, the war for complete personal freedom comes through the constant violation and erosion of the customs and beliefs of our Egregore… ie Christian notions around sexuality, sin, gender the role of the family, etc.
There has been a gradual ongoing war fought in the shadows, sadly with many victories by the kiddy fiddlers under the claims of ‘rights and personal freedoms’:
California Legislature Passes Bill Reducing Penalties for Oral, Anal Sex with Willing Children
The gradual normalisation of ideas that children should “explore their gender identity” even as young as toddlers, or that they were “sexual entities” is something would have been considered nearly inconceivable just 20yrs ago. Yet here we are where such ideas and topics are now part of the national discussion. Under the dominant Christian cultural view, before we were colonized by the Cultists, was that a children’s sexual identity be left for them to find out for themselves, adults have no part involving themselves in that process of self discovery.
Yet all these ideas all come from somewhere – gender as a spectrum is a cultural idea for some cultures, eg, some tiny Islands in the Pacific, a couple in Africa, and of course Judaism. In a MultiCult society it increasingly seems these two incompatible ideas are forced to share the same space. I would argue that the result in terms of social acceptance and tolerance of these new values, shows whose culture really has the upper hand in this culture war.
Anyhow, it was with interest that I read the following ZH article, and the rabbit hole it took me:
It was filled with quotes that appeared too incredulous not to investigate further. Things like:
The 68-page report titled Standards For Sexuality Education in Europe, also calls for supplying information to toddlers about “enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s own body, early childhood masturbation.”
The policy paper also states that kids between four and six years should “talk about sexual matters” and “consolidate their gender identity.”
Which then further down the article lead me to this:
The development comes on the heels of two UN bodies publishing a report that outlines an agenda to decriminalise all ‘consensual’ sexual activity, even between adults and minors.
Which upon further investigation lead to this site:
That was filled with provocative claims designed to white ant social revulsion towards minor age sex.:
“Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law.”
The argument being that because of this it is more appropriate to view the relationships within a spectrum, defining an adolescent as 10-19 yrs, and that adult minor relationships should be viewed in that context even up to the age of 24. Personally I think a 10 yr old is a kid and not an adolescent, and that a 24 year fucking around with a 15 or 16 yro is asking to be buried under a termite mound.
But then they did it, they included this quote
In an accompanying press release, Ian Seiderman [Every.Single.Time] Law and Policy Director at ICJ noted that “Criminal law is among the harshest of tools at the disposal of the State to exert control over individuals … as such, it ought to be a measure of last resort however, globally, there has been a growing trend towards overcriminalization,” adding “We must acknowledge that these laws not only violate human rights, but the fundamental principles of criminal law themselves.”
And loh! From there I found my way back to the UN:
Basically every outlandish comment in the original ZH that I could be bothered trying to verify if it was actually correct, lead back to these quasi UN websites.
Criminal law allows judges to already take these things into context, what these laws do is hobble their power to punish those that are truly guilty, or to provide a convenient legal backdoor for those who can afford a slick lawyer.
In Melbourne our Paedo Groomers are Millennials…
The fuck?! There’s a toddler gyrating it’s arse for a baying crowd of really sick people.
Twerking is highly simian and highly sexual. There is a reason why it emerged out of African ‘culture’…
One of the whiny bitch comments
made by faggots is that pointing out that Trans are in fact Paedo freaks, means that they are going to kill themselves as a result of pointing out they are Paedo Freaks.
Trans are already mentally ill, this is their default, their starting position. They don’t magically turn mental after being Trans or someone hurts their feelings about their blue hair etc.
In throwing more public money to his Paedo mates, last year Dan Andrews said ”Young same-sex attracted people are already five times more likely to attempt suicide – and young transgender Australians are 15 times more likely. That’s why the Labor Government is stepping in…”
Suicide might be a very common outcome for Trans people but they had that already dialled in. The Trans shit is just an outcome, a symptom of severe mental illness.
this is a new way if thinking about the topic and I appreciate the insight. It has the potential to effect majority of my thoughts.
good creative thinking
this is pearl clutching Stewie
Yes – sexualising kids has a very very long tradition in western culture thousands of years
I find it distasteful because of my modern/late 20th century mores , but who’s to say the post modernists are “wrong”
least of our problems imo
Although I imagine claiming your foreskin would be a huge victory for some Rabbi I was using it as a pejorative.
Make Jew great again (as an insult).
This is patently true. And examples are plenty
St Augustine was engaged to marry a 12 year old. This was in the 400s-500s
in the 1100s, Eleanor of Acquitane was 15 when she was married.
in the 1700s Catherine the Great was 16 when she was married.
in the 1800s in Zola’s Germinal, 22 year old Ettiene pursues 15 year old Catherine.
btw, these are not examples of what’s “right” just examples of what has been common practice.
i wouldnt be actively rolling protections back here, but at present doesn’t seem to be a pressing issue at al
They were exceptions rather than the rule – the average age of marriage for women in the 17th century in England was 25. Indeed in most of Western, Christian Europe it was always around that age – infact it is known as the Hanjnal line.
St Augustine was around the time of the fall of Rome. The Christianisation of Rome, away from paganism, actually resulted in a huge Cultural shift in attitudes towards children and sex.
Prior to the Christianisation of Rome, child prostitutes were common, sex with slaves were common, and women had little more rights than chattle. St Augustine was someone who lived in those transitory times, and would be viewed with disgust nowadays.
The remaining examples are all powerful women or daughters of powerful rulers who were married at early ages, not through love or common procreation, but through politics – so they’re not particularly good examples or indicative of the widespread values of the time, rather they were political exceptions to the rule…. meticulous church and secular council records on marriages have proved this to be the case.
its just that the examples of powerful women are easier to look up and point to. They are not unrepresentative.
If anything, among the peasants, marriage ages were lower. 26+++ as the average marriage age is complete fantasy.
if you read De Bovoir’s The Second Sex, it is full (indeed, excessively so) of examples from throughout history of marriage at ages that are now considered “childhood”.
The observation I would make is that at almost all those earlier times throughout history the woman was always legally a child & never legally independent. Always a ward of her father or brothers, etc. And those men would contract marriage on her behalf. Subsequent to marriage, she’d be a ward of her husband.
Now, she is fortunate enough to gain independent legal capacity at 18. and to contract marriage personally. This is a very recent development.
Well yes, obviously, if the average age was 25 or 26, there would still be some who would get married younger. Peasants lived a fast life cycle, but still even there the age of marriage was rarely below 16…. which was still a vast improvement over the pre-Christian attitudes towards child sexuality and ages of consent.
As for De Bovoir – from the age of 21 she spent most of her life in the companionship of Jean-Paul Sartrewho was a lecherous, disgusting individual. The pair of them lived in an open relationship, with numerous homosexual and lesbian relationships…. basically she was consumed by the cultural values of her partner, and being honest, the 2nd sex, although notionally written by a Catholic, are actually the views of a fallen woman corrupted by a lecherous Marxist pervert, and the cultural baggage from the groups where that ideology originated .
So you can either take the accurate and detailed historical records as to the average age of marriage and deduce the attitudes towards sex and marriage, or you can look through the lens of a bisexual and indeed abusive (and abused) woman, and her adopted cultural lens.
Culture does matter.
Go back to the ancient Greeks and it gets even worse
just doesn’t strike me as a money launderer
A good thread by Keith Woods on the Jewish word of power:
Thanks Stewie. That was gold.
Some good insights there as to the deliberately orchestrated demise of any concept of Nationalism by WW2’s successful Globalist winners… and thus the rise of the apathetic age we live in today.
The history is worth knowing, but what is needed a pathway out: a way to preserve what is left of our connection to our ancestors. The social engineers want people to know only what they say about the past. Perhaps personal research in to one’s own family history is the way foward. Tell the stories that your children need to hear about the people whose lives led to their existence – your parents and their families. That’s what the jews do. Perhaps by facilitating that process, we can start to undo the total fabrication that is “tabula rasa” and the modern ideologies that depend on believing it to be the truth.
What’s this stuff about gender as a spectrum in Judaism?
8 different genders in the Talmud the book they follow but don’t talk about. This is where it all stems from.
Every idea or belief comes from somewhere, and is usually built on the back of or carried on the shoulders of earlier constructed values.
In Contrast Christianity deals in absolutism – there are only two genders. Keith Wood’s thread makes reference to the abolishment of absolutes, although in a slightly different context.
The second of the above links also touches on the plural use of the world Adam:
In the first chapter of Genesis, the Torah chooses to refer to Adam in the plural:
I’ve referred to this previously.
it’s interesting how men, particularly older men, are shamed as ‘pedos’ for finding young but sexually mature girls attractive
ive heard of guys dating 19-20 year olds who are 10 or so years older than the girl being called ‘pedo’ by women now
so basically ‘pedo’ appears to be a shaming term that older roasties use to attack men who admit to finding girls/women approximate to peak fertility hot
here’s kim kardashian at 14 for example, what grown ass man wouldn’t want to bullseye that
is it pedo to say that? would people 200-300 years ago have seen that as pathological?
it’s a modern western idea that this is wrong, based on being ultra sensitive to the idea of being called ‘pedo’, which is the result of older roasties having greater influence in society and trying to dictate to men that finding prime babes hot is wrong in order to desperately preserve their fading SMV
is there any real evidence people are more sexualised than ever? apart from gross depictions in music video clips and stuff younger generations appear to be more sexually withdrawn and incel than ever, increasingly just not having sex at all
HellBytheDashBoardLight put it pretty well when he said girls these days dont want a boyfriend at all, they want a dog
if the globohomoists are succeeding at anything it’s not turning everyone into sex-craved sluts but neurotic messed up weirdos that don’t know what they are and don’t want to have sex at all
yes ephebophilia should be distinguished from true pre-pubescent paedophilia
there were tons of female teachers that i wish had molested me from 12 onwards
There’s plenty of evidence that people who are exposed to sexual practices in early teenage years are more sexual in later life
Is that a bad thing?
I don’t know
Lots of things about it screams moral panic though
Having said all that I personally find guys who are more attracted to younger women probably are weird and insecure
likely to be losers, and not very masculine
similar archetype as the white guy who is only into asian women
i have always found the panic/hysteria about female teachers fucking male students to be totally contrived
oh nooo she MOLESTED ME
the problematic bit, morally, is not the age itself, but the power relationship involved
I can definitely see how some instances would be morally inappropriate while others morally permissible.
the age thing is a convenient proxy/shortcut. Plus parents might have a legitimate expectation that teachers arent going to try to ride their students.
id rather a teacher does it than some rando adult they meet at the bus stop
there’s always a power imbalance in sexual relationships
teacher would involve a betrayal of trust, whereas bus stop rando wouldn’t.
I agree with Peachy – yes there is a power game. Attitudes towards sex and minors, should be absolute and impartial in regards to gender.
While it may be true female lead sexual relations with minor boys may lead to less visible harm as boys are generally less neurotic than women, that is not to say it doesn’t corrupt or influence boys later attitudes towards women and sex.
It is wrong to have sex with minor girls, it is wrong to have sex with minor boys…. sure as a randy boy it might have been great, but the harm isn’t always immediately apparent.
“There’s plenty of evidence that people who are exposed to sexual practices in early teenage years are more sexual in later life”
this could just be a function of life history speed
earlier sexual activity predicts later greater degree of sexual activity in life, and also shorter life expectancy, more rapid physical aging, no # of children and degree of parental investment etc
its part of an over arching phenotype where some individuals have more offspring to a greater number of partners but don’t invest in their children’s wellbeing as much or at all, its an evolutionary strategy
the idea is if you have lots of kids even if more of them don’t necessarily ‘make it’ there’s a chance at least one or two of them will grow up to reproduce so it’s effectively as fruitful as only having one or two kids but spending a lot of resources and effort ensuring that they survive
elephants have slower life history speed than clams for example
ofc this isnt even a problem in modern welfare states, the offspring of individuals with fast life history speed always ‘make it’, which is probs gonna be a problem
Yes – on average girls of Sub-Saharan ancestry reach puberty around 2 years before white girls, who reach puberty a year or so before East Asian girls. Many of the examples of De Bovoir failed to take this into account.
Two or three years doesn’t sound like much of a difference to us, fully grown adults, but it makes the world of difference in terms of a person who is at that age and developmental state.
Anyone who has had a teenager knows just how much development and maturity can occur in a two year space.
Could someone please inform me what the ‘Book that shall not be mentioned’ says about coprophilia, necrophilia, bestiality and cannibalism?
Just so I can mentally prepare for the next thing that shall be normalised.
They’re all good. Particularly coprophilia.
Proposed new WEF slogans:
‘You Will Own Shit and Be Happy’
‘The Great Faecal Reset’
‘The Fart Industrial Revolution’
I think people don’t realise how much influence the UN has.
Every accord they think up is unquestioningly signed by the 180-190 member states and then becomes equivalent to law for those countries.
The IMF is a UN agency:
The IMF is also a big fan of CBDCs:
IMF central bank digital currencies
And Digital ID:
IMF digital ID
The World Bank (part of the World Bank Group) is a UN agency:
Through UNESCO they decide what’s in the curriculum of schools and unis:
The WHO is also a UN organisation:
It is interesting that the WHO is working on a Pandemic Accord (who pandemic accord) which would give them the power to dictate to other countries how they shall handle the next pandemic.
Also the whole Green Agenda comes from the UN:
Tin foil hatters worry about global government, well, it’s here.
Australia has signed on to all of it, and will also sign the WHO accord.
I’m sure glad the voters were asked and their opinions heard.
UN and WEF signed a strategic partnership in 2019:
They are all part of the same Globalist hydra – if you wanted to assume control of the world and roll out your cultural values to every corner of the globe the easiest way to do it is to take over any institution designed to prevent anyone taking over the world.
The UN is full of toxic Globalist values – every Western nation should withdrawal, but of course the masses have been so brainwashed into believing the UN is good and noble, that any suggestions of “not belonging to the group” or being “agreeable” would cause about half the population in each nation to become hysterical.
I’m afraid the masses know nothing about the UN other than that it was started after WW2 to avoid war and act as a global peacekeeper.
That was the camels nose under the tent where it now has infiltrated policy decisions of the whole of government.
All these UN treaties have never been part of the political discourse where people were asked their opinion.
This is another reason why voting doesn’t matter anymore.
It now acts as a supranational government.
100% Most normies think of the UN as this benign organisation that does world good and stops wars….. yet for some reason every war that has occured since its foundation hasn’t been seen as a failure of its charter and purpose.
The UN is an evil Globalist organisation that is destroying the West from within – the Camel’s nose is a very apt analogy.
+1 (can’t upvote as guest)
The only reason the UN hadn’t become an evil one world government is the permanent veto by China and Russia