Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

The Onslaught of Pedophilia on the Internet

Rate this topic


John Tate

Recommended Posts

In the field of ethics there is this little discussed and ignored area known as sexual ethics. In discourse sexual ethics is today dominated by pedophiles, feminists, perverts, and “sexology.” In philosophy, feminism and pedophilia are typically influenced by the dominant ethical trend of altruism. Though thankfully, most of us have a sexual ethic based on the mores of society: consent and the ability to reason. In the bedroom however sexual ethics are not ignored, but seldom talked about as they are obvious to anyone through first-hand observations. So typically one might expect that wherever you are in the world sexual ethics are much the same and they typically are except where there is organized knowledge – typically only by religion.

In the information age sexual ethics have however for many stopped merely being a case of simple inductions but a matter of great concern – unless you are not paying attention. As I write pedophiles try to teach boys their code, not the boys they target, but the boys (teenagers) whom try basically try and recruit. Typically for many sexuality has been for so long an unspoken area of knowledge – not any more. Not for these lads. That is why I am here.

The onslaught of pedophilia on the Internet is a debasement of anyone targeted by these groups. Ayn Rand’s theory of sex makes the response to ones highest values – and the reversal of this for the psychology of young men and for what become second-hand responses will turn out to be devastating. Essentially, our young boys are being told not to pursue their highest values in sexuality which is almost a-priori, but to pursue childish girls most would describe as unappealing. This is unfortunately, something easy to make effective. A boy at 12 years old will quite naturally find girls around him, though often women, quite attractive and like various girls. These memories are with many of us for life. So pedophiles through not just words but imagery hold back the sexual development of adolescent men, by making it far more difficult than it has ever been for them to simply forget these girls and naturally move up in what ages they find attractive – and at say 16 rather than simply no-longer responding to a girl of say 12 – being passively reminded of them by these pedophiles (and their anonymous youngsters) combined with the alluring promise of easy sex.

I am here talking purely about male adolescents, no sexism is implied. Girls too are obviously caught up in this, and unlike the hysteria of nineties television mixed signals appear to be sent out of what is weird and what is not. Worse still, the state seems to provide a perfect reverse psychology and if a girl is looking for rebellion it is easily found in older boys. This isn't so unnatural but in the information age this appears to be becoming seriously distorted in just how old they get. Contemporary culture however has absolutely nothing to say, as so much seems obvious, in response to the confused state of many of these perpetrators and victims. If you thought Capitalism was poorly defended, well, this isn’t a position defended at all by much other than the judicial system – not philosophy or ethics.

It is becoming clear that an unstoppable and serious transformation is taking place due to the treatment of sexuality as debased, unimportant, and non-intellectual. Not only now does this ethos of culture as Ayn Rand and many others identified lead people down fruitless sexual avenues like it did in the past of shame and evasions but it is powerless to stop the onslaught of what is evidently becoming incredibly persuasive. Simply, the only way to fight the ideas promoted by pedophiles is with the idea that sexuality is a response to ones inner-most virtues and values.

http://johntate.org/node/306

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't aware that pedophilia was a movement comparable to feminism. Could you provide some examples for what you are talking about?

I never said that it was. My point being is that Feminism is one area of knowledge put in the faces of youth; and has been for a while. Now pedophilia is being promoted in a similar way on the Internet. Some examples, well, there is the culture surrounding imageboards and file sharing networks beyond pornography but in the area of indoctrination. Most of us take for granted our own knowledge of sexual ethics without really expressing it. Pedophile ethics spread with little opposition on the Internet. The closest example I can show legally is the stories and literature on www.asstr.org which is for erotic fiction. On top of that are the usual sources, Lolita by Vladamir Nobakov, and such.

Generally though this is something I am sure other young men are experiencing simply in various conversations with adolescents. As a young man I run into this culture online and I am sure a lot of people do. I have started to realize that this faces little opposition.

As for formal philosophical influences, pedophile ethics are generally inspired through altruism, hedonism, and moral relativism. Altruism, it is seen as helpful and that can be seen in just the court testimonies of pedophiles. Hedonism, sexuality is made out as an activity devoid of meaning anyway. Moral relativism, well just look at this vanity fair article.

Settled in 1790 by mutineers from the storied H.M.S. Bounty, Pitcairn Island is one of the British Empire’s most isolated remnants, a mystical hunk of rock that was largely ignored until 1996. Then Pitcairn’s secret was exposed: generations of rape and child molestation as a way of life. Delving into the South Pacific island’s past, the authors chronicle its 10-year clash with the British legal system, which ripped apart a tiny society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you provide any evidence that there is an onslaught of pedophilia? Or are you just saying such people do exist, and are bad for the reasons you say?

I suggest you just take it at face value, which might not be much to you. It will not surprise me if some other individuals have seen some of the stuff around. Considering this is the Internet I can't really provide you with evidence of anything, at all. The place I studied has been removed so at the moment I am at a loss. I will see what I can find, in time, but at the moment I'll admit I don't have much. This is, in terms of numbers not that they should matter if that is how you are taking the word onslaught this is quite small. In terms of opposition nonetheless I can see it becoming a problem. By onslaught, I mean a paralyzed and hopeless good and a ridiculously potent evil in the making. I don't mean numbers, maybe you did not either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest you just take it at face value, which might not be much to you. It will not surprise me if some other individuals have seen some of the stuff around. Considering this is the Internet I can't really provide you with evidence of anything, at all. The place I studied has been removed so at the moment I am at a loss. I will see what I can find, in time, but at the moment I'll admit I don't have much. This is, in terms of numbers not that they should matter if that is how you are taking the word onslaught this is quite small. In terms of opposition nonetheless I can see it becoming a problem. By onslaught, I mean a paralyzed and hopeless good and a ridiculously potent evil in the making. I don't mean numbers, maybe you did not either.

I'm confused about what you are saying. How are you defining pedophilia? Without citing something, can you at least give an anecdotal example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the field of ethics there is this little discussed and ignored area known as sexual ethics. In discourse sexual ethics is today dominated by pedophiles, feminists, perverts, and “sexology.” In philosophy, feminism and pedophilia are typically influenced by the dominant ethical trend of altruism. Though thankfully, most of us have a sexual ethic based on the mores of society: consent and the ability to reason. In the bedroom however sexual ethics are not ignored, but seldom talked about as they are obvious to anyone through first-hand observations. So typically one might expect that wherever you are in the world sexual ethics are much the same and they typically are except where there is organized knowledge – typically only by religion.

In the information age sexual ethics have however for many stopped merely being a case of simple inductions but a matter of great concern – unless you are not paying attention. As I write pedophiles try to teach boys their code, not the boys they target, but the boys (teenagers) whom try basically try and recruit. Typically for many sexuality has been for so long an unspoken area of knowledge – not any more. Not for these lads. That is why I am here.

The onslaught of pedophilia on the Internet is a debasement of anyone targeted by these groups. Ayn Rand’s theory of sex makes the response to ones highest values – and the reversal of this for the psychology of young men and for what become second-hand responses will turn out to be devastating. Essentially, our young boys are being told not to pursue their highest values in sexuality which is almost a-priori, but to pursue childish girls most would describe as unappealing. This is unfortunately, something easy to make effective. A boy at 12 years old will quite naturally find girls around him, though often women, quite attractive and like various girls. These memories are with many of us for life. So pedophiles through not just words but imagery hold back the sexual development of adolescent men, by making it far more difficult than it has ever been for them to simply forget these girls and naturally move up in what ages they find attractive – and at say 16 rather than simply no-longer responding to a girl of say 12 – being passively reminded of them by these pedophiles (and their anonymous youngsters) combined with the alluring promise of easy sex.

& cetera...

John, much as I hasten to agree that the topic is worthy of discussion, I am afraid that your post is confusing and does not reach or advocate much of a point. The other commenters so far have considerately asked you for further elaboration and elucidation - I agree with them as well. Some further grounding in the facts of the matter (such as you may find) is definitely needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with them as well because it is the problem I am finding that these things are done by people who are trying to hide as well. Our culture isn't so backward that if people were caught doing this they would be in trouble. I remember my own childhood, at twenty-three now I remember at about thirteen the usual stuff Chris Hansen goes after. I had just gotten the Internet and was always good with programming. Net Nanny was the first thing to go. This girl talked to me of 18 and years later it occurred to me it probably wasn't a girl.

I'll state that I was sexually abused and that man was dealt with by the law many years previous to that. He tried to teach me his code, I don't think he was homosexual at all. His focus was girls, he tried to make mine that way as well. I've been over this for so long I've not read it in a while but there is a quarterly journal called MaleSurvivor and I might be able to find the evidence you are looking for.

These days I've noticed young people are not just targeted for sex, they are targeted to be taught a pedophile code in the stage of intellectual development where they are angry with society. It is basically offered as a form of simple rebellion. There is something legal for Americans to have a peek at but not me myself as an Australian known as lolicon a type of manga. This material can become somewhat addictive (for lack of a better word) when a young enough person has access to it while it is still normal to possibly like those girls, say at about 10-14. In my experience with some 18 year old guys I know they've had a lot of trouble and shame because of what pedophiles have dragged them into.

Basically what I am saying is just like you see things on Dateline and such of what these people do to try and get sex they also try to do it to continue their traditions and repeat their early motivations to fresh lots of young men. This is like feminism, feminists target young girls as an audience for their irrational philosophy with different results of course. We don't see that one everyday either - we can go read about it. The very reason I am at a forum is because my desire at least is to get to these youth first before they do. It's not seemed like a huge problem, just a happening, until now as I take a younger friends word on it on just how effective it is on young men.

Regarding feminism, in a sense it is a counter-culture to that irrational trend. Feminists have indoctrinated girls for decades and pedophiles have used the resulting attributes that become of these women as a case for those they are trying to indoctrinate to be pedophiles. Is it really hard to imagine happening? I know that isn't what you want to hear - but this is kept out of our sight with quite a bit of effort. Were it organized the term conspiracy would be appropriate and occasionally it is. On the most part however this is just a subject of informal chats online that occur spontaneously between boys and bad men. Often because boys cannot even swear without trouble they hardly understand, they don't speak of it for the same reasons I didn't speak of it when being molestered. Sexual taboos are why I used the term onslaught, because that exact situation has them attempting this indoctrination unopposed and unnoticed. I am surprised not far more others have had similar experiences online lately as to see this content casually wherever anonymity is protected.

I do wonder what the world will look like in thirty years when maybe onslaught will be a term those of you skeptical accept as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused about what you are saying. How are you defining pedophilia? Without citing something, can you at least give an anecdotal example?

I can easily on a chat community pretend to be a young teenage male and as we all probably know its very easy for a girl to be groomed so can men. Just the grooming is of a different sort.

Also the more common anecdotal example I can provide is that young men looking for pornography would look for girls their own age. This comes from child porn sources and lands them smack in the midst of the kind of indoctrination I am speaking of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, you're posts really do drift all over the place. If that first post is supposed to be an essay as you said, you really should try getting an editor. As it is, it is confusing indeed what exactly you're trying to say. I'm going to try to summarize what you're points are and ask that you correct me if I'm wrong:

1) Pedophiles on the internet exist, though in semi-hiding.

2) They are targeting children not only to have sex with, but to recruit as new members of their community.

3) This is bad and something should be done about it.

Now, so far, one of my main questions here is why you believe these efforts to stunt the development of children's sexuality would be effective. There are plenty of 14 year olds out there that have sex with other 14 year olds, lots of times even, yet I've heard of no established correlation even between this and getting hooked long term on 14 year olds as such, long past the time one is actually 14 themselves. I would expect this should have far more impact too than just porn would have.

Second of all, what exactly is it you would propose be done in response to this aside from throwing any adult in the slammer who actually tries to have sexual interaction with a kid, which is already done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, you're posts really do drift all over the place. If that first post is supposed to be an essay as you said, you really should try getting an editor. As it is, it is confusing indeed what exactly you're trying to say. I'm going to try to summarize what you're points are and ask that you correct me if I'm wrong:

1) Pedophiles on the internet exist, though in semi-hiding.

2) They are targeting children not only to have sex with, but to recruit as new members of their community.

3) This is bad and something should be done about it.

Now, so far, one of my main questions here is why you believe these efforts to stunt the development of children's sexuality would be effective. There are plenty of 14 year olds out there that have sex with other 14 year olds, lots of times even, yet I've heard of no established correlation even between this and getting hooked long term on 14 year olds as such, long past the time one is actually 14 themselves. I would expect this should have far more impact too than just porn would have.

Second of all, what exactly is it you would propose be done in response to this aside from throwing any adult in the slammer who actually tries to have sexual interaction with a kid, which is already done?

I'm tired of repeating myself and yes I can be a bit confusing, I jokingly call it Alan Greenspan disease. Arcane writings and speakings seem to be a second-nature of mine :P.

It is becoming clear that an unstoppable and serious transformation is taking place due to the treatment of sexuality as debased, unimportant, and non-intellectual. Not only now does this ethos of culture as Ayn Rand and many others identified lead people down fruitless sexual avenues like it did in the past of shame and evasions but it is powerless to stop the onslaught of what is evidently becoming incredibly persuasive. Simply, the only way to fight the ideas promoted by pedophiles is with the idea that sexuality is a response to ones inner-most virtues and values.

If that isn't clear enough, I am suggesting that people take sexuality more seriously. You can end up with worse things than Lillian Rearden as a result of just floating along with the mainstream culture. In fact its becoming a pretty big part of culture to assume sometimes that these people thrown in the slammer for borderline jailbait have actually had something nice. It's not good for anyone - except by one standard: altruism. By that standard the "selfish" behavior is considered by typical way of the intellectual package deal. Much like say, Madoff is considered Selfish, and many assholes caught up in the intellectual package deal of selfishness would like to be him also many people think these people have actually experienced something "good" for them.

To state and repeat the bleeding obvious (excuse the Brittishism) there is certainly more to lose than just capitalism in the mess that is todays culture. Because people have more anonimity we are beginning to see what many people really have to say. Wherever that level of protection exists problems like I'm describing become more apparent. What can we do? I should just refuse to answer. I am beginning to see that, having read all of Ayn Rand's non-fiction that many of you are not taking a serious effort to be Objectivists and should cease using the title. The first essay was and is merely a request for comments and people with similar experiences. I don't think I am quite so confusing - merely I expect my readers to actually understand Objectivism.

What should we do? The same thing suggested by Objectivism you do about everything else: think, speak, and reason with people on all the issues. I know some of you must understand Objectivism quite well, and I am a little obscure but a question like that to me borders on the ridiculous. Especially now that I've not said what we should do once but twice and I imagine a third time. Maybe some of you people need rotes however because you are clearly just reading Wikipedia, and the Lexicon which I am beginning to think should cost cash money like HBL, TOS, and everything else that should only be used by people who have already familiarized themselves with the material.

Edit: Why not try thinking for yourselves. What should YOU do? If you do not care, I am going to report your posts. If that isn't good enough, I am going to report this forum - then its first mention ever in "Todays Culture" at the ARI can be a negative one. I am really starting to wonder if this place is what it says it is or is worth even a dime.

Edit 2: By coming along and saying you "dont care" (where the normal reaction is to do what I expected of just about everyone, to ignore it) you are by axiom actually caring. This is really dumb, and a lot of you evidently don't know a damn thing about Objectivist Epistomology nor practice it. Please stop wasting my time and yours.

Edited by John Tate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:/ That was highly uncalled for, sir. We have been trying to discern your intended message in order to discuss it with you. If you could be a little patient with clarifying rather than saying you just don't feel like bothering to put that much effort into what you claim to be your super duper issue of serious concern rather and insulting us, you may actually get some productive results from this. That somebody doesn't get what you say right away does not mean they are stupid or unserious. Getting mad at people for asking questions to try to understand does not help you in the slightest and is in fact counterproductive. You came here to ask us for stuff, so please stop treating us like we're the ones who have been coming to drag you into anything against your will for our sake's at your expense. Many people here are very serious about Objectivism (and in fact, many like myself take it seriously enough we only call ourselves students of Objectivism because we are concerned about not using the name until we believe we fully grasp it through and through in its entirety), but your less than stellar communication style is very off putting, so people may choose to spend their time on other threads instead. That doesn't mean we think child molestation or attempting to thwart the sexual development of children is at all a good thing, just that your thread is not the be all end all of that topic and it can still be discussed at other times and places where communication is easier so we can get farther on the issue in less time and without the insults.

I gather my three points above I listed were a fairly accurate summary of your initial points. You next propose the problem is largely rooted in and abated by shitty cultural messages about sex and propose the proper philosophical messages are needed to help with the problem (the ones Objectivists have). Do you have any more specific propositions about how you believe one should go about this sexual ethics war on the interwebs pedos? Just saying "Go out and spread the good word!" is not much help. As you know, that's already what we do on every issue and thus your whole thread amounts to little, just repeating a known problem and a general standard way of dealing with every problem as we already do. If you think your looking into this issue is of more use, gives you some additional insight, then please, say some specific tactics you may believe would be helpful in spreading the good word here and preventing the success of efforts by pedophiles that the rest of may not have already guessed without that observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll apologize but I am starting to realize a great many people are taking the wrong approach to learn Objectivism. Rather than doing it directly they are doing it on the Internet. They need to read the source material. I see too much of it on Facebook, perhaps I've assumed too much of it here.

---

Generally the response is simple: do not just walk past discussions of sexuality by hedonists of any sort. Often when people talk about sex, it is not good. Typically discussions are disconnected from ethics because these people without selfishness have nowhere to turn for ethics - and thus sex is downsized in ordinary discussions. These people are also the people who try to take on pedophiles but are quite powerless to do so. They share the axiom of hedonism with the pedophiles. I've even seen these well-meaning sexologists (for lack of a better word) convinced by their opponents because of the shared axiom. We must question the axiom, "sex is just sex," for that is what allows the ethical dichotomy.

Also often little more is made in terms of ethical claims than arguments from intimidation, that is:

"I like to fuck kids,"

"You are an awful person,"

"Why,"

"Because you are an awful person,"

It doesn't really change anybody.

The collectivist axioms people hold become problematic as well. Rather than pedophilia just being considered a sexual vise that it is - instead pedophilia is considered an incurable disease. People attack pedophiles as if they are viruses and not human beings. This only convinces them that the solution (selfish sexual ethics) does not exist and that the problem is of a different nature than it really is. I think I'd know - I had similar problems I had never acted on. Unexpectingly my emotional radar, as we so call it, simply stopped responding that way. That and like many I simply grew up and got over the girls from my early teens.

I think perhaps that is why so many ask a question that to me seems obvious. Perhaps many of you are treating an evil system of value judgment as something impossible, biological, and unbreakable. That is a premise I simply don't share with you all. I believe Ayn Rand accidentally "cured" me. If homosexuals thought they could bitch about repression - they have no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The apology is aprreciated, as is the further attempt to answer my inquiries. You indeed assumed incorrectly that people here generally are going bout their learning very sloppily and haphazard. This place I can promise you has overall a support for being much more careful and exacting and checking source material. This place treats itself as a supplement to the primary sources. You are also incorrect that we see this whole issue as a matter that is purely deterministic. In general, we do not and have not been in disagreement on your conclusions largely, but instead have been critical of your methods in the thread here for how you have gotten to them and what your suggestions are.

Incidentally, the cause of pedophilia is entirely moot to the morality of child molestation. Even if the attraction is entirely the result of biology, they have volitional control over their actions. If somebody denies this, they deny morality being possible to exist at all being purely a determinist and thus that issue of determinism needs to be addressed first before you could address child molestation in particular. On the other hand, some people fail to recognize the distinction between children and adults when it comes to informed consent for sex. In that case, you need to start there to get to why child molestation is still wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few comments on your essay. Like a few others here, I think that documentation of the trend that you are discussing is vital. It is pivotal to ground your subject matter with a few concrete examples early in the essay; it will facilitate understanding of precisely what trend you're talking about and help to establish that it is indeed an important issue. I would start with establishing the issue at hand in this manner, and then move on to the philosophical and psychological root of the issue (the lack of esteem for sex implicit in today's culture, under your thesis), and only then introduce the proper countermeasure, which is a theory of sex which places it in a vital position within a coherent moral code, specifically Ayn Rand's. In particular, this point, which you only mentioned a few posts later, I think is strong and should be included at this point in the essay:

its becoming a pretty big part of culture to assume sometimes that these people thrown in the slammer for borderline jailbait have actually had something nice. It's not good for anyone - except by one standard: altruism. By that standard the "selfish" behavior is considered by typical way of the intellectual package deal. Much like say, Madoff is considered Selfish, and many assholes caught up in the intellectual package deal of selfishness would like to be him also many people think these people have actually experienced something "good" for them.

This kind of comment is vital to include if you are trying to reach anyone who is not already well-versed in Objectivism; the fact that having sex with adolescents is not part of any rationally self-interested life. This is the fundamental basis for attacking this trend from the viewpoint of the proper alternative (egoism), and it should be more developed and made more explicit.

An important thing to decide is who exactly the intended audience of the essay is; are you just trying to preach to the choir of fellow Objectivists, or are you intending a wider reach for your ideas?

Also, including a sentence prior to your essay explaining what it is, why you are posting it here, and what you attempt to gain from us by posting it here would help to establish context for the reader. Otherwise, we're immediately reading about pedophilia and left wondering why we are (you got there a few posts later with, "The first essay was and is merely a request for comments and people with similar experiences"; put that front and center).

Most of all, do not jump straight to "you idiots don't understand Objectivism; Objectivist internet forums must be useless!" simply because you did not get the immediate reaction you expected... particularly when you yourself admit that "...I can be a bit confusing, I jokingly call it Alan Greenspan disease. Arcane writings and speakings seem to be a second-nature of mine :P."

Edited by Dante
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also often little more is made in terms of ethical claims than arguments from intimidation, that is:

"I like to fuck kids,"

"You are an awful person,"

"Why,"

"Because you are an awful person,"

I have never met a single person who failed to identify "because it hurts the child" as the reason why they are against pedophilia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...