GirlChat #606145

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Re: OK, I'll Drink The Koolaid

Posted by EthanEdwards on Friday, November 21 2014 at 10:34:40PM
In reply to OK, I'll Drink The Koolaid posted by Dante on Thursday, November 20 2014 at 8:50:43PM

This is a thought-provoking post.


Radicalism will provoke backlash... why be out? Why be out at all? Even anonymously over the internet?

Quick answer: we can be out because we're as important as anyone else and deserve a chance to talk with each other. The way to avoid backlash from radicalism is instead to be moderate.


There is a kind of selfishness that all the muggles understand. We want to be known for who we are, we don't want to keep a big secret, and we don't want to be hated. That's ordinary selfishness, if you will. It lies behind muggle sympathy with any group with a disability, or any ethnic group, or any sexual orientation or interest. A significant segment of the muggle world is open to hearing that from us as a community, gathered online anonymously. In our case the hatred is so extreme that immediate goals are the ability to come out to one's closest family and friends, or to mental health counselors. These reasonably sympathetic people are willing to listen to what we have to say about our lives and what it's like to be us.

Gathering online in forums is an expression of ordinary selfishness too. Many pedophiles report a joy at joining a pedophile community -- GC, BC, VP and B4U-ACT are the ones I'm personally familiar with. They realize they are not alone. Naturally they want to talk about anything and everything.

What makes us different from other groups is that at some important level, we would like to be sexual with children -- a desire parents find understandably worrisome. We can all have different intuitions and opinions about whether that could be done ethically or not under different degrees of societal change.

Now suppose we face the world. We are objects of extreme suspicion. What should we say? Ideally, we should just talk about ourselves and what it's like to be us -- the ordinary selfishness. I have violated this rule by keeping a blog celibatepedos.blogspot.com. I address a wide variety of issues and express opinions that are not strictly about what it's like to be a pedophile. I can't seem to help myself. It might have as redeeming features some careful insight on difficult issues, and it stands as an example of pedophile thinking that does not include arguing in favor of adult-child sexual contact.

The truth is that if any of us pedophiles simply say what it's like to be us day-to-day, it leaves an elephant-sized unanswered question: do we think adult-child sex is OK, or should be OK? Those of us in VP are able to say "no" and retain the basic goodwill sympathetic muggles have with any minority group. Those of you who say "yes" raise alarm bells that undermine -- obliterate -- that goodwill. Since they believe such sexual activity is very bad for children and hardly any non-pedophiles say "yes", you are seen as out of touch with reality in a way that sure looks like it's for selfish reasons. It's seen as a different order of selfishness entirely. They see that you misperceive reality in order to inflict terrible harm on their children for your sexual gratification. We all know that's not the story, but it's what even ordinarily sympathetic liberals believe.

Suppose I like many of you thought adult-child sex might be OK some day. If I perceived this political reality correctly but wanted to stay true to my beliefs, I might say something like, "When I think about it personally, I can imagine that some day it could be OK -- I can't help hoping it would be. But it depends entirely on what's good for children, society is full of people who care deeply about children, and if there was ever going to be any change, it would be up to them to discover it." If there is one area where recusal is politically important, it is here. Of course many of you would never do that and will continue to be seen as monsters by society at large.

Here's an analogy. There is a movement to abolish the death penalty. Do you think it would help or hurt to form an organization of people on death row, called say, "Death Row Inmates Against the Death Penalty"?

To specifics,

But why should we make our burden their burden when they aren't the ones who are broken? They have demonstrated that they have no interest in shouldering our burden. Nor should we selfishly put them at risk of a potential criminal investigation by revealing our identities if we truly are law-abiding.

This starts out as a statement about society at large dealing with us as a class, where it is largely true. But then the focus shifts to coming out in real life to specific people, and it is a big issue. The motivation these people have to accept us if we came out is that they already know us and like us as ordinary people. VP members struggle about whether to come out to wives or girlfriends or family or friends (or therapists). This whole issue also strikes me as ordinary selfishness.

In fact, our bias in favor of selfish self-justification will just make our peer support suspect. Others already believe that our online communications only embolden each other.

It's true that some people suspect that, but large numbers do not. This is a manageable task. This is just ordinary selfishness that we want to share our lives with each other.

And, since there is much good we could do in our communities which would only be questioned or repudiated should we be outed, even anonymous online communications are just too risky.

I think a lot of pedophiles have made that choice. But I think it goes too far and doesn't allow for ordinary selfishness that ordinary people understand and sympathize with.

I have been trying to figure out how one can accept all the arguments designed to silence the pro-choice

No argument I make has been designed to silence anyone. If silence is the final recommendation, that's the chips falling where they may.

...refrain from invoking slurs about my detractors that depend on the myth-derived notions that Pedos cannot be trusted.

VP and allies are trying, with maddeningly slow progress, to convince people that not all pedophiles molest children. You think it is an unacceptable slur to concede that pedophiles molest children at a rate higher than average people. Even if that were true (which it's not) it would be way too soon to promote it.

One sure way to be rid of me would be for Dante to agree with this post -- a heart attack would surely do me in. I write for the uncommitted.






Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)
Subject







Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?