If love worked, then how come, despite the fact

that you probably haven't done anything bad to the antis, they still hate you? Wasn't turning the other cheek, blessing those who curse you, etc. supposed to produce some good results? Wasn't it supposed to teach them that you're actually a good guy; yet they view "good man who's a pedophile" as an oxymoron.

A lot of pedophiles have done a lot of good things for society, and gotten treated like shit by that society. One might say, "Well, the problem is that their system is based on dominance, so it doesn't respond well to love."

How are you going to replace that system, though? Probably you have to achieve dominance, enough to displace their dominance. And then you have to maintain dominance to keep them from coming back and trying to dominate again. So in the end, all you've done is replace one dominance-based system with another.

Hopefully your system will be more enlightened, but it's not fundamentally different in how it's set up. You're still going to need guns and whatnot to fend off those who take kindness for weakness and only respect violence. Otherwise, they're going to disrupt your love-based society.

A lot of people have treated women, blacks, Jews, and many other groups with respect and kindness, and gotten treated pretty badly, and even villainized, in return. This is what teaches people to hate, and to start to lean fascist or authoritarian or conservative in their views.

Dominance is not really a bad thing, unless it's directed at bad ends. A dominance-based system can create peace, order, and justice. At any rate, if good people are unwilling to rule, then bad people will step in to fill that power vacuum.

In the case of relations between the sexes, if the husband doesn't keep firm control of his wife, then she's going to take control, wreck the family, and probably accuse him of being abusive, ironically enough; since if a woman isn't happy, she looks around and says, "Okay, some man here must have done something bad to make me feel this unhappy" and if her husband is the one she's living with, obviously it must have been him.

She'll rationalize till she finds some way to blame him for her unsatisfactory situation and the unpleasant feelings she's experiencing. This is because women are used to being under dominance and therefore feel entitled to having a dominant man take care of all their needs.

Unless you like being accused of being an abuser for doing nothing but being kind to others; or unless you like being bled dry by people who take advantage of your kindness and take it for granted and feel entitled to it, till they discard you when you have nothing left to offer because they took it all, you pretty much have to buy into some sort of system that gives you a place, hopefully a favorable place, in a dominance order.

It probably sucks in some ways being at the bottom of a hierarchy, but on the other hand, in a dominance order, those higher up have responsibility for taking care of those lower than them, while at the same time they have security from being taken advantage of, so it works out well for everyone.

The system we have now, where we've tried to make everyone equal, has produced a lot of misery and resentment. The problem is that if you're in a supposedly advantageous position in any way, such as being older, then people are on their guard and will say that you're exploiting the one who's in a supposedly less advantageous position, in this case, by being younger. They'll say, "That's not love; that's domination."

This is what happens when we try to prevent "domination"; we have to basically outlaw relationships except between people who are similarly situated (same age, same amount of money, etc.)