Yeah I saw that argument but I don't buy it.

No polite WASPs are going to fight with 'the courage of despair'.

They will just go quietly into that good night of demographic/economic oblivion.

So why bother leaving any opposition if you are the all powerful conspirators.

Quote: (03-16-2017 06:20 AM)Belgrano Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:55 AM)lightning_jack Wrote:  

And if supposed conspirators were so powerful why would they allow any opposition at all.

Sun Tzu:

When you surround an army, leave an outlet free.

This does not mean that the enemy is to be allowed to escape. The object, as Tu Mu puts it, is "to make him believe that there is a road to safety, and thus prevent his fighting with the courage of despair." Tu Mu adds pleasantly: "After that, you may crush him."

It's neither a loss neither a victory.
Good:
PVV won 5 seats (25% increase) and is now 2nd biggest party.
Rutte lost 10 and did not lose more due to the way he handled the Turks, the Wilders way.
Socialists lost 29.
Bad:
Treehuggers got a shitload of sits.
Kebabs also got seats

It was not the best, but it was a good shift towards the right direction.
Kebabs in parliament will start to show their true colors and will win more votes due to immigration. It will also give more votes to Wilders next time.

^ and dont forget the rise of our friends from the FVD

Quote: (03-16-2017 06:01 AM)Lime Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:55 AM)lightning_jack Wrote:  

Wilders has full time body guards - for life.

Doesn't quite sound like 'allowed to be' to me.

And if supposed conspirators were so powerful why would they allow any opposition at all.

He would be not 'allowed to be' without his bodyguards (state protection).

And of course the results could have been better but they also could have been much worse. D66 and GL are very europhile, though, and that isn't good.

Wilders isn't as polished/sophisticated as Trump and much more one-issue. So I never expected the PVV to gain much more than this. You can't realistically expect 35 seats for the PVV. It is realistic to expect a centre-right, yes maybe globalist but definitely not leftist government. And for me that's a win. Left has never been smaller I guess. Why complain so much than (not necessarily you but in general)?

I agree, Wilders will never be big enough to be prime minister, plus that other parties will just refuse to work with him, just as they said if he had been the biggest party now.

I agree that the VVD with perhaps the CDA as a combination is the best you can get in Holland. That is because the system is so, that you would never be able to govern by one party. It is true the VVD and the CDA has incorperated many of the ´lighter´ points of the PVV. So it is also true that some of their viewpoints are now mainstream. A likely coalition now would be VVD+CDA+D66 (center left) plus a 4rd party. They might start talking with the treehuggers (groenlinks) just for form, because they've grown, but I suspect the 4th party will be the ChristenUnie (christians). The VVD and CDA have already been cooperating in the past with them, because our Senate is not the same as the chamber, and the government parties in the last year needed support of non government parties. The ChristenUnie did this almost a 100% of the times.

So this would mean a likely government of 3 right parties and one center left. Thats probably the best we can get, considering the landscape.

Also, regarding the cities and liberal people. That is very true. Most of the liberals vote D66 or GroenLinks. But don't underestimate the reason many people vote for the VVD. I have plenty of friends back home, who are high educated but vote VVD or even PVV. The reason the VVD is so big is because that is the most accepted form of a right party. The PVV is still considered to go a bit too far by many. But because a lot of their issues are now incorperated in the VVD and CDA, its not all bad.

And while the international press may say this is a stop on populism etc, that is only half true. All the Dutch papers and news are saying that Holland has become more and more geared towards the right since today. So, its really not that bad. Wilders has himself to blame a lot too, he did a poor campaign.

The size of the country make it very vulnerable without having protection from bigger countries, so they suck up to whoever can be their big daddy. 70% of all laws are dictated by the EU, and this was a few years ago.

The way Dutch politics are constructed make any significant change very unlikely. Coalition-forming destroys any opportunity for real change. Besides, I compared the results of this election vs the last one. The leftist parties got a similar amount of seats as last time. That means that the percentage of Dutch people wanting to address the migrant crisis hasn't really increased.

What is not discussed but seems relevant, is the power of the female vote. Rutte, the prime minister, is an incel. The guy before that was married, but is the "provider"-type. As far as I can tell, there are no masculine type in Dutch politics.

Thierry Baudet, the starter of FvD, is conscious of this. He is red pill and has written a novel about the subject. He knows about this forum and what goes on here.

Quote: (03-16-2017 07:52 AM)asdfk Wrote:  

The size of the country make it very vulnerable without having protection from bigger countries, so they suck up to whoever can be their big daddy. 70% of all laws are dictated by the EU, and this was a few years ago.

The way Dutch politics are constructed make any significant change very unlikely. Coalition-forming destroys any opportunity for real change. Besides, I compared the results of this election vs the last one. The leftist parties got a similar amount of seats as last time. That means that the percentage of Dutch people wanting to address the migrant crisis hasn't really increased.

What is not discussed but seems relevant, is the power of the female vote. Rutte, the prime minister, is an incel. The guy before that was married, but is the "provider"-type. As far as I can tell, there are no masculine type in Dutch politics.

Thierry Baudet, the starter of FvD, is conscious of this. He is red pill and has written a novel about the subject. He knows about this forum and what goes on here.

Coalition forming is the real pain yeah, actually the reason I haven't voted in the last elections. There is no way a party holds on to their views, because they have to exchange some with other parties in order to govern.

It's interesting about Baudet yes, pretty impressive he got into the chamber from scratch to two seats with this election.

So, the centrists lost seats and the treehuggers and populists gained seats? That polarized result shows that people are choosing sides and generally rejecting the neo-statists and globalists. Tribal politics like this scares "progressives" because they know it means their usual sophistry isn't working.

I like how nobody is taking notice (outside of RVF) of the creeping Islamic political power in Europe.

Its a critical stage to achieve for a group to obtain real power in a nation which it normally has never had a power base in.

Their numbers will increase and urban centres, particularly Amsterdam and its degenrate culture will begin to cede its so-called freedoms soon enough. The violent crime there is a mix of Albanians and other ethnic groups.

Good luck with your death spiral Holland.

Quote: (03-16-2017 09:09 AM)C-Note Wrote:  

So, the centrists lost seats and the treehuggers and populists gained seats? That polarized result shows that people are choosing sides and generally rejecting the neo-statists and globalists. Tribal politics like this scares "progressives" because they know it means their usual sophistry isn't working.

The leftist party is a utopian dreamer party made up mainly of women. It has no chance of succeeding.

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:38 AM)Lime Wrote:  

I can see why people here think the outcome is bad with a slightly smaller PVV than expected and 'globalist parties' winning big.

Truth is, VVD is seen in the Netherlands as 'antisocial capitalists' by the left and CDA follows their 'centre right' economic policy. VVD and CDA could only get this big because they had to take a firmer stance against islam and VVD won arguably some seats with the Turkish issue last weekend.

While VVD might be 'globalist', they are pro-business and for me that is good.

The real win here is that the left got hammered. PVV thinking got incorporated in VVD/CDA and are becoming more mainstream. This is part of the heritage of Pim Fortuyn.

Let's honor Pim Fortuyn, the intellectual anti-globalist sociologist, who would get a lot of love from RVF if he wasn't assassinated in May 2002.



He was too intellectual for the establishment, Geert Wilders is allowed to be because he isn't as broadly appealing as Pim Fortuyn was.

Mind you, it is partly because of Pim Fortuyn that the Netherlands isn't like Germany of Sweden now.

Do you really consider an advocate for pedophilia as your national hero?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/world/fortu...-1-1373183

911 it is much more nuanced than that.
He was homosexual and he wanted less paranoia about sexual relations between old & young (young could very well mean 16+ here, the legal age of consent). I don't say I advocate this but he isn't seen as an advocate of pedophilia here generally in NL, maybe you overreact a little bit. It wasn't that he supported child molesters or something AFAIK.

Fact is, is that he made previously 'unsayable' stuff more mainstream, and in this way he changed the country.

Quote: (03-16-2017 12:13 PM)Lime Wrote:  

911 it is much more nuanced than that.
He was homosexual and he wanted less paranoia about sexual relations between old & young (young could very well mean 16+ here, the legal age of consent). I don't say I advocate this but he isn't seen as an advocate of pedophilia here, maybe you overreact a little bit. It wasnt that he supported child molesters or something AFAIK.

Fact is, is that he made previously 'racist' stuff more mainstream.
.

Fortuyn was effusively positive of his own molestation at age 5.

Quote:Quote:

In 1998, Fortuyn published an autobiographical work called Babyboomers, the name given to children born in the post-war years up to 1953. He reveals that he had early sexual experiences with adult males, which he claims to have found pleasurable and exciting. His logic is that because he enjoyed sexual experiences with adult men as a child, it should be legal.

Fortuyn's first experience occurred when he was five years old. "The Dutch soldier asks if I want to see his tent. That's what I want. I like it...

Most telling is his appraisal of these memories. "In chapter 1 about the 1950s, I wrote about my early sexual experiences, experiences that I see as an enrichment. Today, an experience like that in the ppark could easily lead to a complaint by parents to the police because of paedophilia, and the relevant young man would be in trouble. But why?

..."He didn't do me any harm. On the contrary, he showed me something that was incomprehensibly exciting and I could feel and touch it, but today we are ready to interfere with complete teams of professionals. By interfering in such an irritating and grown-up way in the world of children, we make an enormous problem of something that for a child is no problem at all and is only exciting."

The guy was a definite pedophilia advocate, and was most likely a pedophile, the kind that thrashes Moroccans in public and molests little brown boys on the down low, like the ex prime minister of Belgium.

Huh, apparently Geert Wilders is half Indonesian. I always wondered why he looked so different from your average Dutchman (and bleached his hair).

I never followed Dutch politics until recently - I assumed any country with a sex playground like Amsterdam as its capital had to be cucked past the point of no return.

He's not exactly of Indonesian stock though, his mother from a Jewish family established in Indonesia, His wife is Jewish too. He's lived in Israel, is funded by AIPAC insiders and has close ties with Israeli intelligence.

https://www.rt.com/news/369217-geert-wil...influence/

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:07 PM)911 Wrote:  

He's not exactly of Indonesian stock though, his mother from a Jewish family established in Indonesia, His wife is Jewish too. He's lived in Israel, is funded by AIPAC insiders and has close ties with Israeli intelligence.

https://www.rt.com/news/369217-geert-wil...influence/

He was born and baptized a catholic no?

Still seems like a good guy even if jewish, perhaps just not really effective.

Quote: (03-16-2017 06:23 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:07 PM)911 Wrote:  

He's not exactly of Indonesian stock though, his mother from a Jewish family established in Indonesia, His wife is Jewish too. He's lived in Israel, is funded by AIPAC insiders and has close ties with Israeli intelligence.

https://www.rt.com/news/369217-geert-wil...influence/

He was born and baptized a catholic no?

Still seems like a good guy even if jewish, perhaps just not really effective.

He's certainly not a conventional populist in Europe. His father hid from the Germans during WW2 and refused to enter the country even 40 years later. His wife is Indeed Jewish but Hungarian,so most likely identifies as a Maygyar before a Jew.

I feel bad for the man,he has many supporters but will be the man who walks alone. His nation is too fallen to be saved. The whole thing is really depressing. If I was Geert, I'd move to Hungary with my wife and retire in the countryside or make Aliya in Israel and go into politics there.

In terms of RVF values ,this would be our party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Political_Party


"As a radical Protestant conservative party, the SGP draws much from its ideology from the reformed tradition, specifically the ecclesiastical doctrinal standards known as the Three Forms of Unity, including an unamended version of the Belgic Confession (Nederlandse Geloofsbelijdenis). The latter text is explicitly mentioned in the first principle of the party,[11] where it is stated that the SGP strives towards a government totally based on the Bible. This first principle also states that the uncut version of the Belgic Confession is meant, which adds the task of opposing anti-Christian powers to the description of the government's roles and tasks.[12] The party is a strict defender of the separation between church and state,[13] rejecting "both the state church and church state". Both church and state are believed to have distinct roles in society, while working towards the same goal, but despite this, some accuse the SGP of advocating for theocracy.[14] The SGP opposes freedom of religion, but advocates freedom of conscience instead, noting that "obedience to the law of God cannot be forced".[15][page needed]

The SGP opposes feminism, and concludes, on Biblical grounds, that men and women are of equal value (gelijkwaardig) but not equal (gelijk).[16] Men and women, so the party claims, have different places in society. This belief led to restricting party membership to men until 2006, when this restriction became subject to controversy[17] and was eventually removed.[18][page needed] It has traditionally opposed universal suffrage, seeking to replace this with a form of "organic suffrage" (Dutch: huismanskiesrecht, "suffrage of the pater familias") restricted to male heads of households.[19]

In controversial discussions in the Dutch House of Representatives (Tweede Kamer), the SGP often stresses the importance of the rule of law, parliamentary procedure and rules of order, regardless of ideological agreement. The party favours the re-introduction of the death penalty in the Netherlands. They base this on the Bible, specifically on Genesis 9:6, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man," and Exodus 21:12, "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death."

Quote: (03-16-2017 07:44 PM)Nowak Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 06:23 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 05:07 PM)911 Wrote:  

He's not exactly of Indonesian stock though, his mother from a Jewish family established in Indonesia, His wife is Jewish too. He's lived in Israel, is funded by AIPAC insiders and has close ties with Israeli intelligence.

https://www.rt.com/news/369217-geert-wil...influence/

He was born and baptized a catholic no?

Still seems like a good guy even if jewish, perhaps just not really effective.

He's certainly not a conventional populist in Europe. His father hid from the Germans during WW2 and refused to enter the country even 40 years later. His wife is Indeed Jewish but Hungarian,so most likely identifies as a Maygyar before a Jew.

I feel bad for the man,he has many supporters but will be the man who walks alone. His nation is too fallen to be saved. The whole thing is really depressing. If I was Geert, I'd move to Hungary with my wife and retire in the countryside or make Aliya in Israel and go into politics there.

I've gained a greater respect for those who walk alone. Truly alone like Wilders, not like those who find strenght in some populist party. You could say Le Pen the elder was like that, but he was rich and probably had a few friends in high society with similar views. Wilders on the other hand goes nowhere without bodyguards for years and still keeps going, if he wasn't such a recluse, it would be very interesting to learn how he keeps his resolve.

Quote: (03-16-2017 11:37 AM)911 Wrote:  

Do you really consider an advocate for pedophilia as your national hero?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/world/fortu...-1-1373183

That's not the point though, is it. He made criticism of Islam and immigration palatable to the mainstream, and that's what Lime is talking about.

Quote: (03-16-2017 01:51 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

It's a bit of a long video, but my thoughts exactly.
Media is spinning the result as a major victory, when it's more than clear than it is not.
Wilders would never be able to form a coalition even if he had won. And he got more seats! (that's not what I would call a blow to populism)
Even though Rutte won, it was a phyrric victory and he rode the populist wave by dealing with the turks the way he did.
Labour is in shambles.

"Populism" is on the rise due to the inability of the current powers to deal with the situation and until they start being more "populists" they will keep on loosing votes.

We, in the West, celebrate ancient Greece. Yet in ancient Greece, young-old homosexual or at least homoerotic relations were more the norm than not. Men held women in awe (eg, reproductive powers) and disgust (eg, madness - hence, "hysteria" or madness in the female was linked to childlessness caused by the Wandering Womb).

A buddy of mine (raised Presbyterian, turned atheist) is doing scholarship on ancient Greek thought. I asked him about this fact, and he said he wakes up every day...wondering what to make of it - he doesn't know.

Having grown up in a family experiencing incest-rape and suicide relating to all this, I must tell people that it is much too much easy to turn harsh and judgemental about anything close to paedophilia and incest. (In my family's case, its roots were much much more about emotional twistedness - disorders of personality - than anything inappropriately sexual. The first was the cause, the second was an effect - people love to confuse the two and go "AHA! How evil...." tisk, tisk.)

For example, take Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy, an expert on memory and cognition, and her book "The Trauma Myth: the Truth About Child Sexual Abuse and It's Aftermath." Her published findings that child-adult erotic contact - contrary to established opinion for over two and a half decades - is relatively rarely traumatic to children or youth. (Rather, it is the aftermath and "treatment" that messes more folks up.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Clancy

Quote:Quote:

Clancy rejects the model that the trauma of sexual abuse is the main cause of damage [to children]. She argues that most children are not physically hurt in sexual abuse, and indeed often cooperate with their abusers. They may enjoy the attention they get and the rewards such as toys that their abuser gives them. There is rarely physical violence or even threat of violence. Regarding the sexual activity, which is rarely penetrative, children may not like it or may have mixed feelings about it, but their primary reaction is confusion: they don't know what is happening and the abuser does not explain what they are doing or gives a confusing explanation.

....It is often problematic because clinicians are so wedded to the trauma model, that all sexual abuse must have been traumatic at the time, but this does not fit well with many people's actual experience and the treatment is not only unhelpful, but can be harmful.

http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc...ok&id=5692

Now, consider what happened to Clancy at Harvard after the Femi-nazi's cast her career into Hell (http://www.incae.edu/en/research-and-kno...ancy.php):

Clancy so outraged the PC and feminist all male-lust-is-EVIL! (as well as the much less powerful religious right), that she resigned from Harvard and escaped to do field work in Central America, since her book came out in 2010.

If one studies social science at all, one knows that the least reliable opinions are found about the "taboo" - beginning with sex itself. Add in the Ultimate Taboo of incest (or child sex abuse and whether it is or it isn't), and anyone seriously investigating the subject is tossed into the swamp of the least reliable sets data of all!

Now, BELOW, let me return us away from indulgent judgmentalism and into the useful matter for us who worry about Islam's inherent xenophobia at the bottom....

Quote: (03-16-2017 12:43 PM)911 Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 12:13 PM)Lime Wrote:  

911 it is much more nuanced than that.
He was homosexual and he wanted less paranoia about sexual relations between old & young (young could very well mean 16+ here, the legal age of consent). I don't say I advocate this but he isn't seen as an advocate of pedophilia here, maybe you overreact a little bit. It wasnt that he supported child molesters or something AFAIK.

Fact is, is that he made previously 'racist' stuff more mainstream.
.

Fortuyn was effusively positive of his own molestation at age 5.

Quote:Quote:

In 1998, Fortuyn published an autobiographical work called Babyboomers, the name given to children born in the post-war years up to 1953. He reveals that he had early sexual experiences with adult males, which he claims to have found pleasurable and exciting. His logic is that because he enjoyed sexual experiences with adult men as a child, it should be legal.

Fortuyn's first experience occurred when he was five years old. "The Dutch soldier asks if I want to see his tent. That's what I want. I like it...

Most telling is his appraisal of these memories. "In chapter 1 about the 1950s, I wrote about my early sexual experiences, experiences that I see as an enrichment. Today, an experience like that in the ppark could easily lead to a complaint by parents to the police because of paedophilia, and the relevant young man would be in trouble. But why?

..."He didn't do me any harm. On the contrary, he showed me something that was incomprehensibly exciting and I could feel and touch it, but today we are ready to interfere with complete teams of professionals. By interfering in such an irritating and grown-up way in the world of children, we make an enormous problem of something that for a child is no problem at all and is only exciting."

The guy was a definite pedophilia advocate, and was most likely a pedophile, the kind that thrashes Moroccans in public and molests little brown boys on the down low, like the ex prime minister of Belgium.

....From my research into incest, the two societies that most accept and known to practice incest today are Japan and most (or many?) Islamic nations.

Think about that fact: they are also the most xenophobic nations or peoples. And both have active (or recent) histories as militarized societies.

Coincidence? Incest and xenophobia? - the fear of different peoples? And violent, martial societies?

As far as I can tell, the correlation is unexplored, much less acknowledged.

On the surface, it suggests a great deal of explanatory potential because incest reinforces group loyalties. It also rewards patriarchal dominance.

By contrast in the West, following the rule of exogamy - marrying outside the family - and cementing that tradition with a widely practiced incest prohibition, implies the ground word for the extra-tribal association that evolved into the nation-state system that dominates the world today.

Does an absence of incest prohibition make pro-social nationalism weaker in societies like Muslim ones? (Up to 60% of marriages in Egypt involve first cousins.) And Japan (10% incest)?

I don't know the answer, but answers to piercing questions like these are seriously needed today, I think.

What do you think?

Now, about the Dutch election, where I've lived.

Perhaps the best response is this rebuke to conventional news: POPULISM is in RETREAT! EU glories ARE BEING RESTORED TO EUROPE!

Brendan O'Neill at Spiked-online writes:

Quote:Quote:

The invention of a continuum of populism [to rationalize recent dissent in the UK and USA, etc] shows how disconnected is the political class. The idea that there’s a far-right movement in Europe, connecting one-time Welsh miners who don’t like the EU with elderly French people planning to vote Le Pen with the genuinely reactionary people who run something like Pegida, is a fantasy. It makes moral connections where none exist. If there’s a ‘theme’ in Europe today, it’s a feeling of exhaustion with the old, technocratic elite, and a desire for a different politics. How this theme works itself out differs from nation to nation, and takes different forms even within nations. It is the political class’s abject unwillingness to grapple with this growing sense of public agitation that makes it cry ‘FAR RIGHT’ at anyone who dares question the old status quo. How easier that is.

Then there’s the second delusion: the idea that the result in Holland was good for ‘normal’, supposedly progressive politics. Rutte talks up the election result as a victory for goodness against hate, for him against Wilders, and Trump, and Brexit. Is he serious? His VVD lost eight seats, down from 41 to 33. His coalition partner, the Labour Party, was all but wiped out: it lost 29 seats, reducing it to just nine. If the election confirms anything, it isn’t that populist politics is waning: it’s that social democracy in Europe remains in a state of terminal decline; that the rupture between the left and voters is now vast. The surprise beneficiary was GroenLinks (GreenLeft), which won 10 new seats, taking it to 14. This looks like a variant form of the rejection of the old politics, only instead of expressing it by voting for an anti-EU party, many did it by switching from social democracy to environmentalism. Also, Wilders hardly did terribly: his party gained five seats and is now the second largest.



Far from scuppering the new populism, the Dutch elections seemed to include its key ingredient: that public feeling of fatigue and anger with the old, zombie-like, bureaucratic politics, with a left-right divide that seems to mean little. That the main centre-right party lost seats and the social democrats got thrashed suggests the Brexit spirit, as we might call it, exists as much in parts of Holland as it does in Norfolk or Stoke or ‘the Brexit states’ in the US, as some referred to those parts of America that most keenly rejected Hillary. It’s just that this spirit takes different shapes in different places; it’s moulded by local and historical factors; it’s positively expressed in some places, less positively in others. For leftists to celebrate the Dutch election result is bizarre. Many left voters have shifted from social democracy to green politics, from ideas based on class to concerns about nature. The old left should worry about this. But those of us who want a new politics should not.



Indeed, to my mind, this is one of the positive things about the Dutch election. Because the more that social democracy and technocracy and other modern political outlooks that are utterly incapable of meeting people’s basic desire for greater autonomy and comfort are swept aside, the more space we will have for discussing and forging a new, better, more genuinely liberal politics. Brexit, nothing like Wilders, pushed us closer to that new politics; let’s keep pushing.

Emphasis added
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/art...M0KG2QrKuU

So, there we are. The ruling class in Europe insists on an echo chamber through its media agents - same as it does in America.

But the reality remains and the angst underlying the growth of populism persists - but is only denied at the risk of missing the loss of legitimacy of the failed ruling class. Things will get uglier there as in the US, before they grow happier.

On economic issues, the Christian Democratic Appeal are actually in the centre, and the Christian Union on the left. And this is by Dutch standards, the most leftist country in Europe after Scandinavia. So on issues of substance it would be hard to call a VVD+CDA+D66+CU government conservative in any real sense of the word. The VVD are the only party that are economically conservative and even they are socially liberal, they passed gay marriage while in government with the Labour party in 2001, making the Netherlands the first country in the world to do so.

In terms of Geert Wilders, I think he would rather drive public debate in opposition then actually step up to the task of governing. He probably realizes he'll never become Prime Minister, so influencing the other parties is the best he can do.

Quote: (03-18-2017 06:14 AM)Orson Wrote:  

We, in the West, celebrate ancient Greece. Yet in ancient Greece, young-old homosexual or at least homoerotic relations were more the norm than not. Men held women in awe (eg, reproductive powers) and disgust (eg, madness - hence, "hysteria" or madness in the female was linked to childlessness caused by the Wandering Womb).

A buddy of mine (raised Presbyterian, turned atheist) is doing scholarship on ancient Greek thought. I asked him about this fact, and he said he wakes up every day...wondering what to make of it - he doesn't know.

Having grown up in a family experiencing incest-rape and suicide relating to all this, I must tell people that it is much too much easy to turn harsh and judgemental about anything close to paedophilia and incest. (In my family's case, its roots were much much more about emotional twistedness - disorders of personality - than anything inappropriately sexual. The first was the cause, the second was an effect - people love to confuse the two and go "AHA! How evil...." tisk, tisk.)

For example, take Harvard psychologist Susan Clancy, an expert on memory and cognition, and her book "The Trauma Myth: the Truth About Child Sexual Abuse and It's Aftermath." Her published findings that child-adult erotic contact - contrary to established opinion for over two and a half decades - is relatively rarely traumatic to children or youth. (Rather, it is the aftermath and "treatment" that messes more folks up.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Clancy

Quote:Quote:

Clancy rejects the model that the trauma of sexual abuse is the main cause of damage [to children]. She argues that most children are not physically hurt in sexual abuse, and indeed often cooperate with their abusers. They may enjoy the attention they get and the rewards such as toys that their abuser gives them. There is rarely physical violence or even threat of violence. Regarding the sexual activity, which is rarely penetrative, children may not like it or may have mixed feelings about it, but their primary reaction is confusion: they don't know what is happening and the abuser does not explain what they are doing or gives a confusing explanation.

....It is often problematic because clinicians are so wedded to the trauma model, that all sexual abuse must have been traumatic at the time, but this does not fit well with many people's actual experience and the treatment is not only unhelpful, but can be harmful.

http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc...ok&id=5692

Now, consider what happened to Clancy at Harvard after the Femi-nazi's cast her career into Hell (http://www.incae.edu/en/research-and-kno...ancy.php):

Clancy so outraged the PC and feminist all male-lust-is-EVIL! (as well as the much less powerful religious right), that she resigned from Harvard and escaped to do field work in Central America, since her book came out in 2010.

If one studies social science at all, one knows that the least reliable opinions are found about the "taboo" - beginning with sex itself. Add in the Ultimate Taboo of incest (or child sex abuse and whether it is or it isn't), and anyone seriously investigating the subject is tossed into the swamp of the least reliable sets data of all!

Now, BELOW, let me return us away from indulgent judgmentalism and into the useful matter for us who worry about Islam's inherent xenophobia at the bottom....

Quote: (03-16-2017 12:43 PM)911 Wrote:  

Quote: (03-16-2017 12:13 PM)Lime Wrote:  

911 it is much more nuanced than that.
He was homosexual and he wanted less paranoia about sexual relations between old & young (young could very well mean 16+ here, the legal age of consent). I don't say I advocate this but he isn't seen as an advocate of pedophilia here, maybe you overreact a little bit. It wasnt that he supported child molesters or something AFAIK.

Fact is, is that he made previously 'racist' stuff more mainstream.
.

Fortuyn was effusively positive of his own molestation at age 5.

Quote:Quote:

In 1998, Fortuyn published an autobiographical work called Babyboomers, the name given to children born in the post-war years up to 1953. He reveals that he had early sexual experiences with adult males, which he claims to have found pleasurable and exciting. His logic is that because he enjoyed sexual experiences with adult men as a child, it should be legal.

Fortuyn's first experience occurred when he was five years old. "The Dutch soldier asks if I want to see his tent. That's what I want. I like it...

Most telling is his appraisal of these memories. "In chapter 1 about the 1950s, I wrote about my early sexual experiences, experiences that I see as an enrichment. Today, an experience like that in the ppark could easily lead to a complaint by parents to the police because of paedophilia, and the relevant young man would be in trouble. But why?

..."He didn't do me any harm. On the contrary, he showed me something that was incomprehensibly exciting and I could feel and touch it, but today we are ready to interfere with complete teams of professionals. By interfering in such an irritating and grown-up way in the world of children, we make an enormous problem of something that for a child is no problem at all and is only exciting."

The guy was a definite pedophilia advocate, and was most likely a pedophile, the kind that thrashes Moroccans in public and molests little brown boys on the down low, like the ex prime minister of Belgium.

....From my research into incest, the two societies that most accept and known to practice incest today are Japan and most (or many?) Islamic nations.

Think about that fact: they are also the most xenophobic nations or peoples. And both have active (or recent) histories as militarized societies.

Coincidence? Incest and xenophobia? - the fear of different peoples? And violent, martial societies?

As far as I can tell, the correlation is unexplored, much less acknowledged.

On the surface, it suggests a great deal of explanatory potential because incest reinforces group loyalties. It also rewards patriarchal dominance.

By contrast in the West, following the rule of exogamy - marrying outside the family - and cementing that tradition with a widely practiced incest prohibition, implies the ground word for the extra-tribal association that evolved into the nation-state system that dominates the world today.

Does an absence of incest prohibition make pro-social nationalism weaker in societies like Muslim ones? (Up to 60% of marriages in Egypt involve first cousins.) And Japan (10% incest)?

I don't know the answer, but answers to piercing questions like these are seriously needed today, I think.

What do you think?

That's a very weird and long-winded way of whitewashing pedophilia. To summarize your post above:

-Ancient Greece was great, and hey, they really loved their little boys (so pedophilia can't be that bad!)

-You survived incest and didn't mind too much (so pedophilia can't be that bad!)

-There is a Harvard researcher that claims that 95% of sexually molested children didn't really mind being sexually molested (so pedophilia can't be that bad!)

- ...and it's those darn PC feminists who actually opposed her, along with traditional Christians and other cultural revisionists who tell them that sexual molestation of children is a terrible thing that make those victims feel bad about having been molested, as opposed to the actual molestations (so pedophilia can't be that bad!)

Quote:Quote:

What do you think?

I think your sig, quoting the marquis de Sade (basically saying that anything goes in sex) sums up your position on this issue... We're definitely not going to agree here.