[AnonymousBosch]

(10-17-2015 03:22 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

Check out this thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments...ey_offend/

and this one, though with less replies: https://www.reddit.com/r/psychology/comm...ey_offend/

The replies are shocking. I can't comprehend how people just accept this shit...

Note the first comment:

Quote:

Thanks for posting this article. This completely changed how I see pedophiles. Through the media and day to day life they are painted as monsters, which makes us forget that they are actually just people.

Media subversion is an extremely-reliable way to shift the Overton Window - the scope of ideas the public will accept - in the name of 'Progress'.

Step 1 accepted for this reader: "They're not bad people".

Note this comment:

Quote:

It's only natural for people to be afraid of their embarrassing sides being exposed for public ridicule or their more scary sides exposed to vigilantism. Pretty much why the rules are like that to begin with.

Everyone has something they'd prefer to hide, after all. Usually several somethings.

SJW's always project. It's why they, without fail, always have compassion for the bad actor in any situation. They don't identify with goodness: I read recent Slate article with a Millennial writer discussing "What I Learnt From Rereading [Stephen King's] 'The Stand", and immediately waited for him to state his fascination with Harold Lauder, (the 'Judas character').

Entirely as expected:

Quote:

The nominal protagonist of The Stand is Stuart Redman, a taciturn Texan who captures the epitome of a certain masculine ideal: even-tempered, humble, and practical. He’s also bland as hell, and despite his prominence in the novel, remains a cipher throughout.

Contrast that with Harold Lauder, a fat, put-upon nerd whose neediness and frustrated sense of entitlement drive him from nebbishy outsider to homicidal madness. Harold’s weight is referenced repeatedly, but even without it, he’d still be more distinctive than Stu, and what makes him so fascinating is the complex mixture of revulsion and sympathy with which King depicts him. Harold is a fuck up, an embarrassment, a toxic concoction of arrogance, lust, and misery. Yet his presence dominates the book to the point where characters are constantly talking about him when he’s not around, fixated on him as much as their author is, for reasons they can’t entirely grasp.

As expected, the flawed character who betrays the group is the one he identifies with, from that I can guess that he physically and emotionally resembles Harold rather than Stu.

His Av Club profile:



Earlier picture:



Any co-incidence he identifies with overweight, acne-written, pretentious wanna-be writer?

The characters are constantly talking about Harold because they recognise him as a threat to the group, but don't act because they want to believe the best in him. In a way, they're moderate Leftists. Of course, Harold, believing morality is subjective, doesn't rise to meet the standards of the group, but betrays them all for his own lusts.

As such, I'd never leave this writer alone with a child.

Back to the comments:

Quote:

Of course actual child porn is always harmful, but if simulated porn provides some outlet it seems like that would be good to use. I think there is some evidence that people who watch porn are less likely to rape so I wonder if it would hold true for cgi porn for pedophiles.

A progressive arguing against Anita Sarkeeisan's claims that video games cause Sexism. Of course, if pressed, he'd say it's 'totally not the same thing'.

Now note this clutch of comments:

Quote:

It's amazing that this is controversial. People are so idiotic, by fear presumably*, to have any reservations against this.

* What is the fear? Fear of their children being hurt? Or fear of pedophiles and their acts? Hmmm, if only there was a word for this 'fear' that implied the problem actually the person doing the judging, not the transgressor. Like, well, 'Pedophobia'.

Remember my theory of progression. This guy is already hitting the further three of them:

Quote:

New Research Shows they're not Bad People > They can't fight their programming -> we need to have compassion for them -> stigmatised word for pedos replaced with 'enlightened' one -> public shaming for using stigmatised word -> educated people need to be tolerant -> love is love -> support these people or you're ignorant -> you're pedophobic! -> Leftist president sends congratulatory tweet.

Fucking progressives:

Quote:

If they join the program before they've hurt any children, then why should they need to be registered? You want to punish people before they have actually committed a crime?

Meanwhile, mandatory classes teaching men not to rape at English Universities...