rigorousintuition.ca

tapitsbo » Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:11 am wrote:groups like PIE did have a hand in the inception of modern gay culture. liminalOyster even gave a nod to these curious historical dynamics

That's not what I meant. I don't think pedophiles had a lick to do with the "inception of modern gay culture." I meant they were tolerated at one historical point as another subjugated culture** but, IME, ostracized and kept at a distance.

One of the big things that concerns me about all of this intellectualized homophobic invective is that it makes no distinction between pederasty and pedophilia. The former refers typically to adult/adolescent "relationships" while the latter refers to the abuse of small children. Obviously I don't condone either but It is, IMHO, something of a disservice that the law somewhat conflates them. Something like "twinks" or maybe even "chickenhawks" seems squarely related to the former while the speculated abuse at CPP et al (if based on the toddler IG posts) relates to the latter.

I find it very difficult to believe that gay people are disproportionately represented among pedophiles but less difficult to believe they may be disproportionately represented among pederasts, though I can't claim to really know. But (and it's a strong caveat), our culture is completely saturated with 18 yo female models and pornographic actresses etc. They are "worth" more the younger they look. This is all quite acceptable in hetero contexts; maybe finger-wagged at but certainly not grounds for accusing your average adult american male of child abuse.

edit:

** please note that this is not a characterization I agree with in any way but the impression I've gotten from hearing/reading about the era in which groups like NAMBLA marched during Pride etc.

How much "LGBT culture has formed, or been formed (I'd say a combination of both) partially as a cloak for ... the sort of nasty shit under scrutiny at RI?" is a very good question.

"...recognizing how that culture has hidden itself inside other cultures, in order to safely move through and into our lives. One of those Trojan horse cultures is gay culture."

I don't think pedophiles are any more prevalent in the homosexual population than they are in the heterosexual population, nevertheless, there are nefarious and covert factors and motives that guide these movements and their unusually rapid ascension.

Yes liminalOyster sexualized friendship sith teenagers might be sleazy or worse but it is a million miles away from the spectre of elite organized extreme child abuse, alleged or proven, that haunts us (and its painstakingly obvious role as an instrument of political control and blackmail, shamelessly practiced out in the open in places like Hollywood and DC as documented exhaustively on this board)

guruilla » Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:55 pm wrote:in Elvis’ post, you end up with a whole lot of nothing.

I'm okay with that, though I'm sorry if I didn't communicate very well. I accept your criticisms in your earlier reply as valid from your perspective, though I may not agree. I'm not invested in "winning" an argument here, I'm just having a conversation. In this matter we just interpret things differently; can we be content to accept that?

I should make it more clear that I've been addressing one question, what I see as the "gist" of pizzagate: Is there sufficient evidence to believe with a reasonable degree of certaintly that Podesta, Alefantis, Hillary Clinton and/or CPP are engaged in pedophilia or child trafficking?

My answer to that is "no" (read the question again if necessary), but it does not mean that I reject the possibility. If my question is too narrow, than we're talking about different things, and my answer might be very different.


Hold on, I have to turn off Terry Gross (why does she grate on me so?).

Okay. Regarding the new discussion of "gay culture," keep in mind that liminalOyster described drag culture, a unique subset (pun not intended), and he nails the pertinent aspect here:

there's a certain kind of kitsch and a certain kind of blasphemy directed towards socially mandated taboos - often directed at the heteronormative / hetero world (ie childbirth).

I'm straight but in two years (in the '90s) of working closely with a dozen gay guys, including travel around the US, going to parties and all the gay bars in big cities (including D.C.), I was surprised at the misogynistic remarks and jokes, not least from the drag queens we worked with. I've heard Majestic Ape's voice & attitude before.


Anyway, I've given my perspective, and made my recommendations: 1) Avoid making reckless claims or accusations, 2) investigate Silsby and Epstein.

The telling thing with Epstein, a dude who paid women to sell him their newborn babies (and I do recommend the video I just posted in the bumped thread about him) is that the media basically went silent about him after the link with the UK royals came up.

The legal proceedings notoriously left him basically untouched with a brief sentence for "soliciting an underage prostitute" (?!?)

Gawker who published his contact list to a wide audience was shut down on the initiative of Thiel who helped install Trump, who like the Clintons was obviously a friend of Epstein.

Most reading this know all this but the course taken by the sort of "investigations" that have happened speaks volumes, as it does with deep events like 9/11 and JFK.

Nevertheless the response to all these events and happenings from the margins is worth something, to put it mildly.

Of course a quick dip into the Pizzagate material will highlight individuals who hung out with Epstein and the Pizzagate crew, obviously

While Rigorous Intuition welcomes a range of informed perspectives, it is not intended to be a forum for the re-fighting of elemental human values. It should be assumed that this is a place where the dignity and rights of all people are respected. Members who challenge these rights may be regarded as disruptive, and members who habitually challenge them will be banned.
...
Posts advocating violence, or espousing hatred of a people based upon race, religion, gender or sexuality, are not permitted.

And yet some of us here know for a fact that the gay subculture overlaps in countless ways with sadomasochism, pedophilia, and every other squalid vice (unsanctioned paraphilia) we can imagine. It just does, and if we want to pretend it doesn’t because of our chosen value set, then we’ve just joined the ranks of useful idiots enabling the evils of the elite.

Like I said, here be the nub of the disagreement. A glimpse into pedo-culture in Washington DC (and the world) means recognizing how that culture has hidden itself inside other cultures, in order to safely move through and into our lives. One of those Trojan horse cultures is gay culture. I doubt I’d be bold enough to say that so plainly here, if we didn’t have an insider to that culture who’s been brave enough to speak out about this reality before.

Tetelestai. It is said. Let the heads roll where they may.

Here's hoping the Fatal Flying Guillotine does its thing with you then.

tapitsbo » Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:15 am wrote:Epstein, a dude who paid women to sell him their newborn babies

Is that in the video, tapitsbo? Do you think it's legit?

How would I know? How would you know?

Obviously it's just an allegation, ultimately from other sources than a Youtube video.

It's possible that these allegations simply don't interest anyone here, in which case I apologise.

I'm sure they interest most of us! I was asking because I hadn't heard anything of the kind about Epstein before - I think it's established he's a dirty old man who interferes with schoolgirls, but I hadn't heard anything to the effect that he's a baby rapist or worse. I thought you might know who made the allegation and what reason there might be to take it seriously.

I don't feel this is a great avenue for me to personally keep going down, but-

I did indeed come across the claim in the video, a sequel apparently to one posted by another user here. A woman associated with the Epstein case had claimed to offer to buy her baby.

I'd assumed the allegation had been more widely disseminated during the attention given to the Epstein case. Sorry.

Whether you should take it seriously or not is far beyond my ability to say, stefano. There may be some relevance here that lies in the grey area between seriousness and unseriousness, for all I know.

It seems to me safe to say that if the Epstein case had solely involved suspicion that he was a dirty man who interfered with schoolgirls, like Anthony Weiner, it would have evoked a lighter, less ominous reaction in those exposed to it.

stefano » 20 Dec 2016 18:37 wrote:

tapitsbo » Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:15 am wrote:Epstein, a dude who paid women to sell him their newborn babies

Is that in the video, tapitsbo? Do you think it's legit?

Sounds legit...

If Epstein was involved in some pretty dark stuff that didn't actually involve buying babies (and we assume doing horrible things to them) then that stuff would be discredited by association with something horrible that turned out not to be true.

Look at the second voting option in the poll at the top of the page.

So what makes something credited or discredited in your book, Joe, outside of this context? Is there any area in between (what kool maudit referred to as a "body of knowledge" and "alarm bells")

My assumption is that neither you nor I believe the authorities pursued all of the leads in the Epstein case.

What happens if someone buys babies and does nothing horrible to them? Just raises them "off the books" since they have friends who can provide different sets of documents as necessary? Is that a cool and understandable thing to do for prestigious members of society?

Have government agencies ever done something similar to this?

And if this sort of thing is going on, who's doing it?

Is this a legit scenario that's ever taken place? Hmmm. Interesting question.

We're told a complex, colourful conspiracy narrative about who the "kingpins" of drug trafficking and terrorism are.

Who are the "kingpins" of human trafficking and organized abuse?

Other than Jimmy Savile and ISIS

(and what environment nourished those entities, anyways?)

It's not uncommon for people to claim to be survivors of these practices, in one form or another, usually much less extreme than what was in the Dutroux, Savile, and other cases.

It's sorta like some survey I read about a number of years ago that men in a mall or a store when they encounter a lost child they do not help because -- well because, you know.