Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 133 KB, 1180x663, 8ca636b5d8de0aa6c45fa22866618082fc3ba973.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18164624 No.18164624 [Reply] [Original]

A fellow intellectual, Guy Sorman, has unleashed a storm among Parisian “intellos” with his claim that Foucault, who died in 1984 aged 57, was a paedophile rapist who had sex with Arab children while living in Tunisia in the late 1960s.

>Sorman, 77, said he had visited Foucault with a group of friends on an Easter holiday trip to the village of Sidi Bou Said, near Tunis, where the philosopher was living in 1969. “Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,” he recalled last week in an interview with The Sunday Times.

>“They were eight, nine, ten years old, he was throwing money at them and would say ‘let’s meet at 10pm at the usual place’.” This, it turned out, was the local cemetery: “He would make love there on the gravestones with young boys. The question of consent wasn’t even raised.”

So how many kids did he give aids to?

>> No.18164750

>>18164624
>puts Arabs in their place (cocksleeves for BFC)
>give them aids
What did he do wrong again?

>> No.18164822

>>18164624
>The question of consent wasn’t even raised.
What can consent mean in a wage labour society?

>> No.18164826

I don’t know how any of this is surprising to anyone. All the French intellectual elites at that time were fucking awful people and their views are largely pointless today honestly.

>> No.18164830

>>18164624
> “Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,”
This is fucked up

>> No.18164834

>>18164830
Yeah, its fucked up that you've taken an English language poster on an anonymous image board as a primary source, and taken the primary source as true.

Jesus fuck, just shoot yourself in the face and quit history now. "Making shit up," is literary criticism. Foucault knew the difference, but didn't attend. You can do better, you can fucking kill yourself now.

>> No.18164839
File: 384 KB, 500x500, aaaaaaaa.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18164839

>half of /lit/ worships this guy

>> No.18164840

>>18164834
have sex
btw is your trip a reference to Otto Ranke?

>> No.18164846

>>18164839
Everyone here hates him and other postmodernists.

>> No.18164850

"Trads" will shit on Foucault for this and then read the Greeks...

>> No.18164854

>>18164840
Leopold you stupid fuck.
>To history has been attributed the function to judge the past, to instruct ourselves for the advantage of the future. Such a lofty function the present work does not attempt. It aims merely to show how it actually took place.

>> No.18165807
File: 119 KB, 512x489, 236664423.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18165807

based baldie making moralfags seethe from his grave

>> No.18165884

>>18164624
I hate twitter trannies who suck Michel's cock as long as it's convenient but as soon as something doesn't feeeeeel right for them, they throw social construction out the window, Take his ideas to their conclusion if you think he's ggod, which he is. Pedophile rights are just as valid as tranny rights, in fact mores, since there's a lot more pedos than trannies. Plus, kids are just aesthetically pleasing

>> No.18165908

>>18164830
faggot. i would kill 99% of humanity to be in a position where little lolis run after me begging for my load

>> No.18165917

>>18165884
>ggod and mores
good* not god, and moreso

>> No.18165926
File: 31 KB, 474x632, napoleon-bonaparte.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18165926

france died with him

>> No.18166067

>>18164846
I love postmodernism but I don't know how anyone can like this hack

>> No.18166076

>>18165908
Based anon, me too. One day we will be free to fuck lolis again, I will it.

>> No.18166146

>>18166076
FBI agent here, anything more you want to add? Also reported

>> No.18166184

>>18166076
No doubt. If not, there's always a way for individuals like us. If you wanna talk more privately drop Wickr

>> No.18166508
File: 27 KB, 400x400, E0QIPwhXoAQAnBA.jpeg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18166508

Jeune Afrique debunked this shit weeks ago.

>> No.18166519

>>18166508
and even if that weren't the case, it would not diminish Michel's basedness, in actual fact, to me he gained significant base when I read the article the first time

>> No.18166535

>>18166146
Yeah, I was gonna add "in Minecraft." Case closed, biatch.

>> No.18166536

>>18166146
>FBI agent here
Same!
>>18166184
Stick to tor forums buddy

>> No.18166541
File: 896 KB, 640x360, 1619799371667.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18166541

>>18166508
lmaooooo

>> No.18166567

>>18164624
rough because Foucault is like the grand-daddy of anticolonialism, which is the intellectual underpinning of the entire neoliberal cultural program.
Not that anyone gives a shit, they can and do freely cancel their own so long as a contributor's sufficient purpose has been served, but if anyone ever decides to keep score they might find that everyone who originated the movement has been rejected by the movement.
IDK what this is, there's some sort of patricidal/matricidal splitting formation.

>> No.18166569

>>18164839
Separate the man from his work.

>> No.18166581

>>18166567
>rough because Foucault is like the grand-daddy of anticolonialism
Was he?
I thought he referred to himself as a Nitzschean, which would mean he wouldn't actually care so much what the powerful do.

>> No.18166637

>>18166581
I would say he was, but my understanding of the intellectual heritage of academic liberalism is not perfect at all.
I just think a lot of this "all power is immoral" rhetoric came from discipline and punish

>> No.18166659

>>18166637
>I just think a lot of this "all power is immoral" rhetoric came from discipline and punish
The complete opposite of what a Nietzschean would say. I didn't read D&P but I don't think it has a thesis, it's a historical account and Foucault wasn't a liberal. He thought liberalism was just as oppressive as totalitarian regimes.

>> No.18166667

>>18166508
This. Also Sorman at first refused to respond to their refutation, them he admitted that he did not actual witness the events he recounted. Basically, it was pure slander

>> No.18166671

> “Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,”
The children literally consented

>> No.18166700

>>18166659
I don't think the fact that he self-describes as a Nietzschean accouonts for his thesis either.
All I've read is DP and a few portions of hx of sexuality so I'm not claiming to actually understand him, and I avoid humanities journals and pubs in general, but I don't think the idea that Foucault is one of the founders of anticolonial thought which served as a framework for neoliberal cultural ideology is too controversial.
Maybe some other anons who have actually studied this shit can chime in and provide some clarity.

>> No.18166702

>>18166659
I think it's fair to say that we was a neoliberal, therefore economically conservative (see his support for Reagan), but from a social standpoint he certainly was a liberal (or at the very least what we would call "progressive"). For example his pro-LBTQ stance is 100% in line with most contemporary liberal thought (and the repression of these groups would have been deemed negatively by him). As such he is less of a Nietzschean people give him credit for: in Foucault there is still a remnant of normative morality, usually articulated as a defense of those who are weak and oppressed

>> No.18166707

>>18164624
Water is wet, he was a bataillean

>> No.18166712

>>18166508
what happened to believing the (voiceless) victim you bigot

>> No.18166734

>>18166702
>his pro-LBTQ stance is 100% in line with most contemporary liberal thought (and the repression of these groups would have been deemed negatively by him)
What do you think of Nietzsche's "pro-LGBTQ" stance:
>The erotic relation of men to youths was the necessary and sole preparation, to a degree unattainable to our comprehension, of all manly education (pretty much as for a long time all higher education of women was only attainable through love and marriage). All idealism of the strength of the Greek nature threw itself into that relation, and it is probable that never since have young men been treated so attentively, so lovingly, so entirely with a view to their welfare (virtus) as in the fifth and sixth centuries B.C.
—Friedrich Nietzche, Human, All Too Human

>> No.18166749

>>18166700
Well again, I don't know if he's anti-colonial or not, and if he was I don't know his reasons for it. If he was lamenting about "poor poc being opressed" then that's one thing.
>>18166702
He was pro lgbt because he was a fag himself but that's not the same as extolling the morality of the weak, more like "i can fuck whatever i want because i am powerful"

>> No.18166754

>>18164624
>>18164750
>>18164822
>>18164826
>>18164830
>>18164834
>>18164839
>>18164840
>>18164846
>>18164854
>>18165807
>>18165884
>>18165908
>>18165917
>>18165926
>>18166067
>>18166076
>>18166146
>>18166184
>>18166508
>>18166519
>>18166535
>>18166536
>>18166567
>>18166569
>>18166581
>>18166637
>>18166659
>>18166667
>>18166671
>>18166700
>>18166702
>>18166707
>>18166712
>>18166734
Imagine thinking that just because someone is evil they can't be a genius, or do great things. And this is coming from someone who doesn't even like Foucault's works, let alone understand anything he wrote.

>> No.18166760

>>18166754
imagine replying to everyone in the thread with this retarded thought, having not read the thread, just begging for (you)s
Imagine supplying a (you) to this poster. Take my word for it, feels pretty bad.

>> No.18166787

>>18166754
nobody called him evil itt retard, while intelligent he wasn't a genius. Jesus

>> No.18166788

>>18166760
this. I'm giving you the (you) because he doesn't deserve it. he will undoubtedly read what I'm writing here though because he's so thirsty. so here goes. you quoted me and then go in to say the quoted posters think Michel is evil and not a genius. had you read any of the quoted posts you'd see that i think he's a genius regardless of his pedophilia, actually even more genial BECAUSE of his pedophilia. And he's not evil because 1) evil is a spook and 2) pedos aren't evil. murder yourself now

>> No.18166813

>>18166712
They went to that Tunisian village and interviewed everyone around there. The so called "victims" don't seem to exist

>> No.18166829

>>18166813
the victims aren't discovered because your episteme doesn't allow it

>> No.18166854

>>18166813
I don't consider them victims anyway but do you really expect a bunch of over 50 tunisian men to remember that time when some bald frenchman paid them for their sweet sweet boipussy? That's like expecting a former basehead to remember a particular john she sucked off for some freebase in 1983

>> No.18166868

>>18164624
Fake news. Sorman retracted because Foucault wasn't in Tunisia in 1969. KYS.

>> No.18166897

>>18166868
>believing the narrative of the powerful
cope

>> No.18166912

>>18166868
don't be upset. Michel was a pedophile nonetheless and that's a good thing

>> No.18166970
File: 2.89 MB, 640x640, ezgif-3-b7afa1d7aaf5.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18166970

>>18166912
But a gay pedo, thus a fag and thus unbased.

>> No.18167023

Ginsberg, Burroughs, and Foucault walk into a bar. And by bar I mean M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle. It's not a joke, I just like the mental image of these three pieces of shit getting shot to pieces.

>> No.18167042

>>18166787
He wasn't intelligent either

>> No.18167043

>>18164624
I mean, was there a doubt?

>> No.18167077

>>18167023
seethe harder anti
>>18166970
i disagree. I'm straight myself but a man of taste is a man of taste. and Michel was that

>> No.18167093

>>18164846
I'm a trad cath and I agree with Foucault's descriptive takes of power relations and institutions. It just makes sense

>> No.18167163

>>18167093
that's because there's ultimately nothing to disagree with. he was completely correct. The reason conservatives like to claim he's wrong is because he gave the game away and that threatens them in their power

>> No.18167211

>>18164846
Wrong

>> No.18167225

>>18167211
true. in the sense of it's true that it's wrong. not the sense of childish back and forth

>> No.18167230

>>18166581
He was a card-carrying communist at point, it’s unlikely he would have approved of colonialism, especially considering how bleak his view of advanced power structures were in general.

>> No.18167271

>>18164624
Fags rape kids. What a shocker.

>> No.18167272

>>18166581
>>18167230
Celine was anti-colonialism too... do we all have to take the opposite view of whatever progresives believe in order to be "based"?

>> No.18167376

>>18167272
i don't hear a word you're saying. celine and foucault were based. how is anticolonoalism the opposite of what progressives believe?

>> No.18167382

>>18167230
A communist wouldn't be anti colonialism because it elevates the subject nation to capitalism and is thus on the path to communism in the dialetic method.
>>18167272
Where did I say I was pro colonialism I just refered to it as a morally neutral thing.

>> No.18167530

>>18164624
>“They were eight, nine, ten years old, he was throwing money at them and would say ‘let’s meet at 10pm at the usual place’.” This, it turned out, was the local cemetery: “He would make love there on the gravestones with young boys. The question of consent wasn’t even raised.”


ummm... based?

>> No.18167535

>>18164822
based lol

>> No.18167563

>>18167382
Sartre and the French commie crowd were very anti colonialist. He even supported Franz Fanon, who said the solution was the African people taking up arms and forcibly excising the colonial population from their home nations.

>> No.18167565

>>18167530
very

>> No.18167659

>>18167563
>He even supported Franz Fanon, who said the solution was the African people taking up arms and forcibly excising the colonial population from their home nations
Fanon proving himself to be utterly based once again

>> No.18167692

post the source stupid faggot

>> No.18167706

>>18167563
They're barely commies and actual commies would have put them into camps.
>>18167659
You will much sooner find niggers wiped out off the map. They are inferior beings with no power.

>> No.18167719

>>18167706
>They are inferior beings with no power
kek

>> No.18167723

>>18167692
It's apparently this, or one of the many smaller sites that re-used the same quotes:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/french-philosopher-michel-foucault-abused-boys-in-tunisia-6t5sj7jvw

>> No.18167730

>>18166754
Imagine thinking that just because you are metaphysically depraved with a soul deformed and enslaved by evil your work will be the complete opposite of that.

>> No.18167733

>>18167023
Good luck winning a gunfight against Burroughs

>> No.18167740

>>18167733
You only need be the first one to fire, that's how warfare works. It's amush vs ambush, when you're supressed there's nothing you can do except get down and call for support.

>> No.18167819

>>18167740
Larp

>> No.18168558

>>18164624
>French
>Parisian
>using the tem "intellectual" not as an insult
>pedo

Every single time.

>> No.18168582

>>18167819
That's how engagents happen, ask anyone who was in the shit.

>> No.18168615

>>18164624
>French
>Faggot
>Kid diddler
>Died of AIDS
Pottery

>> No.18168958

Anyone have any info on the follow up of this whole thing?

>> No.18169081

>>18164624
>Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’
sluts

>> No.18169117

>>18166754
>Imagine thinking that just because someone is evil they can't be a genius, or do great things. Imagine thinking that just because someone is evil they can't be a genius, or do great things.
Foucault was neither.
>let alone understand anything he wrote.
Then shut the fuck up.

>> No.18169134

>>18166581
>I thought he referred to himself as a Nitzschean
he's a retard who took nietzsche's perspectivism to its most logical conclusion. he's a literalist reader of nietzsche, incapable of thinking in metaphor.

>> No.18169156

>foucault gets in a debate
>"Well first you HAVE to abandon what we understand of 'good' and..."
Fuck this faggot.

>> No.18169258

>>18164826
There are literally only three post-Revolution French philosophers that are worth respecting: Girard, Guenon and Maritain.

>> No.18169399

>>18169258
Guenon is a meme but Girard is legit.

>> No.18169419

>>18169156
Too scared to go into the deep water, brainlet? Stick to reading aphorisms LMAO

>> No.18169442

>>18169419
>If you don't accept my perspectivist postmodern axioms as self-evident then I don't need to engage you
Bravo Foucault.

>> No.18169445

>>18169442
If you fundamentally misunderstand the argument then there is no need to engage you. You might as well be screeching on Twitter.

>> No.18169463

>>18169445
>If you fundamentally misunderstand the argument then there is no need to engage you.
see >>18169442

>> No.18169486
File: 131 KB, 589x600, 589px-Duvert_Tony_002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18169486

wait till you guys find out about Tony Duvert and Gabriel Matzneff!

>> No.18169746

>>18166508
This, similarly https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/idees-et-debats/michel-foucault-et-la-pedophilie-enquete-sur-un-emballement-mediatique_2148517.html has an article on it as well (that references the Jeune Afrique one), but /lit/ is a board for shitposting about books/authors, not about actually reading

>> No.18169861

>guy known to be venomously against post-modernism makes up a hit piece 60 years later because he is butthurt Foucault is remembered more than him
Im not buying it

>> No.18169867

>>18167706
Oh, I’ve been dealing with in an insincere idiot. Great.

>> No.18169899

what else was there to do in north africa for a european intellectual during the early half of the 20th century

>> No.18170220
File: 526 KB, 750x734, 1617964767986.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18170220

>Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,” he recalled last week in an interview with The Sunday Times.

>“They were eight, nine, ten years old, he was throwing money at them and would say ‘let’s meet at 10pm at the usual place’.” This, it turned out, was the local cemetery: “He would make love there on the gravestones with young boys. The question of consent wasn’t even raised.”

He was giving these kids aids while fucking them on gravestones. That's a poetic kind of evil. Nice.

>> No.18170242

>>18170220
yknow when all those nuts protestants called these people the devil maybe they were on to something after all

>> No.18170341

>/lit/ will complain when a sjw tries to cancel someone over something that happened 2 years ago with multiple people making the claim yet completely side with a single person who claimed this happened in the 60s

>> No.18170359

>>18165926
They died in battle. Dummy

>> No.18170819

>>18170341
It really is quite funny

>> No.18170906

>>18166754
My copy of Foucault just arrived today. All geniuses have contemptible proclivities, just add him to the pile.

>> No.18170915

>>18170220
>sodomy of a tween
>making love
kek

>> No.18170933

>>18170220
he at least truly gave no shit about christian morality. much cooler than modern leftists.
We could have been friends, as long as he didnt constantly try to rape me.

>> No.18170949

>>18169156
this guy is right >>18169419
Foucault is the deep end. It is outer fucking space. No reference points, no epistemology, just fucking air. Time and space. Then he begins building it up and you are well into it before you realize he's only just been establishing the prerequisites for analysis and there's still the other half of the book left.

>> No.18171601
File: 80 KB, 400x400, Fearless-Iranians-From-Hell-Holy-War-vinyl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18171601

>it's another episode of reactionaries having no other arguments but ad hominems

>> No.18172027

>>18169486
I've been reading Diary of an Innocent and well, that boys would be running after Foucault seems believable after that book. In such a place of the world, early teen sexuality may well have let itself be fucked, for some money, and without adopting the mannerisms of a fag – it's all good, no trauma fetishism, when they grow up they grow out of it, a square with a family. But that was then…

>> No.18172203

>Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,”
so, what's the problem here?

>> No.18172400

>>18166854
They remember Foucault, and they remember him having had relationships eith 17-18yo men.

>> No.18172540

>>18172027
Surprised someone else on here is reading that book at the same time. It reminds me a lot of Pasolini's descriptions of street youth in Rome where gay shit was just a common event in the path towards a later hetero marriage and there was no identity or even vocabulary centered around homosexuality. But yeah, that was 50 years ago and contained in the accounts of self-identified pederasts, so I take it with a grain of salt.

>> No.18172817

>>18172400
source on that?

>> No.18172858

>>18172027
no doubt. the notion that children are asexual is ludicrous. I can personally attest that I have been horny since I've started to from memories. I loved playing with my shota dick, I loved looking at hot women, even as a 5 year old, and would have killed to fuck a grown woman when I was tiny. A few years ago I watched Shakira's Wherever Whenever video and I had a vivid flashback to my childhood, when I used to watch it. I suddenly remembered how horny I got when I watched that video and how I've always been filled with an unquenchable desire to fuck women, even before I knew what fucking was. Started jerking off when I was ( too, but only because no one showed me how earlier. If I had been lucky, an adult would have introduced me to masturbation and pornography when I was in kindergarten. I wish an adult had the grace to have fulfilled my wishes back then. I wish some experienced adult had taken my virginity before my 8th birthday

>> No.18172877

>>18164624
Why even bother going to Tunisia? The guy lived in the middle of Paris, I am sure he could have grabbed some 10/10 twinks if he wanted to.

>> No.18172893
File: 951 KB, 1503x2316, 1594876718853.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18172893

A French tradition

>> No.18172944

>>18172858
based 5 y/o chad cumbrain

>> No.18172960
File: 21 KB, 370x278, pedo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18172960

>>18172858
Here is your mentor bro.

>> No.18173046

>>18172960
He would have used me like a little fleshlight. why oh why was this fate taken from me. Just imagine how big his creamy load would have seemed in my tiny shota boipussy. it would probably have overflowed. I wonder how big his cock is. I pray that he's doing well and experiencing sublime pleasure wherever he is.

>> No.18173068

>>18173046
He probably already got his face sliced up or raped in protective custody.

>> No.18173075

>>18173068
poor man. I truly hope he's doing well and is as ruthless in his pursuit of pleasure as ever

>> No.18173085

>>18164624
>‘what about me? take me, take me’
does the question of consent even need to be raised here ...?

>> No.18173092

>>18173085
They wanted money to live in their shithole not have Count Dracula molest them.

>> No.18173112

>>18173092
not molestation if they consent

>> No.18173126

>>18173085
if children can't consent, that would have implications. we as a society clearly think that they can consent in other areas but don't want to admit it because normie antis get emotional when it comes to sex because they think sex is icky

>> No.18173130

>>18172400
Again, the Jeune Afrique article

>> No.18173141

>>18172817
Oops, this >>18173130 was meant for you

>> No.18173513

>>18164624
>paedophile rapist
I hate that normies think a pedo is automatically a rapist. The 'take me! take me!' anecdote clearly proves that there was consent, gleeful, enthusiastic consent even

>> No.18173554

>>18164624
>what about me? take me, take me
isn't that consent?
also why would little kids be eager to fuck an old man? why did this cunt wait so long to tell this story?

>> No.18173595

>>18173554
>isn't that consent?
It is obviously. You can do mental gymnastics to claim that it isn't anyway but that would carry with it some major societal implications that no one claiming children can't consent is ready to face

>> No.18173612

>>18173595
Such as?

>> No.18173664

>>18164624
The Guy Sorman accusations have been debunked btw. https://illwill.com/the-black-masses-of-michel-foucault

>> No.18173699

>>18173664
This. Sorman actually had to issue a retraction lmao.

>> No.18173746

>>18173612
such as the fact that if they can't consent despite all appearances (i.e. take me take me) the only reasonable conclusion is that they don't have the capacity to understand the power dynamics, thus they can't consent. okay, fine. the problem is, sex isn't the only relation that has unequal power dynamics. especially when it comes to kids. School, parenting, doctors appointments. All have unequal power dynamics. If they can't understand or consent to them, children should not be allowed to attend school, be raised by adults, or get medical care. They do these things, thus they can consent even to things they don't neccessarily understand. However normies think sex is icky because despite their apparent aversion to christianity and its fundamentalism, they view sex through a christian fundamentalist lens, where sex is always bad.

>> No.18173773

>>18166581
Using aspects of Nietzsche's ideas doesn't mean he agrees wholesale with everything Nietzsche said. Foucault and other leftists who appropriate Nietzsche focus on his criticism of Christian morality and emphasis on the body but dismiss the aristocratic themes and vitality.
It's the same as Hegel having both left and right Hegelianism following his steps. When you're an influential philosopher, people read you however they want.

>> No.18173838

>>18173664
The article doesn't actually debunk shit. He was a pedophile. His defenders are pedophiles. It's that simple. Was he a child molester? Who knows, but he was certainly a pedophile. The article's author is attempting to jam in some polysemy by restructuring the petitions as attempted liberation, when in reality the children of '68 were by and large concerned with upbraiding the normative, including a dismissal of anti-kid-fiddling and moral guardians that opposed.

>> No.18174012

>>18173746
yeah, under the "but its unequal power relations!" argument lies the weird presupposition that power inbalances equals automatically bad. If we took this as an argument, then parenting would be forbidden. Of course what they mean is that its harmful to the children. But then again, there are many cases where its not.

>> No.18174036

>>18173838
>Eye witness testimony contradicting Sorman’s account
>not debunked

>> No.18174045

>>18174036
Reread, señor Dipshit. Reread.

>> No.18174062

>>18174012
>Of course what they mean is that its harmful to the children
not if they consent and if they're not brainwashed into believing that they were raped/molested/abused when they're older. the brainwashing lies at the heart of this 'trauma' issue

>> No.18174112

>>18174062
Children can't consent. It's not a didactic issue, it's deontological. The legality, or lack thereof, isn't relevant with regard to the Trauma Myth (2009), it's about the Nurture Assumption (1998). Maybe you should consult actual victims? You can tour psych facilities, why not do a little field-work and discover what molestation/rape do to real children in the real world?

>> No.18174162

>>18174112
>In their own words, they “participated,” “consented,” and “allowed it.” 41p
> So, in a court of law, children cannot consent. The problem is that most people do not live in a courtroomWe live in the real world, and in the real world, from the perspective of child victims, they do consent 73p
>We cannot accomplish this with platitudes or blanket statements like “You were not to blame” or “It was done against your will.” They consented not because they were forced to but because they did not understand enough not to. And victims need to know that this is normal 146p The trauma myth
sorry, cant hear you over the truth and facts

>> No.18174173

>Frenchman is a irredeemable coomer
color me surprised

>> No.18174219

>>18174112
>Children can't consent
why not? if they say yes, that's consent. If you say that still isn't consent see >>18173746
>Maybe you should consult actual victims? You can tour psych facilities, why not do a little field-work and discover what molestation/rape do to real children in the real world?
I'm not denying that people who were raped as children, or who had sex with adults as children are facing issues today. When it comes to rape, I agree, it's always harmful. But if you're a kid and an adult has sex with you and you agree in the moment and maybe even enjoy it, growing up and viewing it as trauma only happens because others tell you that what happened to you, something you may have enjoyed even, was rape/abuse, then of course you'll end up facing the same issues as children that were actually raped/abused. That's why I said it's brainwashing. They get brainwashed into believing they were harmed as kids when they may not have been. Our attitude towards consent and child sexuality plays a deciding role in the problems that children who had sex with or were raped by adults face. Plus, the whole concept of inability to consent has issues in itself

>> No.18174233

>>18174219
also, children are harmed all the time by things they don't (or can't, although I wouldn't say can't) consent to. But in most instances that aren't sexual, it's seen as unproblematic because the parents/guardians consent FOR them. See violent movies. No doubt detrimental to a child's mental health, yet if a parent permits their child to view a violent movie, that's seen as the parents choice and right

>> No.18174655

>>18174233
That would be the argument of Marjorie Heins (2001). Again, it's deontological, not didactic.

>> No.18174673

Pedophilic rape is okay if it's gay. That's what the jews have told us.

>> No.18174770

>>18174655
address the main point and not the afterthought

>> No.18174782

>>18174655
lol, based brainlet just keeps repeating that its deontological without providing any elaboration

>> No.18174848

>>18174219
Mate, let me be real with you on the basket-weaving forum. I work with children (5-12) and adolescents (13-17) both inpatient and outpatient. You will never convince me, or any provider with routine interaction and the requisite credentials, that this is applicable or even domain-specific with regard to therapy. Never. Stop shilling this shit. The entire premise is one of children as preternatural adults. You may not realize this, but the typical child acts by way of naive theory, not because of knowledge deficits, but because of their age. They analogize because ontological distinction requires category sampling (see: personification, animism, theory of mind). The developmental markers are a very real, very relevant thing in medicine. That's all there is to it. Clancy's arguments aren't relevant, they're pop-psych pseud-shit meant to comfort relativists and adults.

>> No.18174880

>>18174848
so what you're saying is kids can't consent. okay. to what? to sex only? why is sex special then. if it's not sex only (it isn't, because we don't allow children to consent to, say, labor contracts) then they can't consent to a whole host of things, including being treated by medical professionals

>> No.18174904

This has been debunked but of course /lit/ will willingly believe it anyway

>> No.18174912

>>18164624
Your ignorance isn’t the topic of the board

>> No.18174923

Do leftists/postmodernists really

>> No.18175100

>>18174880
See: Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees (1957); Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. Usually, they can't really consent to anything. Assuming you're in the US, I suggest you review the relevant laws regarding treatment by state (they differ). Where their consent is considered appropriate, there are additional requirements that stipulate a forfeiture of placement (DCS/Wards - for instance, Cal. Family Code § 6928 in relation to Cal. Penal §
11167 and 11167.5), reporting or guardianship. Where I'm based, parents/DCFS don't require a minors consent for treatment (mental health).

>> No.18175118

>>18175100
thanks for that. I'll check it out but you gotta admit though that the entire concept of consent and inability to consent is extremely murky and dubious at best.

>> No.18175254

>>18174848
not who you replied to, but thank you for your real reply. My mom works as a pediatrician, and nowadays they're essentially primary care for child psychiatry, but I've never asked her about this stuff. Do you mean that since children lack specifc modes of thought (before developmental markers) they're unable to consent to anything in general?

>> No.18175283

>>18174848
>but the typical child acts by way of naive theory, not because of knowledge deficits, but because of their age.
but Clancy doesnt deny the difference between cognitive abilities of children and adults. What you're writing has absolutely no relevance to the problem of consent. Sex has to do with physical pleasure, not with solving puzzles.

>> No.18175297

>>18175254
>they're unable to consent to anything in general
I'm the guy right above you and in my view that ^ or the opposite, i.e. they can consent to anything are the only two options. there's no in between.

>> No.18175301

>>18175100
>Where I'm based, parents/DCFS don't require a minors consent for treatment
unacceptable. read szasz

>> No.18175397

>>18175301
I don't care about Szasz, nor do any practicing clinicians. I've found that Szasz circulates in a morganastic fashion. The average clinician either forgets him entirely or received third-hand accounts of TMoMI.

>> No.18175533

>>18175397
yeah no shit average NPC doesnt like a thinker that debunks his whole field

>> No.18175576

>>18175533
Ok? I'm sorry that real people don't care about Szasz. Any field relevance he may have had (debatable) has long since been dismissed. Have a little self-awareness, jeez.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action