- Joined
- Mar 13, 2022
LessWrong has pedophiles? Next you'll tell me fish swim in the ocean!
Prostasia Foundation - Tax-exempt paedophile advocacy charity with an open forum; wants an end to sex offender registries; has had several sex offenders working for them; finances a "MAP" support club kids are allowed to join; legalize child sex dolls you bigot
- Thread starter easy
- Start date
- Joined
- May 29, 2021
We all know Netflix's biggest flop, Cuties. Well there was an article by a Sexual Abuse survivor who gave it a warm review. I disagree heavily but she's not the main focus in all of this,
How did Jeremy Malcoms respond? To praising CP which is what Prostasia does by the way.
LINK / ARCHIVE
That's right! Correcting a survivor of pedophilia that it wasn't ACTUALLY pedophilia! And it wasn't actually cp!
Here's the DOST test btw.
In 1989, when i was 5, I spent several weeks in a children’s psychiatric ward. My father, who began abusing me sexually three years earlier, was outraged by the hospitalization because he feared I’d become perverted by listening to “all the sex talk” from the counselors. A social worker told him I’d been admitted because of some of my new behavior: acting out toward other kindergartners, making comments about my private parts and theirs, telling my mom I was going to kill myself, before laughing uncontrollably.
I have few memories of the treatment. I remember my roommate liked to pull the fire alarm and that, at some point, my mother came to visit. I remember wrapping my hands around the fence between us, crying for her not to go, until a nurse guided me back inside. I remember the feelings of helplessness and rage were more than I knew what to do with. Afterward, I did my best to wade through adolescence and young adulthood, working diligently to assure everyone that I was fine.
When I found out my father died in the spring of 2019, an unholy swell of despair rose to the surface and couldn’t be pushed down again. I started using the word pedophilia in casual conversation, as if to mark the source of my emotional breakdown. I’d always thought the word was so ugly. Suddenly, it was all I could think about. Which was why in mid-September, when I first heard about a new Netflix film accused of promoting pedophilia, I decided to watch it.
Cuties, I learned, was a French movie directed by Maïmouna Doucouré that premiered to acclaim at this year’s Sundance Film Festival. It follows an 11-year-old girl named Amy who, like Doucouré, is the child of Senegalese immigrants. As she struggles to accept her family’s cultural and religious traditions, Amy befriends a group of girls who are part of a dance crew called the Cuties. Hot pants, hair dye, and twerking ensue. The film also grapples with class, race, and the role social media plays in shaping young women’s self-image, but that’s not what pulled it into a cultural firestorm.
By now, the beats of the controversy are familiar: Ahead of the film’s release, Netflix shared a misleading poster showing Amy and her friends in their stage outfits—mid-competition, midriffs exposed, knees spread. The poster was so bad I wondered if the provocation was deliberate. Netflix apologized, but the damage was done. #CancelNetflix became the No. 1 trending hashtag on Twitter the day after the film dropped. The director received death threats. Movie critics and Twitter users who defended Cuties were called rapists or pedophiles. Politicians, most notably Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard and Republican Senator Ted Cruz, accused Netflix of promoting child pornography.
Last week, news surfaced that a grand jury in Texas indicted Netflix for promoting work depicting the “lewd exhibition” of girls under 18 (the company is standing by the film). The indictment also declares that Cuties “has no serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
This claim is reckless, and untrue.
After my father’s death, I began trauma-informed therapy, the kind designed to pull the patient out of the vortex of shame that pedophilia creates in its victims. Part of the recovery process involves giving up what I call “the search”: an impulsive hunt for fictional portrayals of sexual abuse in movies or books, anything that could trigger a sense of nausea. This compulsion has eased, but it lingers—this desire to find portals to the origin of my pain, to the imagined place where I can make sense of what happened to me once and for all.
Read: On marrying a survivor of childhood sexual abuse
When I sat down to watch Cuties, I expected to disassociate or panic. Instead, I just felt wistful and a little sad. Although at times uncomfortable, the film I watched was hardly the sordid filth that its detractors were claiming. (“Disgusting and wrong,” Cruz called it. “Appeals to the prurient interest in sex,” the indictment stated.) This was a coming-of-age story, told with obvious care and emotional sensitivity—a meditation on how lonely, complex, and occasionally joyous the road to adolescence can be. When the credits rolled, I thought to myself, That’s it?
Cuties thoughtfully portrays Amy navigating the exhilaration and cluelessness that can emerge between true childhood and early puberty—especially in an era when young people spend so much time on platforms such as TikTok and YouTube, where sexualized content abounds. While researching the movie, Doucouré spent a year and half interviewing more than 100 Parisian girls about their experiences with social media so that she could better understand the forces that shape young women today. Cuties has plenty of contemporary relevance, but it has a timeless quality as well: The film shows what it’s like to desperately need your mother and hate the life she’s given you at the same time. It depicts the intense, capricious love that can undergird young friendships.
Read: When do you become an adult?
The movie does include scenes of the Cuties dancing that will make viewers cringe, and these are the scenes that called Doucouré’s responsibility to her audience into question. But the argument that images of girls dancing like women will “delight pedophiles” forgets that pedophilia is a perversion, a sickness unworthy of consideration in the process of creating sensitive, highly contextual art. Netflix’s marketing team deserves scrutiny, but Doucouré’s vision is not exploitative, callous, or cruel. On the contrary, she shows restraint in the moments when the potential for audience discomfort is greatest. As a director, she brings her characters right to the edge of disaster, but she never leaves them there too long, nor does she let them suffer consequences they’re unable to handle. In one tense scene often singled out by the film’s opponents, Amy snaps a photo of her genitals and posts it online. She makes the impulsive decision after a video of her involved in a schoolyard tussle reveals that she wears “baby” underwear. Taking cues from the provocative celebrities she watches videos of on her phone, Amy believes the picture is her path to being treated seriously. The sequence is shot from the side, so that the Amy we see is covered by her clothing; the audience never sees the photo she takes.
The fallout is swift: Amy’s classmates call her a slut; her friends kick her out of their dance group. But the movie’s lens, both literal and figurative, matters in the bathroom scene. Doucouré invites the viewer into this moment not to leer, but to empathize; by the end, it is Amy’s pain and confusion over her choices that we’re left with. The image of Amy seated on the bathroom floor, phone in hand, seconds before she posts the picture, is the saddest moment of the film. Organizations such as the Parents Television Council called it one of several examples where the protagonist “hungrily seeks out examples of sexualized dancing and behavior to emulate so she can fit in.” I found their language more charged than the actual scene.
The collective rage that Cuties evoked isn’t terribly surprising. Dramatic works depicting female sexuality and sexual awakening have long been fodder for moral panic, regardless of critical reception. Cuties isn’t a tender tale about a first crush or first heartbreak, both surely more palatable themes for a tween film (think My Girl, or 13 Going on 30). It’s a movie about girls not wanting to be little girls anymore. About girls spying on classmates in the bathroom, girls who want to wear tight pants and hump the dance floor, without understanding why no well-intentioned adult wants to look at that, and without understanding the danger of the adults who do. The roughness in the slow transition from girl to woman—the fumbling, the misunderstanding, the pain—has been left in for the viewer to see. Cuties is a reminder of the dangers of the digitally connected world, but also of the fact that sexual feelings aren’t always contained within bodies old enough to understand them.
Read: ‘Mustang’: When girls just want to have fun
At the end of the movie, I thought of my own early adolescence. I was awkward in the way all middle schoolers are, but I’d been stripped of the natural impulses that my peers seemed to have. I didn’t want to be touched. I didn’t want to be visible. I wanted to cry really hard during love scenes between young actors, and pretend their world was where I lived instead. Watching Cuties, I wasn’t envious of Amy’s journey. But at age 36, I still found myself desperate to feel the pure emotions she and her friends felt. I live with a permeating sense of nostalgia, sometimes, for memories that have never taken place.
Iwasn’t surprised to learn that some of the angriest critics of Cuties are far-right conspiracy theorists, as other journalists have reported. Although some detractors have good intentions, I’m not convinced that everyone who is professing disgust about this gentle film is motivated by morality or reason. A few days before my father died, I learned he had a website. Since 1999, he had mostly used it to promote UFO conspiracy theories, but eventually it became a place for him to rant about the supposed spread of liberal perversion in America. The last entry before his death was in part dedicated to me, whom he called “childless, barren, and alone.” I imagine he would have detested Cuties, and the empathy it showed for its young characters.
This empathy, which suffuses every frame of the film, is why claims that Cuties is absent of serious artistic value hold no water. In one of the final scenes, Amy is dancing onstage when she realizes—in the middle of the number—that performing with the Cuties isn’t where she wants to be. This change of heart comes quickly, and when it registers, Amy begins to cry. She is suddenly, painfully her age again. The crowd watching the girls is horrified by their movements, and we see the audience’s shock at the same time we see the smallness of the girls’ bodies, the mismatch of their gyrations and the tears rolling down Amy’s face. Afterward, Amy changes out of her costume and into a pair of jeans and a T-shirt. We see her wander out of her apartment and take a turn jumping rope. The camera slows down, and it leaves us with Amy’s face, gleeful, grinning, moving in and out of the shot. She had gone too far before, and she knew it. But she was able to come home.
I thought of how worried the film’s critics were that showing young girls discovering their own selves would “whet the appetites of pedophiles” and threaten young lives. I thought of how pedophiles are cowards who rely on secrecy and the shame their victims feel to act in the first place. To say that Cuties enables sexual abuse is to miss the point of the film. This movie brings a rare vision of girlhood to light, and posits that sexual exploration—in all its discomfort and modern complexities—is actually okay, even normal.
Cuties celebrates the sense of self I didn’t feel at age 12. The kind that pedophilia kept hidden in the dark. The kind I’m working on finding now.
Caira Conner is a writer based in New York City.
I have few memories of the treatment. I remember my roommate liked to pull the fire alarm and that, at some point, my mother came to visit. I remember wrapping my hands around the fence between us, crying for her not to go, until a nurse guided me back inside. I remember the feelings of helplessness and rage were more than I knew what to do with. Afterward, I did my best to wade through adolescence and young adulthood, working diligently to assure everyone that I was fine.
When I found out my father died in the spring of 2019, an unholy swell of despair rose to the surface and couldn’t be pushed down again. I started using the word pedophilia in casual conversation, as if to mark the source of my emotional breakdown. I’d always thought the word was so ugly. Suddenly, it was all I could think about. Which was why in mid-September, when I first heard about a new Netflix film accused of promoting pedophilia, I decided to watch it.
Cuties, I learned, was a French movie directed by Maïmouna Doucouré that premiered to acclaim at this year’s Sundance Film Festival. It follows an 11-year-old girl named Amy who, like Doucouré, is the child of Senegalese immigrants. As she struggles to accept her family’s cultural and religious traditions, Amy befriends a group of girls who are part of a dance crew called the Cuties. Hot pants, hair dye, and twerking ensue. The film also grapples with class, race, and the role social media plays in shaping young women’s self-image, but that’s not what pulled it into a cultural firestorm.
By now, the beats of the controversy are familiar: Ahead of the film’s release, Netflix shared a misleading poster showing Amy and her friends in their stage outfits—mid-competition, midriffs exposed, knees spread. The poster was so bad I wondered if the provocation was deliberate. Netflix apologized, but the damage was done. #CancelNetflix became the No. 1 trending hashtag on Twitter the day after the film dropped. The director received death threats. Movie critics and Twitter users who defended Cuties were called rapists or pedophiles. Politicians, most notably Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard and Republican Senator Ted Cruz, accused Netflix of promoting child pornography.
Last week, news surfaced that a grand jury in Texas indicted Netflix for promoting work depicting the “lewd exhibition” of girls under 18 (the company is standing by the film). The indictment also declares that Cuties “has no serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
This claim is reckless, and untrue.
After my father’s death, I began trauma-informed therapy, the kind designed to pull the patient out of the vortex of shame that pedophilia creates in its victims. Part of the recovery process involves giving up what I call “the search”: an impulsive hunt for fictional portrayals of sexual abuse in movies or books, anything that could trigger a sense of nausea. This compulsion has eased, but it lingers—this desire to find portals to the origin of my pain, to the imagined place where I can make sense of what happened to me once and for all.
Read: On marrying a survivor of childhood sexual abuse
When I sat down to watch Cuties, I expected to disassociate or panic. Instead, I just felt wistful and a little sad. Although at times uncomfortable, the film I watched was hardly the sordid filth that its detractors were claiming. (“Disgusting and wrong,” Cruz called it. “Appeals to the prurient interest in sex,” the indictment stated.) This was a coming-of-age story, told with obvious care and emotional sensitivity—a meditation on how lonely, complex, and occasionally joyous the road to adolescence can be. When the credits rolled, I thought to myself, That’s it?
Cuties thoughtfully portrays Amy navigating the exhilaration and cluelessness that can emerge between true childhood and early puberty—especially in an era when young people spend so much time on platforms such as TikTok and YouTube, where sexualized content abounds. While researching the movie, Doucouré spent a year and half interviewing more than 100 Parisian girls about their experiences with social media so that she could better understand the forces that shape young women today. Cuties has plenty of contemporary relevance, but it has a timeless quality as well: The film shows what it’s like to desperately need your mother and hate the life she’s given you at the same time. It depicts the intense, capricious love that can undergird young friendships.
Read: When do you become an adult?
The movie does include scenes of the Cuties dancing that will make viewers cringe, and these are the scenes that called Doucouré’s responsibility to her audience into question. But the argument that images of girls dancing like women will “delight pedophiles” forgets that pedophilia is a perversion, a sickness unworthy of consideration in the process of creating sensitive, highly contextual art. Netflix’s marketing team deserves scrutiny, but Doucouré’s vision is not exploitative, callous, or cruel. On the contrary, she shows restraint in the moments when the potential for audience discomfort is greatest. As a director, she brings her characters right to the edge of disaster, but she never leaves them there too long, nor does she let them suffer consequences they’re unable to handle. In one tense scene often singled out by the film’s opponents, Amy snaps a photo of her genitals and posts it online. She makes the impulsive decision after a video of her involved in a schoolyard tussle reveals that she wears “baby” underwear. Taking cues from the provocative celebrities she watches videos of on her phone, Amy believes the picture is her path to being treated seriously. The sequence is shot from the side, so that the Amy we see is covered by her clothing; the audience never sees the photo she takes.
The fallout is swift: Amy’s classmates call her a slut; her friends kick her out of their dance group. But the movie’s lens, both literal and figurative, matters in the bathroom scene. Doucouré invites the viewer into this moment not to leer, but to empathize; by the end, it is Amy’s pain and confusion over her choices that we’re left with. The image of Amy seated on the bathroom floor, phone in hand, seconds before she posts the picture, is the saddest moment of the film. Organizations such as the Parents Television Council called it one of several examples where the protagonist “hungrily seeks out examples of sexualized dancing and behavior to emulate so she can fit in.” I found their language more charged than the actual scene.
The collective rage that Cuties evoked isn’t terribly surprising. Dramatic works depicting female sexuality and sexual awakening have long been fodder for moral panic, regardless of critical reception. Cuties isn’t a tender tale about a first crush or first heartbreak, both surely more palatable themes for a tween film (think My Girl, or 13 Going on 30). It’s a movie about girls not wanting to be little girls anymore. About girls spying on classmates in the bathroom, girls who want to wear tight pants and hump the dance floor, without understanding why no well-intentioned adult wants to look at that, and without understanding the danger of the adults who do. The roughness in the slow transition from girl to woman—the fumbling, the misunderstanding, the pain—has been left in for the viewer to see. Cuties is a reminder of the dangers of the digitally connected world, but also of the fact that sexual feelings aren’t always contained within bodies old enough to understand them.
Read: ‘Mustang’: When girls just want to have fun
At the end of the movie, I thought of my own early adolescence. I was awkward in the way all middle schoolers are, but I’d been stripped of the natural impulses that my peers seemed to have. I didn’t want to be touched. I didn’t want to be visible. I wanted to cry really hard during love scenes between young actors, and pretend their world was where I lived instead. Watching Cuties, I wasn’t envious of Amy’s journey. But at age 36, I still found myself desperate to feel the pure emotions she and her friends felt. I live with a permeating sense of nostalgia, sometimes, for memories that have never taken place.
Iwasn’t surprised to learn that some of the angriest critics of Cuties are far-right conspiracy theorists, as other journalists have reported. Although some detractors have good intentions, I’m not convinced that everyone who is professing disgust about this gentle film is motivated by morality or reason. A few days before my father died, I learned he had a website. Since 1999, he had mostly used it to promote UFO conspiracy theories, but eventually it became a place for him to rant about the supposed spread of liberal perversion in America. The last entry before his death was in part dedicated to me, whom he called “childless, barren, and alone.” I imagine he would have detested Cuties, and the empathy it showed for its young characters.
This empathy, which suffuses every frame of the film, is why claims that Cuties is absent of serious artistic value hold no water. In one of the final scenes, Amy is dancing onstage when she realizes—in the middle of the number—that performing with the Cuties isn’t where she wants to be. This change of heart comes quickly, and when it registers, Amy begins to cry. She is suddenly, painfully her age again. The crowd watching the girls is horrified by their movements, and we see the audience’s shock at the same time we see the smallness of the girls’ bodies, the mismatch of their gyrations and the tears rolling down Amy’s face. Afterward, Amy changes out of her costume and into a pair of jeans and a T-shirt. We see her wander out of her apartment and take a turn jumping rope. The camera slows down, and it leaves us with Amy’s face, gleeful, grinning, moving in and out of the shot. She had gone too far before, and she knew it. But she was able to come home.
I thought of how worried the film’s critics were that showing young girls discovering their own selves would “whet the appetites of pedophiles” and threaten young lives. I thought of how pedophiles are cowards who rely on secrecy and the shame their victims feel to act in the first place. To say that Cuties enables sexual abuse is to miss the point of the film. This movie brings a rare vision of girlhood to light, and posits that sexual exploration—in all its discomfort and modern complexities—is actually okay, even normal.
Cuties celebrates the sense of self I didn’t feel at age 12. The kind that pedophilia kept hidden in the dark. The kind I’m working on finding now.
Caira Conner is a writer based in New York City.
LINK / ARCHIVE
That's right! Correcting a survivor of pedophilia that it wasn't ACTUALLY pedophilia! And it wasn't actually cp!
Here's the DOST test btw.
- Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child's genitalia or pubic area.
- Whether the setting of the visual depiction is sexually suggestive, i.e., in a place or pose generally associated with sexual activity.
- Whether the child is depicted in an unnatural pose, or in inappropriate attire, considering the age of the child.
- Whether the child is fully or partially clothed, or nude.
- Whether the visual depiction suggests sexual coyness or a willingness to engage in sexual activity.
- Whether the visual depiction is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2022
The forum has a globally pinned thread that claims the woman in the news story about a sex doll being made from her daughter's likeness (onion) lied about it and fabricated the whole thing.
Before going further, let's go over how retarded and difficult it is to archive long Discourse threads. Every Discourse thread is a Web 2.0 infinite scrolling piece of shit that puts everything on one page so both archive.today and ghostarchive cut off after a random point. Even if you try to archive a specific post further downthread, it will just start at the first post so there's no way to archive the entire thread with just those services alone. The way I've found is to archive using the Wayback Machine, which disables Javascript so the thread is actually paginated (page 1, 2, 3), and then because the Wayback Machine bends over for tranny pedophiles (onion), re-archive the Wayback pages to archive.today (page 1, 2, 3). Avatars are not archived this way but that doesn't matter.
Anyways here's the OP (who is a moderator):
And...um...yeah they look pretty fucking similar. Yes they're not identical, but you have to be a real pedantic asshole to get upset over that. The article talks about her likeness being used after all, which is still bad.
Next are posts by a guy named, no fucking joke, LoliShadow:
Then someone named JustLurking totally conclusively proves the story is fake:
Then this guy goes on to sperg out about some Instagram model who's young-looking yet is still 21 years old, I'm not sure what his point is. That the doll was based off of her? Not screenshotting because the images make me feel uneasy. Then:
Then the final slam dunk:
Holy fucking shit!
...and? So you're saying her daughter doesn't have two ponytails too? How do you know that it's not covered up by the perspective of the photo too?
I don't even have words for this. I don't know how someone could believe that not only is the story of sexual exploitation fake, but that ACKSHUALLY, the real exploiter here is the mother.
I'm not even halfway done with the thread and this is taking a while so let's just blitz through a few more posts before ending it off.
That's enough from me. I'm going to take a long shower now.
Before going further, let's go over how retarded and difficult it is to archive long Discourse threads. Every Discourse thread is a Web 2.0 infinite scrolling piece of shit that puts everything on one page so both archive.today and ghostarchive cut off after a random point. Even if you try to archive a specific post further downthread, it will just start at the first post so there's no way to archive the entire thread with just those services alone. The way I've found is to archive using the Wayback Machine, which disables Javascript so the thread is actually paginated (page 1, 2, 3), and then because the Wayback Machine bends over for tranny pedophiles (onion), re-archive the Wayback pages to archive.today (page 1, 2, 3). Avatars are not archived this way but that doesn't matter.
Anyways here's the OP (who is a moderator):
Love how this guy is using scare quotes around the names Terri and Kat. Yes, he does imply further downthread that Terri doesn't even exist, but we'll get to that later.Chie said:
This is not a moral panic. This is legislators doing their jobs for once.Chie said:
Wow, what a fucking QED. So what? This just means her daughter's picture must have been on the Internet before late 2018. Which I don't find hard to believe.Chie said:
Oh wow. Not come to your own conclusions, but rather, the right conclusions. I.e. anything that would make child sex dolls okay.Chie said:
How the fuck is she the one who is "exploiting" her daughter? This is some real DARVO shit going on here.Chie said:
So here's the least blurred image I could find:Chie said:
And...um...yeah they look pretty fucking similar. Yes they're not identical, but you have to be a real pedantic asshole to get upset over that. The article talks about her likeness being used after all, which is still bad.
Next are posts by a guy named, no fucking joke, LoliShadow:
Counterpoint: Wikipedia is retarded and the Daily Mail isn't the only outlet reporting on this story. In fact the OP links to an NBC News article too.LoliShadow said:
Source? I find it hard to believe that pedophiles don't possess lolicon in Japan.LoliShadow said:
Good thing I also hate Pornhub and believe it needs to be shut down. I'm not a fan of porn in general. Pornhub is the worst site to defend anyway as they keep having incidents of underage performers being uploaded to the site.LoliShadow said:
With this specific scenario on a per-day basis? Very low indeed. But that has nothing to do with the doll looking like her daughter.LoliShadow said:
No, actually, that's even less likely.LoliShadow said:
Hold the fuck on here. How is Terri going to the news media to report on this story illegal?!Chie said:
One sentence: Absence of proof is not proof of absence. Not every site on the Internet is indexed and we don't even have the unblurred picture of her daughter to do accurate reverse image searching with.Chie said:
LOL good fucking luck with that.Chie said:
Then someone named JustLurking totally conclusively proves the story is fake:
Again, this proves nothing. I can believe there's other ways the picture of the daughter ended up in their hands. Pedos are notorious for sharing pictures of little kids with each other that may not be public.JustLurking said:
Ok? I mean yes, the mother gave it to the news outlets. Is that damning in a way that I'm not aware of?JustLurking said:
Then this guy goes on to sperg out about some Instagram model who's young-looking yet is still 21 years old, I'm not sure what his point is. That the doll was based off of her? Not screenshotting because the images make me feel uneasy. Then:
I don't know why you couldn't find an Amazon listing by reverse image searching, but absence of proof is not proof of absence.JustLurking said:
Then the final slam dunk:
(these ones: )JustLurking said:
I do agree. It's weird and downright creepy the company posed it the same way as the daughter in the photo.JustLurking said:
I don't fucking know why they did that. But that's what they did. I don't find it hard to believe they did it. "This story is fake because a company wouldn't be retarded like that" is a retarded argument.JustLurking said:
Absence of proof is not proof of absence. This shit is exhausting.JustLurking said:
JustLurking said:
Holy fucking shit!
...and? So you're saying her daughter doesn't have two ponytails too? How do you know that it's not covered up by the perspective of the photo too?
Uh, no. This is conspiratard-tier thinking.JustLurking said:
Ok, this is definitely DARVO at this point. "The mother is the real pedophile here!" is quite a take for sure.JustLurking said:
The former. Both are unlikely but the latter is way more unlikely.JustLurking said:
Oh come the fuck on.JustLurking said:
I don't even have words for this. I don't know how someone could believe that not only is the story of sexual exploitation fake, but that ACKSHUALLY, the real exploiter here is the mother.
JustLurking said:
This is a real reach. With my good conscience, I say that she wasn't posed to look like a sex doll because the sex doll was posed to look like her. I can't believe I'm reading this DARVO shit right now.JustLurking said:
Oh fuck off with this "just asking questions" bullshit. "dOeS tHe MoThEr HaVe A nArCiSsIsTiC pErSoNaLiTy DiSoRdEr" like that's even remotely a possibility or concern here.JustLurking said:
I love how you already have an excuse at the ready in case the child disagrees with you. No matter the result you won't change your mind.JustLurking said:
No.JustLurking said:
What the fuck is this shit?JustLurking said:
I sincerely doubt this.JustLurking said:
No child abuse on the part of the mother has occurred here.JustLurking said:
I'm not even halfway done with the thread and this is taking a while so let's just blitz through a few more posts before ending it off.
Well, that's because it is.anon49547193 said:
Now that's a new neologism. "Sexphobic". Apparently if you don't want pedophiles molesting children you're a sexphobe.anon49547193 said:
Terri doesn't exist? Based on what fucking evidence?Chie said:
So Kat and Terri are likely not in a professional modeling agency...but the story is still fake?Chie said:
Fuck off faggot and kill yourself nigger.Chie said:
That's enough from me. I'm going to take a long shower now.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Also even if it is just coincidence and it isn't based on this specific girl, it's still a goddamn CHILD SEX DOLL.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
One of this group's fascist alumni is really mad about something dumb he saw on CNN: https://www.publicnotice.co/p/cnn-trump-town-hall-fascism
He also re-posted a review of a 2015 book in which he complains about due process from state persecution (in this case because other unrelated people are bad) like any good fascist: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/the-coddling-of-american-professors
Then he (he even fucking says the line) accuses freedom of speech of being fascist:
He really hates popular people being allowed to say things he doesn't like publicly, which is ironic for such a pedophile advocate: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/anderson-cooper-wants-trump-to-urinate
Does he complain about anything but free speech? Well, yes, he complains about free speech and the right to keep and bear arms both being fascist: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/guns-dont-kill-people-nazis-kill
If you're concerned that Noah is maybe of a one track mind don't worry, he also takes on the really important issues too: https://observer.com/2023/05/guardi...he-mcus-tradition-of-villainous-progressives/
No, don't do it, don't click:
He also re-posted a review of a 2015 book in which he complains about due process from state persecution (in this case because other unrelated people are bad) like any good fascist: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/the-coddling-of-american-professors
Then he (he even fucking says the line) accuses freedom of speech of being fascist:
He really hates popular people being allowed to say things he doesn't like publicly, which is ironic for such a pedophile advocate: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/anderson-cooper-wants-trump-to-urinate
Does he complain about anything but free speech? Well, yes, he complains about free speech and the right to keep and bear arms both being fascist: https://noahberlatsky.substack.com/p/guns-dont-kill-people-nazis-kill
If you're concerned that Noah is maybe of a one track mind don't worry, he also takes on the really important issues too: https://observer.com/2023/05/guardi...he-mcus-tradition-of-villainous-progressives/
No, don't do it, don't click:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2022
Funny how literally everything Noah Berlatsky says can be refuted with "shut up, you normalise pedophilia".
I don't even understand how one could make this comparison. But I guess that long chain of telephone is the sort of logic that comes from the deranged mind of a pedophile.
He is literally arguing that letting Trump say things on your platform is akin to letting him come into your house and piss all over your floor. Oh, and not only that, CNN doing it in this one case means that they're letting Trump have every single platform in the world and is free to spew his lies 24/7. And oh, it's not just Trump, it's every fascist too.
I don't even understand how one could make this comparison. But I guess that long chain of telephone is the sort of logic that comes from the deranged mind of a pedophile.
Wait till he hears about Audrey Hale. Oh, that's right, he doesn't ever mention her.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
These "people" need to be put against a wall.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2021
(Link) (https://ghostarchive.org/archive/33Tna)
(Author Page) (https://archive.ph/OAFzW) (Article) (https://archive.ph/sdN0i)
This private information is unavailable to guests due to policies enforced by third-parties.
(Homepage) (https://archive.ph/xq63L)
(Donate Page) (https://archive.ph/oil5G)
(About Page) (https://archive.ph/4m4xY)
This site also has a publically available sitemap (https://archive.ph/wip/9kPVq) if anybody else wants to dive further.
(https://archive.ph/Z5mCO) (10,000 Tweets from @TNF_13 Saved on Wayback)
MAP Civil Rights Project
(https://archive.ph/wip/pfm9e)
All of his articles are placeholders, so let's look at the site's homepage:
Yes, you read that right: reparations for pedophiles
A Matt Nolan is credited for the copyright of the MAP Civil Rights Project - I don't know the first thing about digging through copyright documents and shit, so I'll leave figuring out connections from this to others:
AboutPedophilia.com (About Page) (FAQ)
There are an absolute fuckton of articles from TNF_13 and at least one other person ("daywalkervirped") on this site, going all the way back to September 2016.
The funniest (and also one of the creepiest) things on this site is the "Accolades" page, which is for displaying all the nice feedback they get from their fellow MAPs that their articles have helped. The kicker is that they only have one message displayed, and it's a) very obviously fake, and b) very obviously part of the author's fetish:
TNF_13 has 186 posts on Christian Forums, talking about the exact same shit
He had a now-deleted Medium account, with the majority of the articles going unarchived:
Some rapidfire mentions for others' perusal:
- He got mentioned in this massive paste of Twitter MAPs.
- He had a Reddit account (now deleted, seemingly not suspended) which you can search the post/comment history of with Unddit.
- He was mentioned in this Boychat post.
- He has a Minecraft account.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
So basically the child molesters on staff want first crack at the grooming victims.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2020
Reading this entire thread is like wading through a vat of slimy chemical shit, Jesus Christ. Plus the name of that nonce group...even if I didn't know it was operated by pedos, I'd feel a lot of unease reading it.
- Joined
- May 29, 2021
Probably the most based fucking post I've seen on the forum. The call for genocide on "Mysopeds."
Who are mysopeds? They're the zoosadist equivalent for pedophiles. That's right! Pedosadism!
POST / ARCHIVE
Hmmmm. I thought you were a free speech absolutionist? What happened buddy? Banning discussion on genocide?
What are you fucking Turkey?
Who are mysopeds? They're the zoosadist equivalent for pedophiles. That's right! Pedosadism!
POST / ARCHIVE
Absolutely fucking based. So how does Jeremy Malcom respond?
Hmmmm. I thought you were a free speech absolutionist? What happened buddy? Banning discussion on genocide?
What are you fucking Turkey?
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Jeremy Malcolm should meet his terminus.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
I can think of nothing better for the various group-based reparation movements than pedophiles trying to make it all about them (and troons when they hear there's money for nothing and weird sex stuff), so I can only endorse this.
- Joined
- May 29, 2021
Child trafficking narratives are misleading
Written by Noah BerlatskyLINK / ARCHIVE
There is a weird narrative in this article that is trying to pushed, most trafficked people are gay, lesbian, and not "cis straight whites."
"Young cis white girls," nigga wut.
Let me break down this part because there is so much wrong about it.
Here is the study : ARCHIVE , firstly, they never specify "cisgender," it just says boys and secondly the point of the article is to say how men are underrepresented in sexual abuse cases and that it's mainly a women's issue. Here are quotes from the study cited. These numbers are WAY less than 50 percent. It is not a diverse crowd, it's mostly women.
Back to the article here is this batshit insane quote.
Source? I made it the fuck up. I'm not kidding.
The link takes you to nothing. "about:blank" to be exact.
This point makes sense on paper, HOWEVER it claims that most trafficked people are trafficked because they leave their house and because more queer people are homeless, that means they're queer. I found a different article which goes against it and gives a better explanation for how less gay people are trafficked. (ARCHIVE)
But this is exclusive to international sex trafficking. Domestically speaking, the article claims that they are at HIGHER risk compared to HOMELESS STRAIGHT PEOPLE.
Other articles do stats that more gay kids claim they were trafficked than straight kids claim. But then again, this was my own research vs the article Prostasia wrote which did NO research. Back to the article.
This did not happen to Kristin DiAnglelo. Kristin is a straight white female.
Yes she was homeless but it wasn't because her parents figured out she was gay.
I can't with Prostasia. It's an odd point to tell people that sex trafficking is diverse.
Also let's talk about Prostasia and privacy. Prostasia is against companies scanning your photos for CSA because of "Privacy." Usually I'd be concerned about the government reading my messages however, I'm a little concerned over Prostasia's intentions.
LINK / ARCHIVE
I'm gonna dox a Prostasia nigga in a little bit.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2023
Link to Comicsgate thread
Nerdette aka Tristen had a run in with Bob Setlock III with using Noah Berlatsky as a source for gotcha on comicsgate. Full details above.
Nerdette aka Tristen had a run in with Bob Setlock III with using Noah Berlatsky as a source for gotcha on comicsgate. Full details above.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2015
@Polentic (can't quote)
I want everyone, especially pedos, to shut the absolute fuck up about the sexual or gender or whatever identity self reported by victims of child sexual abuse, because trying to figure anything out as a youngster about how you feel about your body or sexuality or any of that shit is completely fucked up by the fact that someone fucking molested you. Victims spend whole lives trying to figure out some way to live in their body and who do they fancy and can they even fancy anyone and can they let anyone touch them, because some fucking crazy pervert hurt them in the worst way when they were too young to make sense of anything.
This is one of those very occasional times when people who know nothing, especially pedos, need to shut the fuck up. Child sexual abuse destroys your ability to discover and develop your sexuality - of whatever stripe it may be - in a developmentally normal way. It fucks you up, to some degree, forever. I notice the pedos managed to read Caira's article on Cuties without grasping that that was the whole point of it. That's what she recognised: the not-being-able-to-be-normal. The 'universal experiences' you can't have and can't relate to.
But pedos. What can be expected of people who are eager to wreck lives so that they can empty their balls. They're not even fucking human.
I want everyone, especially pedos, to shut the absolute fuck up about the sexual or gender or whatever identity self reported by victims of child sexual abuse, because trying to figure anything out as a youngster about how you feel about your body or sexuality or any of that shit is completely fucked up by the fact that someone fucking molested you. Victims spend whole lives trying to figure out some way to live in their body and who do they fancy and can they even fancy anyone and can they let anyone touch them, because some fucking crazy pervert hurt them in the worst way when they were too young to make sense of anything.
This is one of those very occasional times when people who know nothing, especially pedos, need to shut the fuck up. Child sexual abuse destroys your ability to discover and develop your sexuality - of whatever stripe it may be - in a developmentally normal way. It fucks you up, to some degree, forever. I notice the pedos managed to read Caira's article on Cuties without grasping that that was the whole point of it. That's what she recognised: the not-being-able-to-be-normal. The 'universal experiences' you can't have and can't relate to.
But pedos. What can be expected of people who are eager to wreck lives so that they can empty their balls. They're not even fucking human.
- Joined
- May 29, 2021
Earl Frank Yarington III / yetanothermap5 / sexuality_and
Earl is a therapist/school bus driver/writer for Prostasia. He has defended Thomas Arthur, (1 2) , he was mentioned on a Prospering Grounds about Angela Brenneis. Angela is an "incestuous Pedophile, Necrophile, Zoophile & Horse Humper." He allegedly gave therapy to this guy. And judging by the other shit he has defended. I bet he approved.
MrDouble
Earl wrote a small piece on Thomas Arthur for Prostasia's Blog. (ARCHIVE)
Thomas Arthur raped a 5 year old FYI. Thomas should've 100% been arrested because anyone who hosts that much CP, should be arrested.
That's right! Arresting pedos before they offend won't work cause people will still commit crimes! By that logic, why fucking arrest anyone. His solution?
Its about destigmatizing pedophiles. He suggests teaching kids this is wrong, but legalizing those images are okay? So idk seems like a mixed bag.
School Bus Driver
Yup that's our boy in front of a school bus.
"Earl Yarington (LMSW) is a social worker and school bus driver."
ARCHIVE
Well, we have no real evidence he's a pedophile right? Maybe we do. The following is a schizo theory.
"sexuality_and" is his username on some websites. So let's search it up on Twitter.
Odd this "yetanothermap5" account pops up a LOT.
Here's the smoking gun.
Another Link to this photo / archive
Loli, pretending to be a female.
It may or may not be him. They argue in the same threads constantly.
Dox
Accounts
Prostasia Account / ARCHIVE
Ortner Rd in Darien Center, New York, 14040-9726
eyarington1@aol.com
eyarington@verizon.net
eyarington@aol.com
efy28@msn.com
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2015
when people bleat about "why does KF dox people", ask yourself: would you want to know if a pedophile activist was driving your children to school every day?
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2021
Except this is public info. So the better question is "why does your school and local law enforcement allow a pedophile activists to be near children at all?"
Or if we want to be fairer, "are posters on an internet forum better at sniffing that out this sort of background than the people responsible for hiring or were they aware of it when they hired him?"
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2021
McGill University Researcher Solicits Online Pedophile Communities for “Child Love” Research
(Link) (https://archive.ph/Y0J22)
This private information is unavailable to guests due to policies enforced by third-parties.