Nick Fuentes defends child grooming on his podcast. A former supporter disavows him, yet a majority of right-wingers in the replies proceed to side with Nick and defend pedophilia
Nick Fuentes defends child grooming on his podcast. A former supporter disavows him, yet a majority of right-wingers in the replies proceed to side with Nick and defend pedophilia
https://twitter.com/KnowNothingTV/status/1702390330597777589
About a month ago he also said that the age of consent should be abolished and that marrying adolescents is fine: https://lemmy.world/post/2594046
Pedocon is a theory in the same way that gravity is a theory.
You're viewing a single thread.
Am I missing something? Isn't grooming definitionally not pedophilia? I know people will be apt to downvote this because they'll inexplicably assume I'm defending grooming, but in seriousness, isn't grooming defined as building a trusting relationship with a minor (without sexually abusing them) so that when they cease to be a minor they will instinctively consent to sex? I.e. don't groomers, by definition, strictly have sex with adults?
No, you're actually wrong on this account. Grooming is definitionally the emotional manipulation that is performed specifically in order to get away with sexually abusing a child. One example of this kind of grooming involves doing illicit non-sexual activities with a child in order to seem like a "fun adult" who "let's them get away with bad things" and to get the child to practice "keeping this our secret" so that when the direct sexual abuse starts, the child is already in the habit of hiding illicit activity from other adults.
*puke
Premeditated as this suggests is so fucking disgusting
The upcoming pedo paradox, holy fuck I'm glad I'm not in a position to have to weigh in on that. I use that as my example that sometimes life gives you agency, and therefore a responsibility to act, but only gives you bad choices.
Future pedo dilemma
- Do nothing, risk pedo offending or reoffending
- Society gives the pedo a lifelike sex robot...at their preferred age (where that otherwise
wouldbetter be strictly illegal) thus curbing and satisting their worst drives.
Both answers are terrible. But assume yr a judge, which one sucks least? If they haven't offended do we show compassion? Do we only help them curb their desires after we know they'll actually do it? That person would NEED it the most, but then it'd be like we are rewarding them.
What do ya do?
I'm of the mind that if they've violated someone they should be chemically castrated.
Yes to showing compassion to non offending pedophiles who do not act on it or argue for it. And then look at studies or conduct studies to determine what works to prevent someone from acting on it and then do that.
Afaik refraining from abusing them isn't part of the definition. Anybody cozying up to a minor with the ultimate goal of having sex with them is grooming, whether or not they wait until they're of age.
That can be one aspect of grooming. But there's plenty of people grooming kids for abuse much sooner than when they turn 18.