This week, the Internet was set aflame over Netflix’s latest release, an award-winning French drama about young girls, simply entitled Cuties (“*Mignonnes*”).It struck a nerve and was the latest example of the yawning gulf between people who watch movies and the obnoxious *poseurs* who write about them. Is this film little more than child pornography *en masquerade*? Is it encouraging or “normalizing” the sexualization of young girls?Or are we overreacting to what is simply a French art house *outrage*? By using so many French words, am I, in fact, making it worse? Edward Dutton and Richard Spencer discuss the reaction to the film and how we can better understand pedophilia and its place in contemporary culture. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit radixjournal.substack.com/subscribe
It's Sunday, September 13th, 2020, and welcome back to The McSpencer Group, America's most procrastinating podcast.
Ed Dutton is on hand for our long-awaited return.
Main topic, Les Prédateurs.
This week, the internet was set aflame with outrage over Netflix's latest release, an award-winning French drama about young girls simply entitled Cuties.
Mignon.
It struck a nerve and was the latest example of the yawning gulf between people who watch movies and the obnoxious poseurs who write about them.
Is this film little more than child pornography en masquerade?
Is it encouraging or normalizing the sexualization of young girls?
Or are we overreacting to what is simply a French art house outrage?
By using so many French words, am I, in fact, making it worse?
Ed and I discuss the reaction to the film and how we can better understand pedophilia and its place in contemporary culture.
Ed, welcome back.
It's been a little while.
How are you?
I'm okay, yes.
I've just been swimming with the family to this spa where there was a wave machine, which was very pleasant.
And because of, I guess, because of fears over corona or whatever, there was hardly anybody there.
There was no competition for the sponge floats and whatever.
So it went very well.
That sounds very wholesome.
We are going to talk about something that is entirely anti-wholesome today.
We'll talk about this outrage over the Cuties film on Netflix.
And then I think we'll be able to expand off into a lot of subjects that are...
A bit discomforting and tricky to say the least.
Maybe a little disgusting.
But I think they should be talked about and they need to be talked about in an adult forum like this.
So let's start with cuties because it's always good to start with something that is immediately accessible to everyone.
I presume that everyone who is watching this or listening to this I mean, I kind of get the idea of consumer boycotts are pointless and this is just one more thing.
Why am I cancelling Netflix over this and not that?
But nevertheless, this was a bit too egregious.
But this has been addressed by Congress.
There are motions, at least, to investigate this in some fashion.
I don't know what that will eventuate in.
This has been denounced by major figures.
Tulsi Gabbard, one of my favorite politicians, she came out pretty hard on this subject.
It's been denounced by a lot of liberals.
But it certainly evoked a great deal of conservative outrage and tons of alt-right, dissident-right outrage and so on.
I have not seen the film.
I feel a little bit bad talking about a film that I haven't seen.
It seems a bit dishonest, but I really don't want to see it.
And of course, I have canceled Netflix.
But I've read a few reviews, and I would say that I do think...
The film is a little more ambiguous than it's been made out to be.
I will grant it that.
But nevertheless, the phenomenon persists.
It wasn't really the film because there are some films that take on difficult subject matter that you can get on Netflix or Amazon or iTunes or all these streaming services that are often lower budget films that take on difficult subjects.
I remember seeing a trailer for a film called White Girl, which was kind of about...
Coming of sad, coming of age of lower class woman who was doing drugs and having sex at a young age and so on.
The film, I mean, it was depicting it, representing it, but it seemed to have a kind of sad quality to it.
I think the problem with Cuties was right away, Netflix was advertising this as an underage strip show.
I mean, I don't...
I think that's wrong to say.
The initial poster was of these girls glammed out.
The poster did not convey any nuance whatsoever.
It was basically preteen girls acting like dancing queens at best, I guess, and strippers at worst, maybe even worse than that, as human-trafficked prostitutes.
And this generated outrage.
Netflix apologized, and I think the line that I've seen is that this was a botched poster, as if they made a mistake or something.
I think it was quite deliberate what they were doing.
And the subsequent posters have been a little more tame.
But, I mean, this movie is more nuanced from what I've read than that poster would imply.
As probably most all movies are.
And it's actually about a Senegalese girl and she's going through the issues of life and having family trauma and so on.
But I also don't think it's wrong that this film is...
The poster and the thumbnail of the film is meant to titillate.
And it's meant to get you excited about this.
You don't click on it or walk into the movie theater for the nuance.
You click on it and go to the movies for the titillation and sensation.
And I think that is clearly what was going on.
And even if there are more nuances, there's no question that...
I mean, it's a French film.
It's French.
So, in general, my experience of French films is that compared to American films or British films, you know, they're inherently deep.
I mean, the French are people who can make penguins wandering around on the ice doing penguin stuff, a profound emotional experience.
Well, that is deep.
Yeah.
Freeman talking, but the version that I got was the original version where it's French.
It's much more profound if it's narrated in French than it's narrated by Morgan Freeman.
So I think there could be an element of sort of cultural misunderstanding there and also perhaps attitudes towards the sexualisation of children and things like this are rather more liberal.
In French sort of art house drama.
If you look at other posters that they've done for this film, remember it's a Senegalese girl, Muslim girl, and she's torn between the hyper-sexualized tween age, I suppose you'd say, or whatever, early teenage world of her very poor Parisian friends and the Islamic world of her background.
And in the end, she makes a choice to go with neither.
Sorry if I've spoiled the plot for anybody.
What they tried to argue was that this was a critique almost.
This was a presentation of reality.
The reality is that the culture is hyper-sexualizing these teenage girls.
I agree with that.
They are hyper-sexualizing themselves and they dress like...
We have this phrase in Finland, pikkuhorat, little whores.
And they dress rather like that.
They're highly sexualized and they've got all these sexual influences.
But on the other hand, I agree.
And there are other posters which they put up where it's these girls in normal clothes and the sort of Parisian background and whatever.
But it seems to me not too much of a stretch to think to oneself that while it is...
Presenting that reality, and it is a reality, of the sexualized nature of these teenage girls, particularly in working class districts of Paris or whatever, and the fact that the Muslims are going to come into contact with them and therefore it's going to put them in an extreme sort of dissonance about how they should behave.
You are rather contributing to it if you do a poster of girls who, whatever they are, 15, 14 years old, how old are they supposed to be, looking sexy and having sexy looks on their faces.
You are contributing to that.
You're contributing to the very culture that you're claiming to attempt to artfully present and critique.
So I find it hard to believe that they didn't realize that, you know, we've got to get publicity for our film.
Good God, this is going to work, isn't it?
Think of all the people that are going to watch this film simply because of the furore.
Yeah, I mean, for the amount of subscribers they've lost, they might very well have gained many.
And the other aspect is that there's this, you know, there is a kind of a certain kind of snobbery of...
Upper middle class people that are probably subscribed to HBO and things like that and not just Netflix, but that, oh, I can watch this.
I can appreciate this sensation in a way that those dumb Christians can't.
I think they're playing on that.
They're almost getting a certain cachet.
They see themselves wrongly, because we have research on what left-wing people are like, and they feel a sense of moral disgust with regard to those that are different from them politically, a lot more strongly than right-wing people do, and they feel this sense of equality very intensely, and they have less emotional control than conservatives.
But they can sort of think to themselves, yeah, I'm above my instincts.
People have these base instincts, these lower-class people that vote for Brexit and Trump.
Marine Le Pen and whatever.
They have these base instincts to just judge this film and judge this poster and be disgusted by it.
But I can see the art in this.
I can see the depth in this.
We've had extreme examples.
If you look at modern art, a lot of modern art is the ultimate example of the emperor has no clothes kind of thing.
Even if you go back 20 years in Britain, you had the Turner Prize, which was the leading art prize, and it was things like Tracy Emin's Unmade Bed.
Or it was just some rubbish strewn on the floor.
I think there's another level to it.
I think it's the I'm above my instincts and through effortful control I can watch this.
But I think there's another aspect to it, which is that if you look at white liberals in their lifestyle, they're living in the suburbs.
They are, in some cases, living in urban environments.
But they, and you can certainly find them in rural environments as well, but less so, but they are living a kind of WASP existence.
And they, you know, I think we, sometimes conservatives will, you know, allow social media to inflect how they view them.
And they think that every white person voting for Biden has blue hair and is yelling at people and screaming or protesting and throwing Molotov cocktails.
The fact is, What?
You're like, that's true.
No.
If you actually go to these white liberal communities, they are pretty waspy.
And I think there's this almost, there's a certain kind of pity that you look down, you know, pity allows you to...
Achieve a certain degree of power.
You are looking down on someone and kind of thinking, well, this isn't happening to my daughter.
And this is kind of a problem among the lower classes.
I was reminded of something that was a kind of phenomenon from about 10 years ago or so.
And it coincided when I was at Duke University.
So I guess it's about 15 years ago now.
But there was this book that was out on hookup culture.
And they actually went to Duke University as one of these high-flying places where you'll get a job in finance afterward.
And they were talking to girls about hookup culture.
And what the book revealed was that there was almost this cold, almost sociopathic response to, what's the matter, Ed?
No, no, I'm just looking in more detail at that picture that caused all the controversy.
Okay.
Anyway, sorry, carry on.
Okay.
So there was this book on hookup culture, and what it depicted was this...
Cold, almost sociopathic relation to sex, where these girls would go give a blowjob, get a little something for themselves, and then kick the guy out of their dorm room at midnight and maybe never see him again.
It was almost this consumerist aspect to sex, where it was fun.
There was actually another controversy about a year later, which was this girl, the sorority, was...
Did a PowerPoint presentation on her fuck list and was just kind of coldly documenting what she's done and how she's risen in status and so on.
It was pretty shocking just in the level of sociopathy, you could say.
But what this book actually was kind of concluded was that you would have these upper middle class white liberals.
Who would go to Duke that could act like this and in a way get away with it and maybe end up married and what have you or end up with a career.
But these same trends occurring among lower classes ended up in...
Broken families, lots of unplanned pregnancy, abortion, drug use, and so on.
It's the difference between operating that strategy and not being particularly intelligent and not having access to resources.
Exactly.
And operating that strategy because you plan to operate it because you're coldly psychopathic and highly intelligent and you realise you can make money out of it and you can sort of drop it whenever you want to and you have access to resources and the contacts to not have to do so.
And so there's something rather different about a person who has an illegitimate child because they're liberal and they think that marriage is an increasingly irrelevant social construct and they don't think they need to get married.
And they live in, I don't know, in some nice part of North London and have an illegitimate child and whatever.
That's fine.
But if a person does it accidentally because out of a drunken, drug-fueled gangbang, then that's the same thing.
But it's less of a problem.
It's more of a problem.
And white liberals aren't doing what you describe.
I mean, in the sense of family formation and so on, this is the coming apart thesis of Charles Murray where all of these...
Obnoxious upper bourgeois whites actually are forming families and sending their children to private schools and so on.
And it's actually the lower classes that are kind of losing this supposed conservatism, which they might actually admire more than the upper classes.
They're just a lot of ironies.
Well, yeah, it's always the irony with the woking classes, as I call them, the woking classes, as opposed to the working classes, that they, it's like Christians as well in the early church, they signal humility as a means of further entrenching their wealth.
And further entrenching their social status and further entrenching their lack of humility, really, by signalling their humility or signalling their adherence to this woke culture.
And so now you do it by signalling your, rather than in the old days, you'd signalling your religiousness, your traditional values in Victorian England or whatever.
Now, of course, you signalled your abhorrence of that.
You signalled the degree to which you are the opposite of that.
I don't need to get married.
I'm perfectly happy to have an illegitimate child.
I'm perfectly happy to swear.
I'm perfectly happy with immigration.
I'm perfectly happy with sexuality.
If I get pregnant and the child has Down syndrome, I'll keep it as a way of signalling my morality and how in touch I am.
And it's only these working class people that would get pregnant with a Down syndrome child and abort it.
So it's a side of my wealth that I would keep it.
And then you just get this signalling in the opposite direction.
I'm signalling my humility in all of these ways.
But in reality, of course, it helps me to cement my status.
And so you have this irony.
But it's those very people that will send their kids to private schools.
Or if it is to state schools, what you call in America public schools, it will be to public schools in the nicest possible area, the nicest possible catchment area.
So they can then signal their virtue by saying, oh, well, no, I haven't sent my kids to private school.
No, no.
Oh, no, no, I'm not.
But look, I...
There's not a huge difference between public and private.
But also, this seems to come to a degree from a meritocratic society, an individualist society, where in other...
And I don't think I'm being entirely nostalgic in saying this.
In other times, the upper classes felt like they are a guardian class of the lower orders, and they would have a realistic assessment of the lower orders, but they would seek to take care of them.
In America, where you can be whatever you want to be...
And it's supposedly meritocratic and individualist and it's all about accumulating wealth or so on.
Then it's just kind of like, well, screw them.
They aren't clever enough to achieve my type of lifestyle.
And you can, again, have pity for them in the sense that you are looking down on them.
But didn't you have that paternalism in the South to some extent?
Yeah.
I mean, are you talking about like the old South or recently?
You have that kind of paternalistic attitude.
Of course.
I mean, the dominant, you know, as the Jordan Roll book shows, the Genovese book, the dominant emotion between slave owner and slave was love.
In fact, it was a paternalistic.
Love, that they aren't doing this just as an economic system, that this is actually a moral system.
Some even Yankees picked up on that.
Yeah, I mean, in England, they were certainly, at the public schools, they were very, what we call public schools, these prestigious boarding schools and the prep schools, they were heavily inculcated with this noblesse oblige kind of Spartan lifestyle.
In fact, they were deliberately and willfully modelled on the teachings of Plato, and Plato argued that the aristocracy should never know their parents.
That the bond with the parents should be broken such that the nobles are there to look after society and to act in the best interests of society and to fight for society and to look after the lower orders.
And that's the quid pro quo they pay for their privilege.
And therefore, as part of their privilege, they must be inculcated with these group selected values through a sort of system of...
Of kindly meant structured violence, basically.
And that was kind of what the system did.
And those were the kinds of people until really quite recently.
I mean, as recently as the early 80s, the Foreign Secretary in England, so the second or third most powerful man in England, was a hereditary peer.
He'd never been a member of Parliament.
He was a hereditary peer, Lord Carrington.
And you had various other people, William Whitelaw, who was Mrs Thatcher's Home Secretary, and lots and lots of others that were gentry, that were part of this upper-class tradition.
And it's only with new Labour.
That that really falls apart.
And you just get, as you say, these upper middle class people that haven't been to public school.
They've been to a lot of them to private, to stay private schools or state schools.
And they, as far as they're concerned, they have much more kind of Mrs. Thatcher's kind of attitude, I suppose, really, without the gentry to hold her back, which is that you should work hard and get to the top.
And everyone can do that.
If you don't do it, you're lazy.
Which is insane because the genetics of these traits such as intelligence and personality that predict getting to the top are very high.
Right.
And so 0.8 for intelligence, 0.5 was more for personality.
So you can see how this would happen.
And then you would, of course, as Charles Murray argues in The Bell Curve, you get this increasing social stratification because of meritocracy, whereby people increasingly just don't know or have anything to do with people of lower social classes, let alone regard them as people they should look after or care about.
Right.
And so you get this increasing polarization.
Well, I'm not going to mention this.
Many people in our movement will say things like, well, race, when we deconstructed race, that began the downfall of Western civilization and so on.
I mean, and if we can just get real about race, that this will be the upfall of Western civilization.
I would...
Interject that it was class deconstruction that started it all.
And I don't think that we can save Europe writ large without a kind of class reconstruction.
And I don't mean that in the sense of, you know, oh, wealth inequality is great and we should have these billionaires.
But there needs to be a paternalistic...
Guardian class in any type of society that can deal with these things realistically.
And these meritocratic sociopathic elites are just as much of a problem.
I think a lot more of the problem than, say, illegal immigrants or something.
So John Glove argued in his book on the decline of civilisations, he noticed that always, during the early winter of civilisation, as the civilisation starts to be noticeably in decline and becomes polarised and whatever, you always get the same process.
You always get, because of the collapse of religiousness and the collapse of patriarchy, you always get the rise of women.
You always get immigration because people don't believe in a God anymore that sees them as special and so they let foreigners in.
And also, you always get everything being about money.
And nothing higher than money.
Because for these kinds of whores that you were talking about that recount the number of blowjobs they give or whatever, there is nothing for them higher.
They have no dignity.
They have no self-respect.
They have no higher values.
They have no transcendental values that say that certain things are just appalling and beyond the pale for the eternal, eternal bad.
They do have self-respect, I would say that.
They actually respect themselves quite a bit.
Oh, in a narcissistic way.
They deeply love themselves in a kind of narcissistic way.
That is true.
But they have no eternal sort of values, and consequently everything's about mummy, and therefore they can do things that disgust them.
And the other thing that you find in this, Glove argues, in this fall of civilization, in this winter stage, is that all the old values are questioned.
All the old values are questioned.
Aristocracy is questioned, which undermines the paternalistic class.
Everything becomes middle class.
Everything becomes about money.
Religion is questioned, so there's no eternal values, no patriarchal values, no sense of ethnocentrism, nothing to fight for, a feeling that everything's just kind of run out.
And then we go, we've gone further than this.
You start questioning every sort of structure, every sort of difference, and it creates a kind of an arms race of questions.
In order to be more questioning and thus supposedly more intelligent and intellectual than the next man, there's middle class questioning of things.
Questioning of gender roles, questioning now of sexuality and sexual orientation, questioning of the nature of male and female, and this push towards equality that you get in that stage of civilization.
So it's been built up because the civilization is about hierarchy.
It's group selected.
It's binding values of hierarchy and in-group loyalty.
The binding values where you sacrifice the good of the individual for the hierarchical structure that is necessary to have an ordered society that can compete with other societies and that can produce things and whatever.
And you have this in-group loyalty and therefore you make sacrifices for the society.
What you see at the decadent stage when everyone's really, really rich and whatever is the decline, because these values are upheld by religiousness.
Once the religion declines, you get these individualistic values of everything is about harbour.
Avoidance and no harm and don't hurt me.
And about equality and questioning everything in the direction of equality.
And that's what we see here.
This highlights you question everything.
You question sexuality.
You question gender.
Eventually, everyone's equal.
People that are gay and straight are equal.
People that are different races are equal.
Men and women are equal.
And eventually, well, what about children and grownups?
And the most fundamental evolutionary thing, which is that parents are...
There to raise their children and raise them, frankly, in a group-selected, adaptive way, because that's a traditional way that children are raised, part of a religion, part of the good of the group, becomes, no, childhood should be about having a nice time and lots of lovely life experiences, which leaves you unprepared for competing in a society where these group values help you to compete.
And even worse, I don't want to judge my child.
I don't want to tell my child what to do.
My child's an individual and I'm an individual.
And so you have this abnegation of responsibility to look after the child.
It's almost like the child and the adult child and the parent are no different.
They're equal.
They're equal.
And then...
If the child will imitate the adult to the extent of this sexualised poster where you have this black girl on her hands and knees, almost like doggy style, asking to be penetrated, which is the poster.
And that is part of this questioning of everything.
This is negative social epistasis in action.
And the case of that boy in America whose mother allowed him to dance on stage at gay nightclubs.
Gay men were saying, well, giving him money and then paedophiles online were saying they'd like to have sex with him because she had abnegated all responsibility for his interests and just let him do whatever he liked and indeed encouraged him to do these unusual peculiar things, whereas a responsible mother would say, OK, the son's going through a bit of a weird phase.
Let's direct him in the right direction.
But no, none of that.
And then eventually you get a point where once all of this is questioned, Paedophilia starts to become something...
Well, look, everyone is in favour of these excluded groups.
It's pride, weak, gay pride.
What about these poor old paedophiles?
Isn't it just a sexual orientation?
Yeah, let's go there.
So, first off, let me mention this.
I don't think the fact that the cuties...
The protagonist is Senegalese is just a dispensable aspect of this thing.
I do think that a lot of this functions on upper-class white liberals looking down on immigrants and kind of not caring about them.
I should mention that.
But, uh, let's, uh, not so much with the, um, you know, tween, uh, tranny boy who was, who was white and had Antifa parents apparently.
Uh, but let's, let's go there in terms of this notion that the car has no brakes.
And, I was born in 1978.
I can remember the gay rights movements of the 80s and 90s.
I can remember that within the context of the AIDS.
Uh, epidemic.
Uh, and I can remember, you know, homosexuals kind of gradually finding their way into culture.
They were, they were viewed, and I think they did this, um, you know, to a large degree, but kind of in a way neutralizing themselves and having, presenting themselves not as a major threat.
There was a, there were kind of, you know, there was the AIDS crisis, which is, you know, kind of terrifying in some ways.
Then there was the activist homosexual kind of from the 70s of, you know, we demand our rights.
We're going to go out in the streets.
We're going to maybe even have a bit of a gay riot, so to speak.
And then there was kind of the move in the 90s and 2000s of the kind of fun, amusing...
Cute gay who is humorous and is your hairdresser and friends with your girlfriend or what have you.
That was actually much more successful in terms of neutralizing homosexuals and making people accept them.
Gay marriage, I think, was the Andrew Sullivan-type tactic of saying we're almost normal and we're just like you bourgeois people who want to get married and have a mortgage.
Was also a very successful strategy for gays being accepted.
But I can remember in about 2013...
When gay marriage had effectively been accepted across the board, Barack Obama, who opposed gay marriage in 2008, endorsed it and signaled about that.
Most states had it.
I think Tim Cook, who was the CEO of Apple Computer, which is a multi-billion dollar company, came out.
And it was just almost a, you know, we've won moment where this is so mainstream now you can't even really, you know, it's not even a thing.
It's not even a controversy at this point.
And many, you could see, you know, National Review, the conservative case for gay marriage and all this kind of stuff.
And I remember thinking at the time, well, okay, I guess this is now over and we can move on to more serious things.
But of course, I was wrong.
It's never over.
And within a year, who popped up on the radar screen?
But Caitlyn Jenner.
And we went to transsexuals.
Within a couple of years after Caitlyn Jenner, which you could say is an oddity and idiosyncratic novelty, we went to trans children.
That was promoted in the mainstream.
By 2018 or 2019, there was a presidential, Democratic presidential, gay, lesbian, queer, forum on CNN, in which most of the candidates were effectively endorsing conversion therapy for children.
There was actually a notorious and really shocking scene in which, you know, Elizabeth Warren, this just, you know, tedious, you know.
The way that she does, talking with his other just tedious...
You know, overweight woman who is, they're bragging about her child being, you know, a transsexual and they're going through therapy.
A child going through a phase, as all children do, phases of various times.
Of course they do, yeah.
And the parents should direct the children in an adaptive direction rather than just listen to them.
I mean, if I listen to my son and just let him do what he wants, he'd be on the computer all day, every day.
Right.
And also, they're going through puberty.
They don't understand what sex is.
They're going to kind of be weird and, you know, you just have to accept that.
And kind of accept it, you know, but then also direct them in a positive direction.
But also understand that, you know...
Look, being a kid, you're learning.
You don't understand things.
You're learning.
Your hormones are changing.
I mean, it's a difficult time.
But to a kid who's a boy who says, oh, I want to dress up as a girl.
And then you say, oh, good, let's castrate him immediately and change him to a girl.
Yeah, I had an older sister who was five years older than I, and her friends would always dress me up like a girl whenever they would come over.
But there was no...
I look back as a form of amusing hazing or something on behalf of my older sister.
But it is not important.
And the notion that that said something significant about my inner identity is absurd.
Yeah, I used to dress my dog up in human clothes, but there's no question for me becoming a trans species.
But the thing that's interesting about it is that in the 70s, when there was this general free-for-all, particularly in the UK, You had the paedophile information network, it was called, which was this paedophile advocacy group.
And it was advocating for paedophilia.
It was advocating for the age of sexual consent to be reduced to three or something.
And it attached itself to the civil liberties, this pro-civil liberties group that were pro-gays.
And it was kind of, to some extent, accepted among this group.
And then eventually there was a public backlash against it.
We've gone too far.
The spiteful mutant types that want to destroy society and completely undermine everything and just embrace the void and embrace chaos.
We've gone too far.
Let's reign it back.
So pedophilia was reigned back.
And there was this kind of transference that as homosexuality was increasingly promoted as acceptable and okay, pedophilia was increasingly the thing that, no, that's awful.
And we're seeing that now.
Yeah, because you see even liberals talking about this is cuties is promoting sex trafficking.
I mean, I think they know it's gone too far too soon.
And it undermines what they're doing.
But where we've gone is so far.
This is like a hundred steps forward, one step back.
I mean, basically.
Exactly.
If you look at places like Iran or whatever, the Shah, he liberalizes society, he makes it all Western, he went too far, too soon, and the consequence of that was a huge backlash on the establishment of the Islamic State, Islamic Republic of Iran.
And so that's what they've got to be careful about.
If you go too far, you get a backlash.
And that's a problem for these people.
The idea is to slowly get you used to it.
So get you used to, yeah, gays is fine.
Get you used to transsexuality.
You don't go too far.
And so these people are now, now, here we go, 40 years after Pi, now in Britain we have these people that call themselves MAPS, minor attracted persons.
And they've got their own flag, like a gay pride flag.
And they've got their own, you know, they're slowly sort of putting it out there.
And there's a psychologist called Stephen Harper at Nottingham Trent University who's, he told a newspaper, I think that the map community is essential.
We know that people are minor who are minor attracted.
Well, okay.
This is one of those things where I agree.
I mean...
I think this needs to be snuffed out.
You can't open up that door.
However, I would say this, just to be entirely objective about this matter, I don't think that a pedophile is...
I don't know what to say.
He's indulging in sin or he's been changed by society.
I would imagine that a pedophile...
He does have a serious mental disorder and maybe even a genetically defined one, and he should be treated clinically.
But I agree.
There's this problem with objectivity where, again, objectivity does not mean endorsement or acceptance.
So I think we can talk about these very discomforting matters.
I don't know what they're doing when Slate Magazine writes some article on how pedophiles, it's not their fault.
I know what they're doing.
But at the same time, at some level, it isn't their fault.
I think they are incurable.
Sexual orientation develops maladaptively.
It has to go through a series of phases to become heterosexuality.
This is a consequence of genes.
This is a consequence of things happening in utero, problems with mother and her hormones and whatever.
And so that's certainly true.
Paedophilia correlates with all kinds of other markers of developmental instability, such as...
face, minor physical abnormalities, all kinds of things like that.
So it's a consequence.
There's nothing adaptive about wanting to have sex with children.
Hebophilia is slightly different.
different thing but there's nothing adaptive about wanting to have sex it correlates it correlates with Mood disorders, 66% have mood disorders, 25% have obsessive-compulsive disorder, personality disorders of various kinds, 61% have borderline personality disorders, so the sense of the self hasn't developed properly.
So yeah, it's not their fault, but they're basically people that, due to those different sets of circumstances, are seriously ill, mentally ill.
Often physically as well, because it correlates with lots and lots of physical problems.
And so to promote it as on a par with homosexuality, particularly when, as I've said, there's some evidence that homosexuality could even be group selected.
It doesn't make much sense to me.
I suppose it could be argued that there could be a group selective dimension to it, in so much as these people are attracted to children and therefore want to work with children and be teachers and things, and as long as they are absolutely forbidden to act on it, there's something like that.
That seems to me improbable when you consider all of the...
Negative genetic costs.
There are plenty of non-criminals who want to coach soccer.
I don't think we need to accept it on that basis.
Yes, so I think it's a matter of salami tactics, a matter of preparing society and going too far.
Like in Britain, with the wokeness, the BBC decided not to play Royal Britannia the last night of the Proms, which is a famous patriotic thing, the last night of the Proms.
And it was realised fairly quickly that they'd gone too far.
This is causing a backlash.
It's causing too much of a backlash.
We should be banning the British national anthems, you know, 30 years from now, not now.
We've gone too far.
And so they've gone backwards.
And that was, I think, what happened with pedophilia in the 70s.
Do you think there's also kind of a class dimension?
I mean, again, I think that pedophiles need to be, obviously, needs to be criminalized.
They need to be treated clinically, and I think in that context, a certain degree of understanding could be offered.
But do you think there's also kind of a class dimension to this in the sense of...
I mean, when you see with the Epstein affair and so on, where it's not a pedophile in the sense of someone who...
Just has this bizarre, maladaptive attraction to children.
Yeah, that's quite right.
The word pedophile is used too broadly.
So there are those that are pedophiles that are just specifically sexually attracted to children.
It's a fetish, a sexual fetish.
Then there are those that just have a very high sex drive and want to have sex and are psychopaths and don't care about who they hurt.
And it's almost like...
There's a little bit of, even if they're not a pedophile in this biological sense, there's almost this frisson of, like, I'll go there, I'll do whatever is against social norms.
I'm just above it all.
And, you know, again, so, I mean, I...
I think some distinctions could be made.
And I think with something like cuties, we do have an elite in Western societies.
The wealth inequality is tremendous.
It's much greater than it was 50 or 100 years ago.
There are people, when you get there, and there are no social norms holding you back, there's almost this sense of, I can do anything.
And I have come to the top, and even if I'm not a pedophile in the kind of clinical sense, why not?
This just demonstrates...
That would be consistent with sort of psychopathic or sort of narcissistic personality, the idea that I'll just...
I demonstrate to myself my own importance by just doing whatever I like, just to see if I can get away with it.
And I can get away with it, and I will.
And they do.
Yeah, I suppose that could be an element of that, that it's something thrilling for someone like Epstein or whatever to know that this is totally unacceptable and I can do it because I'm above everything.
I'm like God.
Yes, and he wanted to be God.
You can actually see in his research interest, there is kind of eugenics are there, but also kind of living forever and all sorts of things.
So, yeah, I mean, it's it was almost like a perversion or deformation of some of the things that we discuss.
It's interesting, isn't it, that traditionally the only person in the English language whose personal pronouns differ from he or she is God, because it has to be capitalized.
And now there's all these people that are saying, oh, my personal pronouns are these.
I have this different personal pronoun from he, she.
And in the past, the only person that had a different personal pronoun from small h, he, small s, she was God.
And the narcissism level among these people is very high.
They have high levels of narcissistic personality disorder, so it kind of makes sense.
I use the first person plural.
For myself, we use that.
Do we?
Yes, that was traditionally the monarch that would use that.
Exactly, yeah.
But I do think that it's picked up on something.
That poster has caused the controversy so starkly.
Those little girls are sexualised.
Perhaps there's some people that have reacted to it negatively as a sort of cognitive dissonance because they're kind of aroused by it and they don't want to be aroused by it and it makes them angry.
I'm not aroused by it.
I see it as...
I've always...
This is why I don't understand pedophilia.
I just...
It's like I would more likely have sex with a shoe or something than...
It just doesn't make sense.
I don't...
I think I've mentioned this on an earlier...
It's like if you were out at the beach...
And you'll sometimes see this, where a toddler or a little girl, they'll take off their swimsuit and kind of, you know, I'm free, basically, in their mind.
Because sometimes they just don't like wearing clothes.
You kind of look at that and it's like, oh, that's so cute.
That's so funny.
But there's no eroticism to it.
And seeing an 11-year-old dance in these ways, or even some of these...
People, and this is actually kind of a lower class phenomenon in the United States, of creating these princess pageants and so on, the John Bidet Ramsey kind of thing.
I'm not just saying this to sound like I'm a prude, but I look at that and this is sad or bizarre.
Those are the emotions or adjectives I would use.
The erotic is not one of them.
No, that's the emotions a normal heterosexual should feel about such things.
Right.
And that's the adaptive emotion.
They're children and they're there to be brought up by society and looked after.
Carefully and successfully moulded into adults.
And that's the group-selected thing to do.
The individualistic thing to do, and it's in extremis, is you're just a total psycho.
It's just to see everybody and everything as subject to your whims and subject to what you want.
And if you happen to feel horny at a given time, and the easiest thing to access...
Is easy to access as a child.
Then that's what you'll go for.
Or if you're just messed up and you'll sense you out and you'll attract children.
And that's why if you look at these old films, if you go back to the 50s or 40s or whatever, child nudity in films doesn't mean anything.
It's fine.
It's commonplace.
It's not a problem at all.
Adult nudity, absolutely a problem.
And now this has been reversed.
Adult nudity is perfectly normal in films.
And you have films where you, like, I remember seeing a film, it was an American remake of one of those Japanese movies, you know, those Japanese kind of movies, horror movie type things.
And there's a boy that has a bath.
And they have him wearing his swimming trunks.
Because the idea of even the briefest or even implied nudity.
With a boy, it would be appalling.
But nudity of an adult is perfectly fine.
So you've had this extraordinary reversal because of concern about paedophilia and concern about this tidy minority of people that would get their rocks off over something like that.
So, yeah, it's a disorder.
It's a serious disorder.
It's appalling, of course, for the children that are abused, whether they are sexually abused or whether they're put into...
Photographs or whatever.
Psychologically, physically appalling for them.
It can lead to, there's evidence it can cause maladaptation in their own sexuality and that a lot of pedophiles have themselves been abused.
And so to normalise in any way the sexuality of children is just something which is a sign of a highly degenerate society.
And that's what a society that's in decline, a society that's lost its way, a society that's lost its values, its group values, and to put up a poster like that where you're clearly...
You're encouraging other children who will see that, think that's okay, and you're clearly kind of titillating people.
They've, of course, withdrawn it over the furore, but it's happened.
They've done it.
They've made their little contribution to negative social epistases.
Well, let's leave it at that.
I'm glad we could have this serious discussion about an uncomfortable topic.
