45 minutes ago, long-time user Rondomi posted a topic on the Comradeship space titled “On Paraphilia”.
This will be the only surviving trace of that thread which has been scrubbed away, a single screenshot that instantly gives away what their topic is really about (and proves that this topic did exist):
In this long screed that we will not be copying from (and that you won’t be either, just in case you saw that thread and what was in it), they make the defense of pedophilia under semi-clinical terms wielded like a wobbly club.
They conflate terms like “paraphilia”, which is a blanket clinical term used by therapists to determine how to help their patients, with pedophilia itself. We don’t have any illusions about engaging with their blatant defense of pedophilia, so that is where we will leave our argumentation. There is no argumentation to be had and there is no need to engage with the argument.
Suffice to say, Rondomi was not making a “what if” thought experiment or trying to engage with the idea. Rather, as was made evident by the content of their post, they were trying to create acceptance of pedophilia within Lemmygrad by abusing communist language, clinical language, and finally using pro-pedophile language that they no doubt learned from such groups which they seem to be spending time in. This wasn’t just an off the cuff moment, this was planned, elaborated, and carefully typed.
In other words, if you are in contact with Rondomi, we highly advise banning them from every space you share with them and blocking off all contact with them.
That is the only point of this thread.
The other point is that we will keep comments open for a few moments. If you wish to go off on Rondomi, you can do it here. But just in case this needs to be said, be aware what happened to their account when you do so.
Appreciate how you handled this. Recently came out that a student in my university department is a pedophile and possessed CSAM. We were all blindsided but came to a simple conclusion: we won’t attempt any vigilante violence but that person is never welcome on campus again, enrolled or not, and we can enforce that ourselves if it ever comes to it. But this person has not been seen since the local news article dropped.
Now you’re making me wonder if we should report it to authorities. I’ll talk about it with the rest of the admins and see if we can do something safely. I’d rather not bring attention from the feds on lemmygrad. Maybe we’ll think of something.
I already cut off ties with Ron.
I suppose the one good thing about standard anticommunists/reactionaries is that they carry a stench that is easy to smell, I still remember that one GenUSA infiltrator that got booted out within a day. Something from this angle is much easier to smuggle in.
Note that there are also crackers that deliberately conflate LGBT with pedophilia to spread hate
This is really bad. It’s the kind of ammunition transphobic chuds would kill for.
it’s seriously gross that they had a trans flag in their name when they posted this. No, I don’t believe they were lying about this (as in pretending to be trans and then post a pro-pedophilia rant – I think they were sincere and thought we would be too dumb to see it for what it is). But it goes to show where their allegiance lies. And to try to get this community on board with it too.
So they made a long post defending pedophilia? What would the point of that even be that’s so bizarre. This is a puny communist forum… just, why?
It wasn’t defending paedophilia directly but rather promoting tolerance of paedophiles using some rhetorical tricks like saying that vilifying them discourages them to seek help (making them look like the victims) and using weird stats like how only a tiny majority of paedos commit SA (portraying the group as relatively harmless ignoring the fact that many unaccounted in this stat consume media that is commoditised SA). I am not too deep into paedo lore but these tactics have been prominently previously for example when they started calling themselves MAPs which, incidentally, was also used in the removed post.
Edit: Maybe it was defending it directly and I don’t remember it. The post is not fresh in my mind but I just remember the parts that I understood.
Because that is definitely how communism will gain traction in the west: by accommodating pedophiles LMAO
I remember when MAP used to mean Multi-Animator Project. It’s such a shame that perverts appropriated that term.
The gist of it was that not all MAP commit CSA and therefore it should be accepted and decoupled from the term paedo.
I have worked in mental healthcare and I have met some MAP who were clients of mine. They were people who couldn’t control their intrusive thoughts on that subject and needed help, and wanted help. I do not disagree with that sentiment.
The post, however, was trying to argue that because some people are MAP, we should therefore see it as something normal and have acceptance for it. Which is imo wrong. There is no consent possible between adults and minors when it comes to this. It should not be viewed on the same level as homosexuality, trans people, etc.
If the post was just trying to start a debate about, for example, lifting the taboo on making treatment for MAPs available, I’d say it was sort of acceptable. But it was not doing that. It was trying to make MAP normalized.
I agree with you, pedophiles need treatment. It’s obvious their sexual attraction is not under their conscious control, since the condemnation and judgement of pedophiles is so big, no one would consciously choose to be a pedophile. There are studies which links sexual attraction to children to sexual abuse in childhood too.
I disagree however with watering down, or diluting that with a lighter term, MAP, because it’s inadvertently promoting pedophilia through euphemism. Whether they are a rapist or not, a person can be a pedophile, and that’s it, we need to accept that situation. But the act itself, to have sexual attraction to children, is a dangerous thing, because we know children cannot truly consent.
So the negative charge that comes with the term pedophilia did not come out of the blue, it’s a historical development. Pederasts in Greece certainly did not have this taboo over the word describing them. Creating a “neutral” word only removes this historical meaning describing the act. So the question is, should we use euphemisms for pedophilia?
I agree. We shouldn’t use euphemisms at all. I hope that that’s not what my comment makes people think lol because that wasn’t my intention.
🌟
create acceptance of pedophilia within Lemmygrad by abusing communist language
This is very bad. There is a reason why it falls under the term “paraphilia”, such things should never be defended.
And this person is obviously dangerous. Because bad things happened once to me when I was a child, I read more about it and also from a manual for therapist how they have to be treated, when I went through therapy. The first thing was to make it clear, that nothing about it is normal or OK. There were several pages describing which arguments some use to defend it and why it is wrong - It is so much important to point it out. But if someone having it and starts finding it normal by making excuses (They bring historical things, which are all wrong) and so on, then this is a problem. It means, that such person can do a bad thing.
It is sad to see, how someone even tried to use marxist terms to defend it. One thing should always be clear: There is no objectively reason, why this should be OK.
Thank you administrators for finding, banning it and most importantly warning other users. You did something very good and maybe saved other people. I wish you a nice day!
