For centuries in Medieval Europe, Florence carried the reputation of homosexuality. Homosexuality was referred to as the "Italian vice" throughout Europe; in Germany, another word for a sodomite was a "florenzer".

In 1376, Pope Gregory XI commented "In the whole world I believe there are no two sins more abominable than those that prevail among the Florentines. The first is their usury and infidelity. The second, is so abominable that I dare not mention it."

Homosexuality was so widespread in Florence that an "Office of the Night" existed with the sole purpose of policing sodomy, which was legally and socially synonymous with sexual relations between men and boys. However, this attempt to crack down on sodomy was not successful. Court records prove, irrefutably, that the majority of Florentine men during this time period were sexually active with boys, without at least two out of every three men being incriminated in the crime of sodomy. These court records include famous figures such as Leonardo da Vinci and Benvenuto Cellini.

Florentine men married late, at around 30, and this lack of a sexual outlet likely contributed to widespread pederasty. Art from the period often emphasizes the beauty of youthful males. Florentine sculptor Donatello's statue of David was the first freestanding nude male sculpture since antiquity, starting a trend of depicting nude boys in sculpture.

This pederastic culture accompanied the great efflorescence of cultural and intellectual innovation of the Renaissance, comparable to the miracle of Ancient Greece, who shared a similar, but socially sanctioned, culture of pederasty, believing that such relationships were imperative in transferring knowledge and virtues between generations.

The widespread nature of pederasty in Renaissance Florence, with the majority of men partaking in such activities, serves as an example that sexual practices that men are willing to engage in are influenced by the culture which they live in.

The most patrician tastes for the most patrician city state

IS THAT A SCULPTURE OF AN UNDERAGE CHILD
WOWZA IM ROCK SOLID
THIS MEANS THE PEOPLE THAT MADE THIS FELT THE SAME WAY AS ME!

no you're just a gay pedophile

Wasnt there a law that if a boy didnt report the abuse he was punished with his pederast?

>>17760023
>It seems likely that Donatello's homosexuality was well known, and tolerated and protected by the Medici and so others. The main evidence comes from anecdotes in the Detti piacevoli, a large collection of celebrity gossip probably compiled around 1480 (but not published until 1548), perhaps by the humanist and poet Angelo Poliziano (1454–1494), a Medici insider as tutor to Lorenzo's children. These tell of Donatello surrounding himself with "handsome assistants" and chasing in search of one that had fled his workshop.

>He was said to hire especially beautiful boys, and "stained" them (probably meaning make-up) so that no one else would find them pleasing; when one assistant left after a quarrel, they made up by "laughing" at each other, a slang term for sex. However, no detail is known with certainty about his private life, and unlike many artists (for example Sandro Botticelli) there are no recorded denunciations for sodomy in the Florentine archives, though these are incomplete.

>>17760035
>they made up by "laughing" at each other, a slang term for sex
did you really post this

>>17760023
There was something called office of the night that was made exclusively to judge homosexual relationships in florence

>>17760035
>The main evidence comes from anecdotes in the Detti piacevoli, a large collection of celebrity gossip
This niggas citing the national enquirer

Greeks did not practice sodomy but intercrural. The anus is not a sexual organ.

>>17760053
>>17760071
>lived in a city renowned for widespread pederasty where the majority of men were caught having sex with boy prostitutes according to court records
>known by his contemporaries to be a pederast
>never married or had children
>revived the European tradition of creating nude statues of boys
Yeah, I'm just projecting. There's no reason to suspect that this guy was a homosexual.

Homos deserve death

>>17760192
>majority of men were caught having sex with boy prostitutes
This is what faggots actually believe

>>17759964 (OP)

>>17760203
Yes, this actually happened. Sorry Christcuck. Florence was infamous for widespread pederasty, to the point that the authorities established a task force specifically to police pederasty called the Office of the Night.

They had a very homosexual culture where Florentine boys would grow up doing gay stuff with other boys, and as young men they would continue having sexual relations with boys, many of whom were prostitutes, which they would give up when they got older and got married. There are many examples of cultures like this, especially in the Sotadic zone. Contemporaries thought the practice was widespread, and modern scholarly analysis of court records show that the majority of men in Florence were incriminated by the authorities for sexual activities with boys.

>As an institutional presence, the Office of the Night must consequently have loomed large, especially in the lives of the young. Considering the number of people who came to the Night Officers' attention from 1459 to 1502 (some 350 annually), and factoring in their typical age distribution, it can be roughly estimated that by the time they reached the age of thirty, at least one of every two youths in the city of Florence had been formally implicated in sodomy to this court alone; by age forty, at least two of every three men had been incriminated. These extraordinary figures confirm once more both how common homosexual activity was there, involving at some time or another a majority of the male population, and how prevalent it was among the young. They give some substance to an informer's remark back in 1436: "And there is nearly no one in [that] neighborhood between the ages of 30 and 40 who in the past hasn't committed such mischief."
Michael Rocke - Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence

And if you don't believe his scholarship, you can read his sources in Italian, do the calculations regarding demographics, and figure out for yourself.

>>17759964 (OP)
Don't bother arguing with this chomo in good faith, he lacks that entirely and that's not the point of this thread. He and his buds on the mod team treat /his/ as their personal dumping ground for barely concealed CSAM trading. He uses bad data, fragmentary excerpts, and one refuted study to engage with almost anyone who disputes his disgusting faggotry. If you get him on the rhetorical back foot he'll call you a Jew/brown and if that doesn't work you will get the ban hammer. They rely on the fact that /his/ is a dead board to keep this charade up and because 4chan moderation were all shown to be glowies/mossad agents they couldn't care less if pedophiles infiltrate.

>>17760192
>the majority of men were caught having sex with boy prostitutes according to court records
bullshit

Again don't respond to this anon, he uses this thread as a way to convene with other predators. If he feels that he has found someone with similar tastes he'll link to a mastodon instance that presumably leads to a tor file sharing website somewhere down the chain. This is a CSAM trading ring operating openly on /his/.

>>17761860
>>17761872

>>17760306
>Yes, this actually happened.
In your dreams, deranged pederast.
Imagine believing there was a majority homosexual society
Imagine believing there was a majority pederast society
Imagine believing there was a majority criminal society
Imagine believing there was a majority convict society
This is the homosexual brainrot

>>17762432
>Imagine believing there was a majority homosexual society
>Imagine believing there was a majority pederast society
All boys in the New Guinean tribes of the Sambia, Keraki, and the Kaluli were required to engage in receptive sexual activities with adult men, from the ages ranging from 7 at the lower end until 14 at the higher end, resulting in the consumption of the man's semen or anal "insemination", and as they reached adulthood, they were expected to take the active role in sexual relationships with boys. These are examples of societies where not only the majority of males participated in homosexual activities, but all males did, so your point is refuted. There are other examples of societies where the majority of men participated in homosexual activities, and Renaissance Florence is among them, which is reflected by the fact that so many famous Florentine men had a sexual interest in boys, including Donatello, Verrocchio, da Vinci, Botticelli, Pontormo, Bronzino, Cellini, and Caravaggio. Until a few decades ago, due to pervasive anti-sexualism due to feminism, the majority of boys in Western countries also participated in homosexual sexual activities with other boys during either childhood and adolescence according to various surveys, such as Kinsey (1948).

>Imagine believing there was a majority criminal society
>Imagine believing there was a majority convict society
Australians, Gypsies, Albanians living in England, and African Americans are all majority criminal.

Will you retract your statement now that it's been thoroughly refuted?

>>17759964 (OP)
Pederasty is endemic in the current day Catholic Church

>>17762568
Always has been.

Why do so many faggots struggle with look, dont touch rule?

>>17762560
>will you retract common sense
No freak, retract breathing air

>>17759964 (OP)
Where can I access the court records that are being mentioned in this post? Is there a translation of it?

>>17760192
Why are you pretending not to be gay?

>>17761860
I constantly have to go elsewhere online to find any interesting histoey convos. This place is completely dead and ai feel like ot’s just the trannies arguing with their own bots and a couple tourists who are disgusted by them.

>>17762432
>Imagine believing there was a majority convict society
Is your contention now that not only was ancient Greece fake but so was Australia?

>>17762756
But I gave you examples which prove that your "common sense" was incorrect. There are New Guinean tribes where all males engage in homosexual activities, and the First Fleet which arrived in Australia was comprised mostly of convicts. Those are two examples of a society where the majority of men engage in homosexuality, and where the majority of people are convicts, respectively.

>>17762773
Pic rel. are the records that historian Michael Rocke uses in his book Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence. They may or may not be available online, and I doubt there are English translations. Considering Florence only had a population of 40,000, and a male population of 20,000, the majority of men would have been incriminated (although not charged) with sodomy during their lifetime.

>>17759964 (OP)
Why were they fucking boys and not girls?

>>17763338
Boys are more promiscuous than girls, and fathers are more protective of their daughters, because they can get pregnant. It's also a known fact that warmer climates dispose individuals to homosexuality. Men in the past also had higher testosterone levels, which made them more attracted to boys. These factors combined made it almost inevitable that Florentine men would have sex with boys.

>>17762874
Australia isn't a real country. next you'll be telling us about Oompa Loompa land.

>>17761872
>he uses bad data
can you prove this? from what I see he used court figures which clearly state 17000 out of the population of 40000 have been charged with sodomy.
That's basically almost every male.

>>17763561
Etruscan cunny lovers > Roman, Gayreek, Florentine faggots
Also I don't get how almost every man in that city was able to have sex with a boy, were they just straight up paying money at a brothel or something?
No way everyone was attractive and outgoing enough to get laid.

>>17763584
He has been pretty obviously refuted in every thread he has posted assuming he didn't get the mods to ban the person refuting him. Again the purpose of each new thread he makes is to try and expand the trade of CSAM him and evidently a few people on the mod team participate in. Taking anything he says at face value and responding to him only serves his purpose.

>>17764282
>He has been pretty obviously refuted in every thread he has posted assuming he didn't get the mods to ban the person refuting him.
Example?

>Again the purpose of each new thread he makes is to try and expand the trade of CSAM him and evidently a few people on the mod team participate in.
Imagine being so buck-broken because some anon refuted you that you start accusing the mods of participating in and facilitating a child porn ring with no evidence.

>>17763338
Because boys are better girls!

>>17763595
There were boy prostitutes called 'bardassa', and presumably they made quite a lot of money, considering the authorities would fine them 50 florins, more than the yearly salary of the average worker, if caught for their first offense.

Boy prostitutes probably traveled to Florence, due to its reputation for homosexuality and less severe punishment for sodomy compared to surrounding cities/states, especially considering that neighbouring communities were more apt to execute boys and men caught in sexual relationships with each other.

>The fift day of my staying here, I saw a Spanish Souldier and a Maltezen boy burnt in ashes, for the publick profession of Sodomy, and long or night, there were above a hundred Bardassoes, whoorish boyes that fled away to Sicilie in a Galleyot, for feare of fire but never one Bugeron stirred, being few or none there free of it.
Commenting on Malta, Ninteen Yeares Travayles by Willian Lithgow

>>17764352
I wonder what it would have been like being stuck on a boat with over a hundred slutty, desperate boy prostitutes.

>Similarly, a poem by the Florentine Francesco da Colle written probably in the 1470s or 1480s vituperates "these insatiable and gluttonous bardasse... who, to show us they're charming and handsome, go about looking for someone who will fuck them from behind." One need not use much flattery to win such boys over, the author adds; a miserly meal will do.

>>17764383
>impoverished children selling themselves to perverts because they want something to eat
>insatiable and gluttonous
Sad

>>17764685
But they were generally described as effeminate, homosexual adolescent boys who enjoyed having sex with men, most of their clients being young men themselves. Many of them came from middle and upper class backgrounds. So your typical feminist characterization of it being a case of impoverished children selling themselves to perverts out of desperation is incorrect. Realistically, these boy prostitutes were mostly insatiable faggots who made a profession out of doing what they love, and many of them made a lot of money doing it. Male prostitution usually has a much different motivation to female prostitution.

>Informers employed numerous terms with feminine connotations or effeminizing metaphors to denigrate passive boys. One they commonly used was bardassa or its diminutive, bardassuola. Nouns of feminine gender, whose etymological root is an Arabic word for "slave," they denote a boy who offers himself in the receptive sexual role to males. The following phrases show some of the ways accusers used the terms: "Sinibaldo di Giovanni Monaldi [is a] bardassa, and... more than 40 young men have buggered him"; "Niccolo, son of Agnolo Biffoli, is a... public bardassuola, in such a way that he's the disgrace and shame of the city"; "Giovanni Maria di Jacopo . . . is one of the most indecent bardasse in Florence, and he lets himself be sodomized by many people."
>Given the connotation of bardasse as promiscuous boys who earned money from sex, it is unsurprising that accusers also compared boys who were sodomized to puttane (female prostitutes). One informer, for example, wrote that a young cathedral cleric named Baldassare "lets himself be buggered more than the prettiest whore in the brothel, who doesn't have as much business as he does." Another claimed that "the son of Amerigo del Cagnone, a student... is like a whore who gets fucked by three or four in turn."

17764802
>One need not use much flattery to win such boys over, the author adds; a miserly meal will do

>>17764812
The author is implying in this passage that the boys enjoy having sex with men, because they are homosexual, and that it doesn't take much effort to fuck them. Not that they are engaging in prostitution out of pure desperation, like you contend, which is why he describes them as:
>"these insatiable and gluttonous bardasse... who, to show us they're charming and handsome, go about looking for someone who will fuck them from behind."

How many adolescent boys would become prostitutes if they had a bunch of women between 18-30 as their clients? Probably a lot. Prostitution isn't always done for purely pecuniary reasons. Homosexual boys who become prostitutes usually do it because they enjoy the lifestyle.

>>17764296
>Imagine being so buck-broken because some anon refuted you that you start accusing the mods of participating in and facilitating a child porn ring with no evidence.

Go on an archive of your choice, it was pretty soon after the outage that he made the thread which mentioned the mastodon instance. The search term pederasty should bring up his threads, he waits for each one to reach the bump limit so they have a rythym. You'll be looking for the one 3-4 threads before this. He posted the link to a mastodon instance which I will not name, but its url was highly suspect and the site itself was dedicated to discussing the sexual abuse of children. This very likely is where the trading happens but if they have opsec it happens a few more steps down the line. In the 4chan archive you'll also see the refutations from many different people. I am not going to do the work to help you potentially find a source for child pornography as I do not know your intentions, but his complete refusal to engage with these posts is evidence enough that this is exactly his purpose. Does it really surprise you that the tranny jannies and mods which run this shit hole would engage in behavior so disgusting? It does not surprise me in the slightest, hell they probably remove enough CSAM from this site daily to have constantly topped up supplies.

He will also get mods to ban you if you get him on the rhetorical back foot, so there is no point in arguing with this nigger, he is dishonest and torches any any discussion which demonstrates that he is a predditor.

>>17764829
>The author is implying in this passage that the boys enjoy having sex with men, because
he was a retard from the 15th century. Probably thought they were tempted by demons too.

>>17764830
ActivityPub instances are public and federate with other instances, most posts are publicly visible and indexable. You don't have to sign up for a particular instance to see content posted on it, sort of like email. Your claim that providing the name of a social media site (after being requested to by another anon) is somehow proof of the existence of a secret kiddy porn trading ring (which apparently the 4chan moderators are involved in) is as credible as claiming linking to a Twitter page implies the existence of a secret kiddy porn trading ring (which the 4chan moderation team participates in). The ActivityPub instance linked to also hasn't even been up for months, and likely won't come back up, because the owner abandoned it, so you haven't even accessed it, and can't make any claim about the content hosted there.

I'm glad that you're so buck-broken by threads on a historical topic that you find confronting that you've gone into full accusatory schizophrenic conspiracy mode. Good to know I mind-raped you so hard you think the jannies are assisting me in doing so. Good to know this topic upsets you so much you can't resist posting in threads about it. Stay seething.

>>17764834
>Probably thought they were tempted by demons too.
But he didn't say that, he made a completely rational and clear-headed statement that would not be out of place coming out of the mouth of a modern person. Your counterfactual about demons doesn't address his actual claims, which were rational. Medieval people weren't as backwards as kike propaganda would have you believe. Most Amerimutts today believe in demonic possession.

Do you not believe that homosexual boys exist?

>>17764877
>these boys are total whores, they love being fucked in the ass by older men, they just cant get enough of it
>a completely rational and clear-headed statement that would not be out of place coming out of the mouth of a modern person

>>17764881
This deranged feminist is now at the point that he is denying that teenage boys are horny and want sex.

>>17764884
Yeah they want to fuck hot chicks, not be sodomized by greasy old perverts.

>>17764888
>gay people don't exist

>>17764891
Yes unfortunately faggots rape young boys which traumatizes them and can lead to such sad maladaptive behavior as in your pic.

>>17764896
>gay boys don't exist and if they do it's because they were raped into becoming gay (which I don't have to offer proof of)
You've now entered the realm of unfalsifiability, once again. Apparently superstitious retards from the 15th century actually knew more and had more common sense than modern day Christcucks do.

>>17764877
It is very likely that you have help from people on the mod team given that people which refute you tend to end up banned. Linking to websites which discuss the abuse of children is usually a pretty good barometer for whether or not someone abuses children or consumes content which depicts it. Nonetheless these websites exist for the explicit purposes of expanding/facilitating trading of CSAM, that is the only reason. NAMBLA doesn't hold meetings for a reason. Thanks for mask slipping and showing yourself to be OP btw, helps with research.

>>17764902
>faggots projecting their perverse fantasies on their own childhood
Such broken people. Anyway its common consensus in psychology and psychiatry that csa can lead to promiscuity as a way to cope with the abuse.

>>17764903
>Linking to websites which discuss the abuse of children is usually a pretty good barometer for whether or not someone abuses children or consumes content which depicts it
>Nonetheless these websites exist for the explicit purposes of expanding/facilitating trading of CSAM, that is the only reason
Amazing that you're willing to make all of these bold claims about a website which I know you haven't even visited.

Here's a board on 4chan intended primarily for homosexual pedophiles, where homosexual pedophiles discuss little boys. Does this board only exist to facilitate the trade of child pornography? Why are you visiting 4chan if you know these sorts of websites only exist for the explicit purpose of trading kiddy porn?

>>>/cm/catalog

>>17764906
Are you going to start spamming biased, poorly conducted studies using clinical samples of self-identified rape victims to prove your point?

>>17764916
If you use /cm/, you are a homosexual pedophile. Why don't you go there instead of polluting /his/ with your garbage?

>>17759964 (OP)
>The first is their usury and infidelity.
Hah. Kikery.

>>17764941
This is a thread about a historical topic, /cm/ is not a board for historical discussions.

Why are you so upset that someone is using the History & Humanities board to discuss history and humanities? Go read another thread if you don't like this particular one, and stop derailing this one.

>>17764972
This is a thread about your fetish, all of the threads related to children that you post are. You have this fetish and you use attempts to historically justify quietly as a vehicle for meeting with other like-minded people. It is not a thread which encourages discussion on this board to any positive end. The only people these threads will attract are other people who are also pedophiles. This turns the /his/ board into a board for pedophiles and not one about /his/torical discussion. You get so whiny about Christians but you represent the exact same off-topic rambling just under a different and distinctly repulsive banner. If you want to justify stupidly evil bullshit to retards do so on /b/.

>>17764903
>Linking to websites which discuss the abuse of children is usually a pretty good barometer for whether or not someone abuses children
Um… no it isn’t. If it’s true, please prove the association with peer-reviewed studies.

>>17764902
In that thread there are gays admitting they were molested.

>>17765110
I got a peer reviewed study right here, and well uh, it says you are a giant faggot.

>>17764902
Wish a 13 year old looked at me like that

>>17764984
No it isn't, it's a thread relating to a historical and cultural topic, which is replete with historical sources. Plenty of people are discussing the topic at hand in this thread. You, and other obsessed anti-homosexual posters are the only people derailing this thread and turning it into a vehicle for off topic discussion. You just don't like being reminded that pederasty was quite prevalent in pre-modern Europe for personal reasons, most likely because you are a Christcuck who's Jewish religion prohibits homosexuality.

If you are offended by this thread, which you evidently are, you are free to pick any other thread to post in.

>>17765185
Stop trying to well poison with your dubious and cherry picked “historical” examples. You are no historian, the conclusions you come to are of no value to either this board or the study of history as a whole. Your sources are just extensions of your own perverse fantasies, and the thread is not replete with them. It is replete with screencaps and the schizophrenic musings of an homosexual who seethes about Christianity and Jews despite being raised as the former and a servant of the latter. You create these threads to meet sycophants and predators, derailing actual historical discussion. You are a poison of the worst kind to /his/ and have no place here, go back to your containment board.

>>17765210
>everybody was raised in my apocalyptic jewish death cult

>>17759964 (OP)
The guy who made this redpilled and fashy statue fucked boys as well... tradsisters...
>Saturday 27 February 1557. Item in the same manner because this magistracy has examined a denunciation against Benvenuto, son of Master Giovanni Cellini, sculptor and Florentine citizen, as it appears in the book of denunciations numbered 287 on page 32 [which states that] for about the last five years this Cellini had kept as his boy Fernando di Giovanni da Montepulciano , a youth who he used most frequently sexually engaging in the despicable vice of sodomy, keeping him in bed as if he was his wife, and also because there is in the possession of the court the written confession of the said Benvenuto, as can be read in the files of the complaint numbered 154, where he confesses that it is true that he sodomized the said Fernando; thus in accordance with the law this court condemns the said Benvenuto to pay a fine of 50 golden scudi to the Treasury of His Most Illustrious Excellency as is the protocol and to serve four years in the prison known as the Stinche from the day he will have presented himself there and strips him for life of holding public office, following the tenor of the said laws.

>>17765547
retvrn...

>>17766850
To the oven kike

>>17767175
We see through your lies, kike.

You faggots need a bullet in the head BANG BANG!

>>17767396
>sees people discussing a historical topic which he doesn't like
>starts crying into his keyboard about how they deserve to be killed for discussing topic
Sorry, I thought this was 4chan. I thought people didn't get triggered here when they see something they don't like like they do on leddit.

>>17759964 (OP)
So where are the cunnyseurs?

>>17767447
Do you genuinely think you will be removed from the list? Do you think your ideas are so bulletproof that you will convince actual committed national socialists and fascists that it's totally cool to fuck boys? Are you utterly insane? Do I need to remind you about the night of the long knives? All kinds of faggotry and degeneracy are methodically excised upon any reactionary seizure of power. Your best bet would be throwing your lot in with Israel, they love raping gentile children and have an insanely high proportion of faggots in their population. The rest of the world and nearly every other ideology/creedo under the sun wants you worse than dead, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

>>17767629
OP uses this thread to trade CSAM and he likes boys so, no loli.

>>17767629
Cunnyseurs are normal men so you don’t see as much by them trying to justify themselves.

>>17765226
You were raised Christian whether you admit it or not. Short of you being brown of course, so maybe you weren't. Every idea you have about justice comes from the traditions of European Christendom and The Church. You were steeped in this culture and likely held fast to at least some of the beliefs it imparted upon you before turning to an imaginary Aryan sodomite tradition. That is unless you want to tell us something about your country of origin. It would be utterly hilarious if you were a brown faggot talking about Aryan it was to molest children.

>>17767772
>Do you think your ideas are so bulletproof that you will convince actual committed national socialists and fascists that it's totally cool to fuck boys?
Yes. Reminder:
>Jews responsible for criminalizing pederasty in Europe through Christianity
>Jews responsible for fostering the feminism which raised the age of consent to 16
>Jews responsible for continuing the same feminism which worsens pedo-hysteria
>Jews responsible for fomenting pedo-hysteria in the first place, so that pedophiles replace a trope traditionally occupied by Jews in folklore (see the English folk song Sir Hugh; in traditional European folklore, the child-grabbing pervert wasn't a pedophile, but a kike)
>Jews promote a perverse, transgressive form of homosexuality through the LGBTQQIP2SAA+ movement
>Jewish academics censor the history of pederasty in ancient European societies by pretending it was adult-adult homosexuality
>Jews responsible for platforming and creating anti-pedo propaganda like HTCAP
>Jews responsible for creating black propaganda like NAMBLA to associate the noble Aryan tradition of pederasty with transgression and perversion
>Jews responsible for creating the pseudoscientific theory that adult-child sex causes psychological harm (Sigmund Freud's seduction theory), almost all early names in "child sexual abuse" literature are Jewish (Judith Reisman, Judith Lewis Herman, Lawrence Pazder, etc.)
>Jews rape children and generate controversy against "pedophiles", even though the child rape is being done by Jews
>Jews use ridiculous age of consent laws and CP laws to plant illegal material on dissidents and to blackmail politicians (Epstein)
>Jews responsible ZOG which enforces global age of consent laws under military threat
>Jews responsible for propaganda campaigns against White teenage pregnancy with the intention of accelerating White genocide

>>17767788
>reminder:
>whole bunch of shit I made up

try again faggot

>>17767791
It's all true no matter how hard you deny it. The Judeo-Christian brainwashing is wearing out, Christianity is in terminal decline, and soon the Aryan will return to his pre-Judaism state of boy-love. And when it happens, people like you who want to enforce Jewish morality, and prevent men from loving boys, will hang, but not before enduring the most excruciating torture.

The clock is ticking, kike.

>>17767812
>and soon i will be able to molest children
>and we will return to a completely fictional understanding of history
>and then you will be TORTURED
>and the president will be there
>and everyone is gonna CLAP

God you are truly pathetic, threatening a nigga on 4channel because reality won't conform to your delusions.

>>17767818
I'm not threatening you. I'm just reminding you of what is going to happen.

>>17767812
Funnily enough you say you are gonna torture him but that is what we do to pedophiles right now. Term search pred-catch on X or gorecentre, do you realize the tremendous amount of content that is uploaded daily dedicated to the torture of pedophiles is gonna suddenly reverse course? You aren't just fantasizing about punching up, you are fantasizing about reaching orbit.

>>17767820
>i...i...it's not a threat
>i...it's a promise!

haha anything else faggot?

I wish I was still a cute little blonde boy like I was more than 25 years ago so it still qualifies for /his/

>>17767820
https://x.com/PedosCaught/status/1879303746158792718

hey OP check the way this one starts crying after he gets knocked around a bit lol, are you telling me these faggots are gonna put up a fight?

https://x.com/PedosCaught/status/1931772210978468231

this one tried to fight back and got his head stomped on lol

https://x.com/PedosCaught/status/1906377629500068283

Look at the way this one cowers

>>17767824
>>17767839
>>17767845
>>17767846
>muh wiggers beating up retards in a walmart carpark
This is what the American mind is preoccupied with, the opinions and dealings of fat dysgenic melungeons in a Walmart carpark. This concerns me about as much as videos of random niggers in Africa engaging in violence. Regardless, contemporary opinions on pederasty do not bother me, knowing that my noble ancestors, before being Judaized, were proud boy-lovers.

>So too the Celts, even though they have the most beautiful women of all the barbarians, prefer sex with boys; as a result, some of them routinely sleep on their animal-skins with two boyfriends.
Athenaios, The Learned Banqueters

>So that in such a state riches will necessarily be in general esteem, particularly if the men are governed by their wives, which has been the case with many a brave and warlike people except the Celts, and those other nations, if there are any such, who openly practise pederasty. And the first mythologists seem not improperly to have joined Ares and Aphrodite together; for all nations of this character are greatly addicted either to the love of women or of boys
Aristotle, Politics

With the decline of Christianity, homosexuality has become normalized, and within a few decades, pederasty will be as well. Society is healing.

>>17767835
Technological advancement will make that a reality. In the future, women won't exist anymore, and everyone will be a cute boy that reproduces non-sexually. Puberty will be obsolete. Deep down, everyone knows this, which is reflected in the archetypes of the grey alien and angels, both advanced humanoids that are basically little boys.

>>17767847
So you see videos of the products of modernity stomping the heads of pedophiles in and think that what will naturally follow is their acceptance under the same banner? Interesting logic there.

>>17767853
>products of modernity
*products of judaism

>>17767847
>Technological advancement will make that a reality. In the future, women won't exist anymore, and everyone will be a cute boy that reproduces non-sexually. Puberty will be obsolete.

we are reaching levels of cope hitherto unseen.

>>17767855
The normalization of homosexuality is fundamentally a Jewish endeavor as you mentioned above, you assert that the normalization of pederasty follows from this. Are you pro-jew now?

>>17767847
Is it a happy accident that you want the exact same thing as the Jews do. That being the normalization of the rape of gentile children? Starting to get on shaky ground here faggot.

>>17767859
It's a fundamentally non-Jewish endeavour, which was subverted by Jews to promote a perverse form of homosexuality as opposed to pederasty, which was the form of homosexuality practiced by the Greeks, the Romans, the Celts, and the Germanic peoples. The Jewish Bible explicitly states homosexuals should be put to death and there is no evidence of pederasty ever being practiced in any Jewish society, whereas pederasty was pervasive in pre-Judaized European societies, and even continued to be so even after adopting Christianity.

>>17767862
Love is not rape. Your poisoned kike mind can't differentiate the two.

>>17767867
The celts were not one people, they were many different tribes and we have little to no written information from them except propaganda from civilizations which actively hated them. Same with the Germanic people. It is impossible to say whether pederasty was pervasive or not in these societies as we simply do not know.

>>17767867
So you are pro-jew because you wish to normalize the rape of children and see the normalization of homosexuality as part of this process?

>>17767867
Many Greek cities and the Roman Republic had strict laws against sexual contact between two citizens of the same sex.

>>17760216
The stress of World Peace 2 is really taking its toll I see

>>17767880
>The celts were not one people, they were many different tribes
They had a shared culture, which is why ancient people made generalizations about them as Celts.

>we have little to no written information from them except propaganda from civilizations which actively hated them
The descriptions of Germanic/Celtic culture in Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic War which could be verified archeologically, linguistically, and historically, have been remarkably accurate.

The description of Celtic people as engaging in pederasty is consistent, through a considerable temporal range, by different authors from different cultures.

>>17767894
The majority of Greek cities didn't have laws against pederasty, and pederasty was commonplace in these cities. Pederasty was also accepted in Rome, until towards the late Roman empire, after Rome was flooded with browns from the Near East. Laws against homosexuality only began after Christianity started to spread. So brown people are ultimately the reason why pederasty became unpopular in Rome, which makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Brown people hate beauty.

>>17767907
>The descriptions of Germanic/Celtic culture in Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic War which could be verified archeologically, linguistically, and historically, have been remarkably accurate.

Yeah they verified things like the location of besieged cities and the productive output of respective cultures, not whether or not these guys had sex with children. The descriptions we have of Celtic people come almost exclusively from those who warred with them and would have good cause to find them to be indulgent and hyper sexual. Pair this with the fact we have zero evidence from the cultures you claim pederasty was pervasive in and well, maybe you see how unreasonable that assertion is.

>>17767907
>The majority of Greek cities didn't have laws against pederasty, and pederasty was commonplace in these cities. Pederasty was also accepted in Rome, until towards the late Roman empire, after Rome was flooded with browns from the Near East. Laws against homosexuality only began after Christianity started to spread.

"The majority", we don't even have surviving records of what the constitutions were from like 95% of Greek cities. We have no idea what was legal or accepted, both Athens and Sparta had specific provisions against pederasty for what that is worth. Rome outlawed homosexuality with the lex scantinia during the later republican period, Caesar even made specific provisions that you would not be forced to sit next to known homosexuals at senate meetings.

>>17767915
Many cultural aspects of Celtic/Germanic society described by ancient authors have been verified. You are just ignorant. For example, the sole source for the mythological progenitor of the Germanic race, Mannaz, is Tacitus. Linguistic evidence has verified that this was legitimate. Aspects of Germanic culture described in Tacitus, were also backed up by later historical evidence, such as the fact that the traitorous Christian Sabbas the Goth was drowned in a bog, a continuation of a Germanic practice described in Tacitus.

Negative claims about Celtic culture, i.e., that they practiced human sacrifice, have been verified archeologically, so even these were accurate. The Romans didn't have to lie.

Most of the authors who describe the Celts as partaking in pederasty come from cultures which also practiced pederasty. The quote by Aristotle, who came from a culture which practiced pederasty, literally describes the Celts as "brave and warlike", so the notion that they would only describe them as practicing pederasty to insult them is nonsense.

>not whether or not these guys had sex with children
I'm not claiming this specific claim could be backed up with archeological, linguistic, or historical evidence. I'm stating that the claims which could be backed up with that evidence have been remarkably accurate, which lends credibility to the claim regarding pederasty.

>>17767916
We have a contemporary scholar (Xenophon) commenting on the fact that pederasty is legal in the majority of Greek cities. All other evidence suggests that pederasty was legal in the majority of Greek cities, which you don't need the complete legal code of these cities to infer. Lex Scantinia only criminalized homosexual relations with a freeborn boy.

>>17767938
>Many cultural aspects of Celtic/Germanic society described by ancient authors have been verified. You are just ignorant. For example, the sole source for the mythological progenitor of the Germanic race, Mannaz, is Tacitus. Linguistic evidence has verified that this was legitimate. Aspects of Germanic culture described in Tacitus, were also backed up by later historical evidence, such as the fact that the traitorous Christian Sabbas the Goth was drowned in a bog, a continuation of a Germanic practice described in Tacitus.


Tacitus was a reliable source, but you need to contextualize what he says and acknowledge the limits of his or any historical account for that matter. Recounting the sexual habits of an entire culture, of which the Romans/Greeks only interacted with a few tribes of for any period of time, is where he has a blindspot. Was there child rape? Who knows, maybe in certain areas, but your claim that it was pervasive is impossible to prove and kicking your feet when this is pointed out does you no favors.

>I'm not claiming this specific claim could be backed up with archeological, linguistic, or historical evidence. I'm stating that the claims which could be backed up with that evidence have been remarkably accurate, which lends credibility to the claim regarding pederasty.

But it is not proof that this is true for Celtic/Germanic cultures. You made a huge logical leap and are now trying to walk it back.

>>17767938
>We have a contemporary scholar (Xenophon) commenting on the fact that pederasty is legal in the majority of Greek cities. All other evidence suggests that pederasty was legal in the majority of Greek cities, which you don't need the complete legal code of these cities to infer. Lex Scantinia only criminalized homosexual relations with a freeborn boy.

Most Greek cities during Xenephon's life time, not the entirety of Greek history. In Greece we do have more actual archaeological evidence than any other culture that child rape was institutionalized to an extent. Most of this comes from pottery however, and that represents a narrow slice of Greek society which could afford decorated ceramic. Making the claim that everyone in Greece was raping boys and it was totally legally ok is impossible, you would need to produce the constitution of each city state and then demonstrate exactly how this institution appeared in each. Was this tutelage as is the case with the Eleans or was this sexual as is potentially the case with the Boeotians? Take into account the fact the boy-lover did not have the meaning in Ancient Greek as it does to us, and you start to see how this gets messy. As for the Lex Scantinia, it outlawed all homosexual contact, freeborn means citizen and non-citizen free man. Sexual abuse of slaves did happen but it was not looked upon favorably.

>>17767938
You need to produce the laws which specifically allowed for homosexual contact between men and boys because relationships between two men were utterly hated. Alleging that this deep homophobia evident in Greek society somehow disappeared universally when one of the partners was a child is a fairly extraordinary claim. It requires extraordinary evidence, which you nor anyone else has, and thus is inherently baseless.

>>17767956
>Was there child rape?
It seems that men and boys having consensual sexual relations with each other annoys you. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's rape.

>which the Romans/Greeks only interacted with a few tribes of for any period of time
There are a variety of different sources from different cultures (including a Persian) which describe Celts as practicing pederasty, centuries apart, presumably based on observation/knowledge of different tribes, and none which describe them as being opposed to it. So clearly, it was known during antiquity that the Celts practiced pederasty.

>your claim that it was pervasive is impossible to prove
It's impossible to prove the vast majority of things people believe about the past. There is sufficient evidence to believe ancient Celts engaged in pederasty.

>But it is not proof that this is true for Celtic/Germanic cultures.
I never claimed it was.

>>17767972
>you would need to produce the constitution of each city state and then demonstrate exactly how this institution appeared in each
No, you wouldn't. This is a ridiculously high standard of evidence. Do you also need to provide the constitution of each state to prove that men had sex with women? No, you can make that inference with other evidence.

>Take into account the fact the boy-lover did not have the meaning in Ancient Greek as it does to us
Every usage of the word paiderastēs in ancient Greek texts was used with a sexual connotation.

>it outlawed all homosexual contact
No it didn't.

>>17767977
You have no clue what you're talking about.

>>17767780
>Every idea you have about justice comes from the traditions of European Christendom and The Church
fucking kek, no sorry we don't molest children here anymore, europeans aren't christian

>>17767788
>>Jews promote a perverse, transgressive form of homosexuality through the LGBTQQIP2SAA+ movement
yes, they promote faggotry. you yourself are a result of their propaganda

>>17767989
>It's impossible to prove the vast majority of things people believe about the past. There is sufficient evidence to believe ancient Celts engaged in pederasty.

There is not sufficient evidence to believe they engage in pederasty because it does not appear in the historical record and cannot thus have its written accounts independently verified. Even assuming it could we would need archaeological evidence that this practice occurred over many hundreds if not thousands of years in many different independent tribes. That would be evidence of pervasive pederasty, you cannot produce this.

>I never claimed it was.
Yes you did in>>17767867

>>17767989
>No, you wouldn't. This is a ridiculously high standard of evidence.

>>17767977 was a companion post, but yes, you are making an extraordinary claim about sexuality in Greece. It requires extraordinary evidence.

>paiderastēs

boy-lover had many different ancient Greek potential origin words, paiderastres was one of them

>No it didn't.
You purposefully cut my statement up into smaller pieces so that you could misrepresent it, what the Scantinia did was outlaw "stuprum" with freeborn youth and more broadly homosexual passives. Sexual contact with non-free slaves did happen, but it was not looked upon favorably.

>>17768001
Being attracted to boys =/= being a faggot. Nobody thought it was until a few decades ago, pederasty was always recognized as a different phenomenon to faggotry.

>>17768008
>There is not sufficient evidence to believe they engage in pederasty because it does not appear in the historical record
It is in the historical record though, which we are arguing about.

>Even assuming it could we would need archaeological evidence
No, that's just silly. There isn't any archeological evidence that Rabbi Yeshua ben Pantera existed, but it's still reasonable to believe that he did.

>Yes you did in
I didn't claim that the claim of Greek/Roman authors that Celts/Germanic people practiced pederasty could be backed up with further archeological, linguistic, or historical evidence (unless if you count later historical accounts themselves). I never said that the Celts didn't practiced pederasty, or that there wasn't sufficient evidence to surmise that they did.

Is /his/ always full of illiterate retards that can't even read the posts they're attempting to respond to? There should be an IQ requirement to post on this board, otherwise having a discussion with any nuance is impossible.

>>17768014
>i dont know about ancient greek pederasty
I'm not going to bother educating you about something you could easily read about on Wikipedia.

>what the Scantinia did
It didn't outlaw homosexuality, as you yourself confirm. Thanks for confirming that you are incapable of telling the truth. Must be frustrating being an inveterate liar, but this is just a day in the life for a Jew like yourself.

>>17768021
>It is in the historical record though, which we are arguing about.

I meant to type archaeological* record, it also isn't in the historical record from the people which you are describing given that they have no written historical record.

>No, that's just silly. There isn't any archeological evidence that Rabbi Yeshua ben Pantera existed, but it's still reasonable to believe that he did.

Completely unrelated segue, I'll go ahead and disregard this, suffice it to say patterns of behavior should be a lot more easy to identify in the archaeological record than single individuals.

>I didn't claim that the claim of Greek/Roman authors that Celts/Germanic people practiced pederasty could be backed up with further archeological, linguistic, or historical evidence (unless if you count later historical accounts themselves). I never said that the Celts didn't practiced pederasty, or that there wasn't sufficient evidence to surmise that they did.

The claim that it was pervasive suggests that you have evidence for this, evidently you do not. Also correct your own mistakes before calling people illiterate.

>>17768021
>I'm not going to bother educating you about something you could easily read about on Wikipedia.

They had eleven different words for love/lover and only a few of them were sexual.

>It didn't outlaw homosexuality, as you yourself confirm. Thanks for confirming that you are incapable of telling the truth. Must be frustrating being an inveterate liar, but this is just a day in the life for a Jew like yourself.

Many other laws outlawed homosexual contact with adult citizen males. The Lex Julia comes to mind, the Scantinia outlaws specifically pederasty. Scantinia also potentially outlawed homosexuality period, Caesar at the very least demonstrated that the Roman people had no love for it. You jump to hostility so quick when your arguments are undermined, this makes you look like a fool.

>>17768021
>Being attracted to boys =/= being a faggot
Yes, you're a pedo faggot just like the jews told you to be

>>17768038
Not exactly 11, 8 in specific terms, but some of them were further modified with suffixes. Particularly Eros, which is one of the ones important to this discussion.

>>17768029
>Completely unrelated segue
No it isn't. Jesus most likely existed. There is no archeological evidence that Jesus existed. Archeological evidence is not required to make judgements on the veracity of historical claims, whether it relates to an individual or a pattern of behaviour. Furthermore, the practice of pederasty, like many practices, would be very unlikely to show up in the archeological record, so its absence is not evidence that it was not practiced.

>The claim that it was pervasive suggests that you have evidence for this, evidently you do not.
I do, and I have presented it.

>Also correct your own mistakes before calling people illiterate.
You have identified none.

>>17768038
>They had eleven different words for love/lover and only a few of them were sexual.
They had the word paiderastēs, which directly translates to boy-lover, which was always used with sexual connotations.

The Lex Scantina did not outlaw homosexuality, which was your original claim. The fact that you yourself know this, yet you still claimed it did, suggests to me that you are being purposefully deceptive. This behaviour is typical of your people.

>>17768056
That's odd, the Torah tells you not to be a homosexual. In fact, it says you should be sentenced to death if you are one!

>>17768071
>I do, and I have presented it.

So you present the accounts of Tacitus and Caesar as definitive proof pederasty was pervasive in pre-Christian Celtic and Germanic societies?

>You have identified none.

In regards to your obvious spelling errors.

>They had the word paiderastēs, which directly translates to boy-lover, which was always used with sexual connotations.

Yes if you choose the one sexual translation, all times the word boy and lover appear it will be sexual. How remarkably convenient.

>The Lex Scantina did not outlaw homosexuality, which was your original claim. The fact that you yourself know this, yet you still claimed it did, suggests to me that you are being purposefully deceptive. This behaviour is typical of your people.

It outlawed sexual contact between freeborn males, this pretty definitively includes adult-adult homosexual relationships even if we go by your warped view of historical societies -- that being that adult-child rape was ok but adult-adult sex was not. Again with this unprompted anger all because your arguments were shown to be baseless, it makes you look like a fool.

>>17768071
Jews follow the Talmud, not the old testament.

>>17768071
>Archeological evidence is not required to make judgements on the veracity of historical claim

When it comes to an apparently pervasive tradition of child rape, yes it is.

>Furthermore, the practice of pederasty, like many practices, would be very unlikely to show up in the archeological record, so its absence is not evidence that it was not practiced

But many other practices like human sacrifice appear, surely if this was such a widespread practice we'd be finding evidence of it. At the very least they would likely be making diapers for the adults who were raped as children and thus needed a way to resolve their incontinence. That was a somewhat satirical example but the point stands, if this truly was a pervasive practice it would appear, just like every other pervasive practice does. Moreover, the absence of evidence for it is pretty good evidence for it not happening if you aren't insane and don't fantasize about child rape.

>>17768076
>So you present the accounts of Tacitus and Caesar as definitive proof pederasty
No. I never claimed Tacitus and Caesar made any statement on Celtic pederasty. I provided passages from other authors which mention Celtic pederasty here >>17767847 and can provide more.

>In regards to your obvious spelling errors.
I have spellcheck on. I have not made any spelling errors. This is petty.

>even if we go by your warped view of historical societies -- that being that adult-child rape was ok but adult-adult sex was not
You are so dishonest, you can't even represent the argument of your opponent properly. Pathetic.

>>17768078
The Talmud is the official authorized strategy guide on following the Torah.

>>17768086
>When it comes to an apparently pervasive tradition of child rape, yes it is.
No it isn't. This is an unqualified assertion.

>But many other practices like human sacrifice appear
Gee, I wonder why sacrificing a person in a bog might show up on the archeological record, but a man cumming inside a boy's butt wouldn't!

>just like every other pervasive practice does
You have archeological evidence that Celtic men performed coitus with women? Or that they hugged their children? Or that they hummed melodies? I would love to see it.

>>17767825
You feel threatened? lol

>>17767847
>With the decline of Christianity, homosexuality has become normalized, and within a few decades, pederasty will be as well. Society is healing
OP is just satan nevermind

>>17768092
>You are so dishonest, you can't even represent the argument of your opponent properly. Pathetic.

This was in regards to gay sex. You believe that it is wrong unless it is the rape that occurs when an old man violates a child, no?

>I have spellcheck on. I have not made any spelling errors. This is petty.
>I never said that the Celts didn't practiced pederasty
>Is /his/ always full of illiterate retards that can't even read the posts

It is somehow only petty when I point this out lol, despite you calling me illiterate for zero reason.

>Gee, I wonder why sacrificing a person in a bog might show up on the archeological record, but a man cumming inside a boy's butt wouldn't!

Tacitus recounts other methods of human sacrifice which we know to have existed. Either way any pervasive tradition of ritualized child rape would produce some sort of material tradition along side it. The cultural reinforcement necessary to make people okay with this most heinous of acts demands an extensive effort to normalize and it simply is entirely absent in the archaeological record. We know they warred because they made armor and weapons, we know they made music, we know roughly what was important to their cosmology. All of these would produce much more material than their habits of humming.

>>17768092
>You have archeological evidence that Celtic men performed coitus with women?

Considering that there was a civilization know as Celtic at all, yes, I do have evidence they sexually reproduced. Humans are not capable of asexual reproduction.

>>17768274
I feel like someone who feels threatened doesn't go on to encourage the threatening party to act. Maybe their is some arcane cope you can wry out of that, but OP imagines a literal sexual revolution taking place to kill the evil straight people that won't let him rape children, so no I am not particularly threatened.

>>17760035
Sounds like Albizzi propaganda

>>17768702
Considering that almost everything OP posts is propaganda, does that really surprise you?

>>17768281
If he is the devil he really blows at the whole deception thing.

>>17768663
>It is somehow only petty when I point this out lol
It is, because it's a small, single, grammatical error. Not multiple spelling errors like you claim. I have not bothered to point out your many grammatical errors, because that would be petty.

>despite you calling me illiterate for zero reason.
You are either illiterate or dishonest because you can not parse and respond to a post or represent my argument properly.

>Either way any pervasive tradition of ritualized child rape would produce some sort of material tradition along side it
No, it wouldn't have.

>The cultural reinforcement necessary to make people okay with this most heinous of acts demands an extensive effort to normalize and it
There have been plenty of societies where pederasty was normalized, with much better documentation than the Celts, the vast majority of which did not view sexual relations between men and boys as heinous.

>All of these would produce much more material than their habits of humming.
You have not given me archeological evidence for the pervasive practices of having sex with women, hugging children, and humming, which the Celts would have engaged in. You claimed that every pervasive practice left archeological evidence.

>>17768669
That is not archeological evidence that Celtic men had sex with women. That is an assumption built on other evidence. For all we know, the archeological record is consistent with Celts using syringes to impregnate their women.

>>17762773
OP made em up

>>17769112
>It is, because it's a small, single, grammatical error. Not multiple spelling errors like you claim. I have not bothered to point out your many grammatical errors, because that would be petty.

When you call someone illiterate expect to have your small grammatical mistake pointed out. And me refusing to entertain an extraordinary claim with minimal evidence does not make me dishonest or illiterate.

>No, it wouldn't have.

The Greeks and the Romans likely had the largest proportion of members at any given time which to a degree tolerated pederasty, they have material which depicts certain cases of sodomy, though less actual direct depictions that certain academics will have you believe. For context pederasty was not pervasive in these societies, as we have previously established, and even they have a material record. If it was pervasive in Celtic and Germanic societies they would have likely produced material which depicted it in at least small quantities, they did not. We have more archaeological sources on the archetypal fertility goddess from the PIE culture than we do for pederasty in these comparatively much more recent Celto-Germanic cultures.

>There have been plenty of societies where pederasty was normalized, with much better documentation than the Celts, the vast majority of which did not view sexual relations between men and boys as heinous.

The only society to my knowledge where it was documented and present in the archaeological record were the Greeks and Romans. Modern ethnographic studies have revealed ritualized child abuse to be present in many different cultures, but these cultures are usually quite isolated and barbaric. The existence of pederasty in these societies cannot be used to draw a parallel between them and the Celts/Germans in such a unique and perverse behavior.

>>17769112
>You have not given me archeological evidence for the pervasive practices of having sex with women, hugging children, and humming, which the Celts would have engaged in. You claimed that every pervasive practice left archeological evidence.

Yes they do, humming and inter familial contact is not a formalized practice like institutionalized child rape is. We do have evidence that the Celts reproduced, given they existed as a culture.

>the archeological record is consistent with Celts using syringes to impregnate their women.

Despite them lacking a medicament industry to produce syringes? It's a much safer assumption that men and women had sex with each other than older men pervasively raped young boys, as generally the institutionalized rape of young boys produces a material culture. Even putting that aside, we do have archaeological evidence that Celts and Germans were sexual with women. Their fertility goddess was a woman for one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_deities

>>17769213
>For context pederasty was not pervasive in these societies
Yes it was. The majority of classicists agree that it was. Take any list of the most famous Greeks, a large proportion of them either practiced pederasty, or wrote about pederasty.

>The Greeks and the Romans likely had the largest proportion of members at any given time which to a degree tolerated pederasty
We have court records and contemporary accounts which tell us that the majority of men in Renaissance Florence had sexual relations with boys. The archeological evidence for this is limited, despite the majority of men partaking in it. At most you could interpret the explosion of artwork of boys as indicative of widespread pederasty.

>they would have likely produced material which depicted it in at least small quantities, they did not
We hardly even have depictions of the gods they worshiped, yet alone depictions which would signify a sexual practice they engaged in.

>but these cultures are usually quite isolated and barbaric
All of the cultures which commented on Celtic pederasty, Greeks, Romans, and Persians, practiced pederasty at some point. In the case of the Greeks, they viewed pederasty as an important social institution. There is ample evidence to believe pederasty is not universally viewed as heinous or abusive by advanced cultures.

>>17769223
>humming and inter familial contact is not a formalized practice like institutionalized child rape is
Irrelevant. Tell me why practicing pederasty should show up in the archeological record of a culture which has a limited archeological output, when the majority of practices which this culture partook in also do not show up in the archeological record.

>It's a much safer assumption that men and women had sex with each other
Right, so you are making an inference on the basis of other evidence. This is not direct archeological evidence proving that Celtic men had sex with women, despite the fact that we know it would have been widespread.

>>17769278
>Yes it was. The majority of classicists agree that it was. Take any list of the most famous Greeks, a large proportion of them either practiced pederasty, or wrote about pederasty.

Yes a large proportion of academia will tell you that Hadrian was in love with Antinous or Alexander fucked Hephaestion. They are positively obsessed with making historical figures gay but the evidence is sparse, either way none of them point to widespread pederasty.

>accounts which tell us that the majority of men in Renaissance Florence had sexual relations with boys.

Florence, a city known for its usury (Jews) and at an entirely different point in time do not materialize evidence for your claim about celto-germanic society, try again faggot.

>We hardly even have depictions of the gods they worshiped, yet alone depictions which would signify a sexual practice they engaged in.

We do know roughly what Gods they worshiped and we have many different inscriptions/carvings of them, I linked here>>17769223

>All of the cultures which commented on Celtic pederasty, Greeks, Romans, and Persians, practiced pederasty at some point. In the case of the Greeks, they viewed pederasty as an important social institution.

They practiced pederasty at some point, to what extent it was accepted or whether it was sexual varied depending on city state and time so no, it was not always an important institution nor one that expressed itself in the way you fantasize about.

>>17769278
>Tell me why practicing pederasty should show up in the archeological record of a culture which has a limited archeological output, when the majority of practices which this culture partook in also do not show up in the archeological record.

They were not lacking archaeological* output, they have plenty of that, they lack written records entirely and also lack artistic depictions of any sort of sodomy between men. Given we do retain other bits of art and importance symbolism, this reflects an absence of sodomy in the culture, and you can't postulate that it might still exist on the basis that humming did, they are wildly different behaviors.

>Right, so you are making an inference on the basis of other evidence. This is not direct archeological evidence proving that Celtic men had sex with women, despite the fact that we know it would have been widespread.

Celtic gods were paired male and female, their fertility goddess was female, and there are depictions of heterosexual sex quite often. Pair that with the fact that they also existed as a culture, it is an evidenced based assumption men and women had sex. This is an obvious concession you refuse to make in the hopes you will trap me on some rhetorical tu quo que but the evidence for child rape is even more sparse.

>>17769448
>Yes a large proportion of academia will tell you that Hadrian was in love with Antinous
He was.

>at an entirely different point in time do not materialize evidence for your claim about celto-germanic society
I never claimed it did. I pointed out that a city which we have documentation from that proves that the majority of men had sex with boys has no strong archeological evidence suggesting that pederasty was highly prevalent, which is an example proving that a culture which practices pederasty doesn't necessarily leave archeological evidence of the practice behind.

>We do know roughly what Gods they worshiped
The archeological record of their gods is fragmentary and minimal, in spite of the fact that this was a highly important aspect of their culture, and they produced votive images of these gods. Many gods which are known by name have no archeological evidence attesting to their existence, and are only known through Roman/Greek writers.

>>17769470
>They were not lacking archaeological* output
I never claimed they did, I claimed they had a limited archeological output, which they do.

>also lack artistic depictions of any sort of sodomy between men
How many Celtic artistic depictions of sex between men and women exist? Can you post a single one?

>it is an evidenced based assumption men and women had sex
This evidence is nowhere near as direct as the archeological evidence you are requesting which would prove the presence of pederasty. There is no archeological evidence of heterosexual sex on par with the type of archeological evidence that you are requesting as evidence of Celtic pederasty. Does that mean we can assume that heterosexual sex did not exist in Celtic society? No, the vast majority of practices of ancient societies do not show up in the archeological record. Your argument is ridiculous.

Tell me, what sort of archeological evidence would exist had the Celts practiced pederasty? A fossilized man and boy engaged in the sexual act?

>>17769448
If you find yourself trying to deny that Hadrian was a boy lover, you need to stop and reevaluate what you're doing and why.

>>17769662
Denying obvious historical facts is a typical cognitive distortion that antis suffer from. Anything to justify their perverse worldview.

>>17770055
Its literary made up shit

>>17759964 (OP)
This bread is truly an epicwin, a nice mappy meal. Good to see people finally breaking out of the Matrix on this topic.

Too many posters here fell for Leather Apron Club's poorly researched propaganda.

14 year old girls owe me sex

>>17769626
>>17770055

Post a primary source other than the Historia Augusta (5th century propaganda) that says Hadrian and Antinous were lovers. It doesn't exist, the inference that they were comes from modern Jewish propaganda academics who believe they fucked for the same reason they believe Alexander and Hephaestion fucked (two men in close proximity). It's faggots projecting their own disorder onto the world.

>>17770139
>thread where everyone but OP and 2 degenerate gooners thinks he is a huge faggot that should be killed
>haha epic win amirite

>>17769626
>There is no archeological evidence of heterosexual sex on par with the type of archeological evidence that you are requesting as evidence of Celtic pederasty. Does that mean we can assume that heterosexual sex did not exist in Celtic society? No, the vast majority of practices of ancient societies do not show up in the archeological record. Your argument is ridiculous.

Except there is, heterosexual sex can be assumed in a culture which does not die out. It is necessary and simple to the continued existence of a society, child rape is not.

>How many Celtic artistic depictions of sex between men and women exist?

The Wikipedia on Celtic deities often has them depicted in male-female pairings in various reliefs

>I never claimed it did.

So you are walking back a claim you made that everyone can go check>>17767867

>whereas pederasty was pervasive in pre-Judaized European societies

You have been caught making polemical statements with minimal evidence and then coping when this is pointed out, there is no way to misinterpret or misread what you said, you claimed that pederasty was pervasive in pre-Christian, there is not evidence such that it is. This is partially because we lack sources from the Celts and Germans (which had cultures that spanned millennia) and so making definitive statements about certain points in time is retarded nor does it lend itself to "pervasive" pederasty. Further where we do have evidence of Pederasty it was not universally praiseworthy, legal nor always sexual in its manifestation, sometimes it was a tutelage based relationship. You posted a Xenephon passage which demonstrated exactly that. Rome had the Lex Scantinia a law specifically designed to outlaw Pederasty from the Republican period and later Laws like the Lex Julia which were even stricter.

>>17771286
>modern jews made it up
>but also you can't mention the Romans believing it themselves over a thousand years prior
>>17771324
>the Lex Scantinia a law specifically designed to outlaw Pederasty
Would you care to cite this?

>>17771289
This thread is an epicwin though, owo. And the other element of his post is correct.

>>17771324
>Except there is, heterosexual sex can be assumed in a culture which does not die out.
This is not archeological evidence, it's an inference made with other evidence. This is not evidence on par with the type of evidence which you are requesting to prove the presence of pederasty.

>The Wikipedia on Celtic deities often has them depicted in male-female pairings in various reliefs
These are not depictions of sexual relations.

>So you are walking back a claim you made that everyone can go check
I never claimed that they had no archeological output.

>you claimed that pederasty was pervasive in pre-Christian, there is not evidence such that it is
There is abundant evidence that it was, which you ignore.

>This is partially because we lack sources from the Celts and Germans (which had cultures that spanned millennia) and so making definitive statements about certain points in time is retarded nor does it lend itself to "pervasive" pederasty
We have several Greek/Roman sources spanning centuries which comment on Celtic pederasty, which tells us that the Celts practiced pederasty, and that it was pervasive throughout a considerable span of time.

>Rome had the Lex Scantinia a law specifically designed to outlaw Pederasty
*Outlaw sex with a freeborn male minor, and the law was hardly enforced. Roman emperors after this law was enacted still had boy sex slaves and boy-lovers, such as Augustus, Tiberius, and Hadrian.

The bottom line is this: I'm right, you're wrong. Celts in mud-huts living over two-thousand years ago practicing pederasty isn't going to leave an archeological record, nobody except you in this particular argument thinks it is reasonable to expect that. All the evidence supports my argument, you are now denying facts which are so obvious, nobody in history before 21st century internet revisionists would deny them. Give up.

>>17771286
People in the past had propriety, and avoided writing about sexual matters in explicit terms. That doesn't mean, however, that it isn't obvious when ancient authors were talking about sexual matters – it is. The earliest source to talk about Antinous' relationship with Hadrian in explicitly sexual terms that I'm aware of is from ~190, in a Christian polemic, seventy years after Antinous' death.

>Another fresh divinity was created in Egypt,—and very nearly among Greeks too,—when the Roman king solemnly elevated to the rank of god his loved-boy whose beauty was unequalled. He consecrated Antinous in the same way that Zeus consecrated Ganymedes. For lust is not easily restrained, when it has no fear; and to-day men observe the sacred nights of Antinous, which were really shameful, as the lover who kept them with him well knew. Why, I ask, do you reckon as a god one who is honoured by fornication? Why did you order that he should be mourned for as a son? Why, too, do you tell the story of his beauty? Beauty is a shameful thing when it has been blighted by outrage. Be not a tyrant, O man, over beauty, neither outrage him who is in the flower of his youth. Guard it in purity, that it may remain beautiful. Become a king over beauty, not a tyrant. Let it remain free. When you have kept its image pure, then I will acknowledge your beauty. Then I will worship beauty, when it is the true archetype of things beautiful. But now we have a tomb of the boy who was loved, a temple and a city of Antinous.
Tit. Flavius Clemens, The Exhortation to the Greeks, IV

You are mistaking your own ignorance of historical sources for a lack thereof.

>>17771760
>>17771837
You are intentionally not engaging with the fact that your main claim has been debunked, you claimed pederasty was pervasive in pre-Christian societies, you have not provided evidence for this claim that is sufficient. You have not provided it because it does not exist to the extraordinary level which your extraordinary claim merits. The idea that child-rape has ever been pervasive in any sufficiently advanced society which we have records from is a hall mark of a pop history factoid. In fact a good proportion of societies seem to have outlawed it to some extent as every single piece of material evidence posted has shown. You instead rely on hit pieces to inform your knowledge of say Hadrian or Tiberius or Augustus and their apparent proclivity for child rape. The allegations made against Augustus came from the Egyptian court while Antony and Augustus were fighting for the empire. The ones about Tiberius were similarly written by a senatorial elite who hated him. The contemporary accounts of Hadrian life don't even go so far as to implicate he was in a relationship with Antinous, only polemic texts and later -- less reliable -- accounts name him a faggot.

>Rome had a law explicitly outlawing the rape of freeborn young males and citizens?
>Greek city states varied in their interpretation of whether pederasty was sexual or even legal?
>b...b...but what about my polemic literature and scandalous accounts from butt mad senators
>no I will not mention that the largest and most famous Greek city states all seemed to loath child rape

>>17771465
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_Scantinia

>>17771760
>We have several Greek/Roman sources spanning centuries which comment on Celtic pederasty,

We have Tacitus and Caesar, we have two sources, each separated by about a century, with almost single sentence descriptions of the sexual habits of an entire people group whose lineage spanned multiple millennia and ranged well outside of contact with Rome. So no, the two sources which mention them do not evidence pervasive pederasty. Where they lying, maybe, maybe not, I'm inclined to believe it did happen but not to a pervasive extent. A hallmark of Jewish academic propaganda is latching onto a very small piece of evidence which contradicts the narrative and preforming a negative dialectic to undermine it. If you are trying to construct missile defense systems this is perhaps a good way of forming knowledge, maybe not considering what's happening in Tel Aviv actually, but you wouldn't know anything about that though would you moishe?

>>17771760
>This is not evidence on par with the type of evidence which you are requesting to prove the presence of pederasty.

Already downgraded it from pervasive>>17767867 to presence have we, I'll accept that concession faggot.

>>17772280
>The idea that child-rape has ever been pervasive in any sufficiently advanced society
The fact that you are unwilling to use neutral language, or even properly represent my arguments, is an indication of your dishonesty.

Pederasty was mostly between men and adolescent boys. The majority of girls in pre-industrial societies got married as teenagers, usually to older men. Roman girls in particular are known to have married very young, usually to older men. Roman demography can only be reconstructed provided you assume Roman girls began having children shortly after puberty. The type of age-gap relationship that I'm describing is the norm in the majority of societies to have ever existed. So yes, what you define as "child rape" is indeed, pervasive. Pederasty, a sexual relationship between a man and a boy, was also pervasive.

>outlawed it to some extent as every single piece of material evidence posted has shown
You haven't posted a single law which prohibits pederasty.

Both Augustus and Tiberius had boy sex servants in their palaces, which is known from funeral inscriptions, which is archeological evidence that backs up historical claims about them. Contemporary accounts of Hadrian's life, which you haven't read, make it clear he was in a sexual relationship with Antinous.

>>17772310
>We have Tacitus and Caesar, we have two sources, each separated by about a century, with almost single sentence descriptions of the sexual habits of an entire people group whose lineage spanned multiple millennia and ranged well outside of contact with Rome
>the two sources which mention them do not evidence pervasive pederasty
I never cited those as sources for Celtic pederasty. Neither Tacitus nor Caesar talk about sexual practices to a significant degree, you have no clue what you're talking about. This statement is bizarre.

>>17772329
You are grasping for straws. Using two different words to a different effect is not an alteration of my argument.

>>17772415
>The fact that you are unwilling to use neutral language, or even properly represent my arguments, is an indication of your dishonesty.

I am not going to argue with a delusional faggot as to whether or not it is ok to have sex with a 10 year old boy. The term is child rape and you can cry about it if you'd like but that's of no concern to me.

>Pederasty was mostly between men and adolescent boys. The majority of girls in pre-industrial societies got married as teenagers, usually to older men. Roman girls in particular are known to have married very young, usually to older men. Roman demography can only be reconstructed provided you assume Roman girls began having children shortly after puberty. The type of age-gap relationship that I'm describing is the norm in the majority of societies to have ever existed. So yes, what you define as "child rape" is indeed, pervasive. Pederasty, a sexual relationship between a man and a boy, was also pervasive.

This is obviously a discussion about your proclivity for boys, not the marriage habits of ancients, as homosexual marriage did not exist in the ancient world beyond abominable cases like Sporus. The issue here isn't with age-gap, it's with your claim that pederastic between men and boys relationships were pervasive, you could not provide evidence that this was the case. Had you said that age-gap relationships were pervasive that would be an absolutely true statement, you didn't though, you specified homosexual pederasty.

>You haven't posted a single law which prohibits pederasty.

Lex Scantinia, try again faggot

>I never cited those as sources for Celtic pederasty. Neither Tacitus nor Caesar talk about sexual practices to a significant degree,

Those are the two extant mother sources which discuss the Gauls/Celts/Germans, most other texts reference them and you are right, they don't talk much about the sexual habits. I wonder why that might be?

>>17772415
>You are grasping for straws. Using two different words to a different effect is not an alteration of my argument.

You said pervasive, now you say presence. Pederasty was undoubtedly present, it was not pervasive. These are two entirely different words with wildly different meanings that prime the reader to view ancient behavior with wildly different lenses.

>>17772415
>Both Augustus and Tiberius had boy sex servants in their palaces, which is known from funeral inscriptions, which is archeological evidence that backs up historical claims about them. Contemporary accounts of Hadrian's life, which you haven't read, make it clear he was in a sexual relationship with Antinous.

Again the statement that these were sex-slaves is where you sneak in your own perversity. Yes both Tiberius and Augustus had slaves which were boys, most Romans did, this does not mean they were raping them. The only contemporary account of Hadrian's life that really mentions Antinous mentions that he was used in a sacrificial ceremony to avert some disaster. Pair that with his later deification (a right no other emperor gave to their lovers) and you begin to see Antinous not as object of desire for Hadrian but someone who laid down their life to attain some metaphysical goal. It is Jewish academic thought that has corrupted your mind and made you view him as an object of homosexual attraction.

>>17772471
>pederastic relationships between men and boys*

>>17772285
I was being facetious. I know you can't cite it because it was never recorded. But that didn't stop you from making confident declarations about what it said.

>>17772280
>The idea that child-rape has ever been pervasive in any sufficiently advanced society which we have records from is a hall mark of a pop history factoid.
You can try and hide behind the fragmentary nature of ancient sources for Greece and Rome. But this assertion is just completely, indefensibly wrong. It's so wrong that it proves how bad faith everything else you've said is.

>>17772554
I know very little about Japanese history. Suffice it to say I would imagine someone familiar with their history and not obsessed with little boys or poisoned by Jewish academia could also debunk your claim that pederasty/homosexuality was pervasive. Usually no matter what human population you are looking at, faggots make up a small proportion. Claiming that this particularly vile species of faggotry was ever pervasive is bullshit and you know it.

>>17772519
Poorly documented laws are usually much better sources for what behavior was acceptable or not than even the most rigorous polemical texts.

>>17772554
>claims other guy is dishonest and bad faith
>has consistently chimped out every time his delusional world view is challenged

If you weren't trying to make a value judgment on homosexual pederasty specifically and instead just argued that podophilic relationships were common you could have gone back to trading pics with the fur fag. Instead you made yourself look like a retard and undermined your own point.

>>17772594
>pedophilic*

>>17762432
evangelical dipshits go to hell after a lifetime of serving satanic jews while God welcomes every single one of his precious homosexuals into the kingdom of heaven

>>17772578
>the most rigorous polemical texts
So is that what you're calling all the philosophers, playwrights, and historians that you ignore and/or lie about? All those guys casually talking about boy fucking can't be trusted, but a law that no one has seen in over a thousand years can?

>>17772573
Everyone familiar with their history will tell you that you're a complete retard. Just like with the ancient Greeks, which has of course never stopped you.
But with the Japanese it isn't even ancient history. They were still fucking boys in the Edo period. Greek-like pederastic relationships among the samurai, Buddhist clergy, and imperial court, boy prostitutes, people fucking boy actors, boys fucking other boys, adult women fucking boys. They had all the bases covered.
>Usually no matter what human population you are looking at, faggots make up a small proportion
This is literally the jewish position, you colossal retard. They're the ones that invented the concept of innate, unyielding sexualities. History shows this is total bullshit and that most people will have sex with whoever their society says it's OK to have sex with.
>>17772594
>has consistently chimped out every time his delusional world view is challenged
Is it possible to be less self aware? You're the one impotently flailing against reality as if coming here and lying is going to somehow alter history. You're arguing against two thousand years of both academic and popular consensus in addition to all the contemporary sources. You will never win this argument because the second any remotely sane person reads the shit the ancient Greeks were writing they immediately come to the conclusion that they were boy fuckers.
>just argued that podophilic relationships were common
That's all I've done. I'm not the OP.

>>17772471
>The issue here isn't with age-gap
You characterized sexual relationships between men and children/adolescents as "rape", and decried that such relationships were not pervasive any society, when they were. You are moving goalposts.

>Lex Scantinia
Doesn't prohibit pederasty. Was hardly enforced. Romans still continued having sexual relations with boys after it was enacted, including emperors.

>they don't talk much about the sexual habits
You characterized Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic Wars as being texts where "almost every sentence" describes the sexual practices of Germanic/Celtic people. This is hilariously wrong and you should stop responding to save yourself further embarrassment.

>>17772475
Using two different words for different reasons doesn't change my core argument.

>>17772486
>Yes both Tiberius and Augustus had slaves which were boys
There were funeral descriptions discovered which indicate that Tiberius and Augustus kept peur deliciae in their palaces, i.e. boy sex slaves. This is consistent with historical descriptions of both emperors. For example, Augustus:
>And though he was much at table or drink, to a certain degree, in fact, abstaining from sleep, he nevertheless used to gratify his lust to the extent of the dishonor of his public reputation. For he was accustomed to lie among twelve catamites and an equal number of girls.
Epitome De Caesaribus, Anonymous author 5th century

>mentions Antinous mentions that he was used in a sacrificial ceremony to avert some disaster
This was a rumour which was first mentioned in writing over a century after the death of Antinous. Contemporary sources describe them as lovers and put special emphasize on how beautiful Antinous was. Hadrian deified Antinous because he was in love with him.

>>17772691
I think you underestimate the importance of Roman laws to the Romans. Nonetheless the picture presented to us from philosophy and other arts is conflicting, some approved conditionally, a fair amount did not approve. None of it supports the idea that pederasty was pervasive or approved of generally and a law against it especially evidences that is was viewed unfavorably.

>>17772729
>Japanese it isn't even ancient history. They were still fucking boys in the Edo period. Greek-like pederastic relationships among the samurai, Buddhist clergy, and imperial court, boy prostitutes, people fucking boy actors, boys fucking other boys, adult women fucking boys. They had all the bases covered.

Good thing the Meiji restoration happened and the emperor purged the filth then haha. Again I don't know much about Japanese history but from what I do know they stopped being backwards and retarded around the time they stopped fucking boys given the timeline you just established? Wonder if that is coincidental.

>This is literally the jewish position, you colossal retard. They're the ones that invented the concept of innate, unyielding sexualities. History shows this is total bullshit and that most people will have sex with whoever their society says it's OK to have sex with.

This is quite literally the position of modern Jewish academia, you recounted it almost word for word. Are you gonna tell me most cultures didn't have a word for homosexual next?

>You characterized Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic Wars as being texts where "almost every sentence" describes the sexual practices of Germanic/Celtic people.

I did not say that, maybe you could point out where I said that and I'll clarify.

>>17772822
>You characterized sexual relationships between men and children/adolescents as "rape", and decried that such relationships were not pervasive any society, when they were. You are moving goalposts.

The relationships between men and boys are rape yes. Age-gap relationships were quite common, between male and female, and whether or not those are rape is another issue. I won't deny their pervasive existence like I do with homosexual pederasty, as I do not believe there is sufficient evidence to conclude that pederasty was a pervasive practice.

>Doesn't prohibit pederasty. Was hardly enforced. Romans still continued having sexual relations with boys after it was enacted, including emperors.

It quite literally does, and we have no idea whether it was enforced or not. Certain Romans did I am sure, even (one) emperor, Nero, took a catamite whom he castrated. This DNE pervasive pederastic relationships however.

>Using two different words for different reasons doesn't change my core argument.

It absolutely does; e.g:

>Your apartment (city state/republic/tribe) has some ants (pederasts) during x time at y location
>Your apartment complex (Pre-Christian societies) has a pervasive ant problem (pederasts)

Wildly different meanings.

>>17772822
>Epitome De Caesaribus, Anonymous author 5th century

Woah! A 5th century anonymous author says Augustus fucks boys and the archaeological evidence which supports this is a single funerary inscription dedicated to the slave? SOOOO TRUE! Even if this were true, it still would not evidence pervasive pederasty.

>>17772859
The Japanese stopped being backwards and retarded all the way back when they learned how to read and write and do government from the Chinese. The entire reason they were able to modernize so rapidly towards the end of the Edo period and in to the Meiji restoration is precisely because they were not that backwards to begin with. Even in their isolation they had maintained trade with the Dutch and were aware of all the shiny new stuff coming out of Europe through them.
>This is quite literally the position of modern Jewish academia
What the fuck are you even trying to do? Everyone but the Sentinelese is aware of the "born this way" mantra that's been pushed for decades now. It is the unquestioned and unchallenged consensus of all academia in the developed world. What is with you and attempting the most brazen lies imaginable? I know jews can't breathe without lying, but this is excessive even by kike standards.

>>17772892
>What the fuck are you even trying to do? Everyone but the Sentinelese is aware of the "born this way" mantra that's been pushed for decades now. It is the unquestioned and unchallenged consensus of all academia in the developed world. What is with you and attempting the most brazen lies imaginable? I know jews can't breathe without lying, but this is excessive even by kike standards.

Nobody is born homosexual barring edge cases in my opinion. People are convinced through abuse which occurs during childhood and/or the absence of a positive father figure given they have certain characteristics in their psyche, but they are not born gay. A nature which predisposes but does not guarantee and an environment which encourages it produces homosexuality in my opinion, but I am no psychologist nor do I really trust their conclusions on this. This is an impossible generalization to make though, many more people become "gay" through various external pressures being applied on to them. With all this being said, the observed number of gay people in any society which has lasts is still far lower than observed number of straight people. Especially prior to modern medicine when child mortality was much higher and protection against venereal diseases/infections were much lower a civilization needs a vast majority of its men to be heterosexual and live long enough to reproduce. If a bunch of bug ridden old men were fucking every young boy as pervasively as OP insinuates, this would simply not be the case. Likewise a society with a large proportion of homosexuals relative to heterosexuals would struggle to reproduce as efficiently as a majority heterosexual one.

>>17772859
>The relationships between men and boys are rape yes
*consensual man/boy love

>I did not say that, maybe you could point out where I said that and I'll clarify.
"I'll clarify", you characterized Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic Wars as texts which were primarily about sexual practices, this was not accidental, this was not a miscommunication, you are a clueless idiot. You have no familiarity whatsoever with these texts.

>>17772872
>It absolutely does; e.g:
Your example is not analogous to any statements I have made. Furthermore, something can be present, and either be pervasive, or not. The meaning of the argument would not be changed. This is petty.

>>17772875
>A 5th century anonymous author
Who had access to sources which are lost to us. Plenty of good historical sources are anonymous. And yes, a funerary inscription of a boy sex slave in Augustus' palace which backs up other historical evidence claiming Augustus kept boy sex slaves is a good reason to believe that Augustus kept boy sex slaves.

You have been proven wrong on every claim you have made, and are now insistent on requesting evidence of pervasive pederasty, a concept which isn't even clearly defined, according to an impossibly high standard you have set. Any honest person would conclude the evidence already posted in this thread was evidence of pervasive pederasty.

>>17772911
Most men in pederastic societies have sex with both boys and women. Man/boy sex is nowhere near as much of a disease vector as man/man sex, especially not when it is non-penetrative. I hope that clarifies things.

>>17772935
>"I'll clarify", you characterized Tacitus' Germania and Caesar's Gallic Wars as texts which were primarily about sexual practices, this was not accidental, this was not a miscommunication, you are a clueless idiot. You have no familiarity whatsoever with these texts.

So where exactly did I say this? I know I do not hold this to be my belief about the texts, I've looked through the thread and I cannot find it.

>Your example is not analogous to any statements I have made. Furthermore, something can be present, and either be pervasive, or not. The meaning of the argument would not be changed. This is petty.

Pervasive (adj): present or noticeable in every part of a thing or place.

>Who had access to sources which are lost to us. Plenty of good historical sources are anonymous. And yes, a funerary inscription of a boy sex slave in Augustus' palace which backs up other historical evidence claiming Augustus kept boy sex slaves is a good reason to believe that Augustus kept boy sex slaves.

Mind pointing to the inscription that explicitly calls this slave a sex slave? I know the one you are talking about, Sarmentus, the origin of him being called a deliciae comes from Plutarch who recounts him being described by Delius (a friend of Antony) during the rivalry between these two. This is the closest thing to a contemporary mention that he gets, and it is coming from a sworn enemy of Augustus.

>You have been proven wrong on every claim you have made, and are now insistent on requesting evidence of pervasive pederasty, a concept which isn't even clearly defined, according to an impossibly high standard you have set. Any honest person would conclude the evidence already posted in this thread was evidence of pervasive pederasty.

Again no, I have not, and yes I am requesting evidence of pervasive pederasty. This is because you have made the claim that it was pervasive >>17767867. This is an extraordinary claim and requires extraordinary evidence.

>>17772935
Up until now you have not posted a single piece of evidence which suggests it was pervasive, meanwhile several laws (scantinia and julia) have been posted from Rome showing that it was illegal and your own Xenephon excerpt indicates that it was not universal in its expression or tolerance during the Hellenic/Archaic period.

>>17772975
>So where exactly did I say this?
Stop trying to backtrack. >>17772310

>This is an extraordinary claim and requires extraordinary evidence
There is nothing extraordinary about the claim. Your contention that it is amounts to the claim that proving that gay marriage, transgenders, and miscegenation, were disdained in the past is extraordinary, because of contemporary opinions on these matters.

>>17772981
Niether Scantinia nor Julia prohibit pederasty, stop pretending they did. There were laws which prohibit pederasty, but these come much later, and were enacted by Christian emperors. They were also highly unpopular among Greek citizens in the empire.

>your own Xenephon excerpt indicates that it was not universal in its expression or tolerance during the Hellenic/Archaic period
It indicates, in Xenephon's own words, that it was legal in the majority of cities. The entire excerpt is also clear evidence that the practice was pervasive during the period. That excerpt could not be written outside of a culture where pederasty was pervasive. Any reasonable person would conclude that pederasty was a widespread practice in the society from which Xenephon was writing from.

Again, all your arguments have been dismantled, you have made a fool of yourself, and you are now focusing on a precise definition of the word "pervasive", to try to salvage some dignity.

I have never claimed that the majority of Greek or Roman or Celtic men engaged in pederasty (unlike in Florence) because there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case. I have never claimed that pederasty was accepted in every locality during every time period during the entire extent of the existence of these cultures. I have never claimed that pederasty was universally favoured by every individual living in these cultures.

>>17773042

>>17772310
>with almost single sentence descriptions of the sexual habits

so ... I didn't say that

>There is nothing extraordinary about the claim. Your contention that it is amounts to the claim that proving that gay marriage, transgenders, and miscegenation, were disdained in the past is extraordinary, because of contemporary opinions on these matters.

When did I mention miscegenation? Where did I mention troons? I did mention gay marriage but yes, gay marriage really did not exist in Roman/Greek societies.

>Niether Scantinia nor Julia prohibit pederasty

Scantinia explicitly does, and Julia was essentially state-enforced heterosexuality.

>It indicates, in Xenephon's own words, that it was legal in the majority of cities. The entire excerpt is also clear evidence that the practice was pervasive during the period. That excerpt could not be written outside of a culture where pederasty was pervasive. Any reasonable person would conclude that pederasty was a widespread practice in the society from which Xenephon was writing from.

It wasn't, several of the largest city states are mentioned to have explicit laws against pederasty. Either way this was just during Xenephon's time and he is notably unspecific with which cities allow it beyond Boeotians. This suggests an episode of tolerance some places but an absence of tolerance in others which simultaneously were also more notable cities; i.e not pervasive.

>Again, all your arguments have been dismantled, you have made a fool of yourself, and you are now focusing on a precise definition of the word "pervasive", to try to salvage some dignity.

My argument always was that pervasive was the incorrect terminology, I never said that it didn't happen, just that it wasn't pervasive. Child rape is a loathsome institution and will always exist to some capacity but fancifully pretending that it was a deeply entrenched characteristic of the ancient world is deceitful.

>>17773042
>I have never claimed that the majority of Greek or Roman or Celtic men engaged in pederasty (unlike in Florence) because there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case.

So you concede that you lied here >>17767867

>I have never claimed that pederasty was accepted in every locality during every time period during the entire extent of the existence of these cultures. I have never claimed that pederasty was universally favoured by every individual living in these cultures.

Nor was that what I thought you said.

>>17773042
Really the meat of this is that you attempted to portray these societies as ones which were pervasively homosexual, specifically in regards to older men raping boys. There is not evidence for this, as simply as it can be put, in fact there is a fair bit of evidence against it. Did it happen? Yes. Did it have uncharacteristic moments of tolerance at certain points in certain areas? Also yes. But it was not pervasive in pre-Christian societies. You choose that demarcation and these specific societies for some reason that is far beyond me, however you choose them in service of justifying what apparently are your own urges towards children. Not only is this retarded in itself, but it is not even an accurate depiction of these societies. You misrepresent history to try and justify your present day, this is a foundational fallacy to any historical/ethnographic discussion that you may have. You are incapable of sound reasoning on this basis and thus anything you say can be rejected on the spot because of this. It is also wrong by its own merits, however.

>>17773075
>so ... I didn't say that
This is the one concession I will make, I misread that post. There are other sources on the sexual practices of Celts, which mention that they practice pederasty. Caesar is not the only source on the Celts.

>When did I mention miscegenation?
It's an analogy.

>Scantinia explicitly does
No it doesn't'.
>Roman law that penalized stuprum (criminalized sexual behavior or "sex crime") against a freeborn male minor

>It wasn't
Xenophon explicitly states that pederasty was legal in the majority of cities.

>he is notably unspecific with which cities allow it beyond Boeotians
"Most".

>several of the largest city states are mentioned to have explicit laws against pederasty
This does not mean that the majority of cities had laws against pederasty.

>My argument always was that pervasive was the incorrect terminology
It is the correct terminology.

>>17773079
>So you concede that you lied here
I never claimed that the majority of men in those cultures practiced pederasty. Pervasive is not synonymous with universal.

>>17773099
>No it doesn't.

What exactly do you think freeborn means? Moreover even if we were to assume it only means literal freeborn non-citizens, citizens were afforded far more legal protections than their non-citizen counterparts.

>Xenophon explicitly states that pederasty was legal in the majority of cities.

I'm sure there were many small towns and cities that dotted the Aegean where you could do just about anything you wanted, this does not necessarily mean that Archaic/Hellenic Greek culture was infested with pederasts all of an explicitly sexual nature.

>"Most".

Unspecific as in he doesn't name them

>This does not mean that the majority of cities had laws against pederasty

No but their rejection of it is a hallmark of what places which came under the sway would follow to varying extents that is possible to know.

>I never claimed that the majority of men in those cultures practiced pederasty. Pervasive is not synonymous with universal.

Yeah I misread here, I still think that pervasive is the wrong word for all pre-Christian societies.

>>17773128
Impossible* to know

>>17773128
By misread I meant I misread this>>17773042


>I have never claimed that the majority of Greek or Roman or Celtic men engaged in pederasty (unlike in Florence) because there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case.

>>17773098
>attempted to portray these societies as ones which were pervasively homosexual
Greek pederasty is so widely known that you are actually making an extraordinary claim, one which is in opposition to the views of the majority of historians, by denying that it was an important, widespread institution. Pederasty was widespread in ancient Rome, yet it didn't serve an important social function like it did with the Greeks. Ancient sources, even ones which are condemnatory, make it clear that having sex with boys was commonplace in Roman society. Roman and Greek sources, and a Persian source, separated by several centuries, mention the Celts as practicing pederasty, and not a single source suggests that they were against the practice, which suggests that pederasty was pervasive in Celtic society.

You have provided no evidence against this thesis. The only pieces of evidence which you have presented, which you claim are prohibitions against pederasty, are actually not. They are prohibitions against sex with freeborn males, and they were hardly enforced.

>>17773128
>What exactly do you think freeborn means? Moreover even if we were to assume it only means literal freeborn non-citizens, citizens were afforded far more legal protections than their non-citizen counterparts.
Everybody on the planet knows that the Romans fucked their slaves.

>>17765547
Where did you get these 16th century court transcripts? I wanna read more about crime & punishment.

>>17773148
The evidence against that thesis has been presented, both by yourself and other people in this thread. Pederasty was not a pervasive institution, it occurred but it was not praiseworthy or even tolerated depending on the time. The idea that the Lex Scantinia was not enforced is a figment of scholarly imagination because it pokes a massive hole in the everyone was gay theory. Even if we assume its enforcement was minimal, it still represents enough of counter to pederasty being pervasive as to introduce serious uncertainty that merits rejecting that hypothesis. Moreover two of the most prominent city states of Archaic Greece (Athens/Sparta) outlawed pederasty, this is important and reflects a similar doubt to the idea that pederasty was pervasive. I do not particularly care what academics have to say on the matter, they have a Jewish agenda, blasting homosexuality/pedophilia in ancient societies is a prophylactic attempt to deflect criticism from, and force upon us, a shift in the Overton's window on these subjects.

>>17773166
Of course it happened, it doesn't mean it was looked upon favorably.

>>17773208
>Pederasty was not a pervasive institution
It was an important and pervasive social institution in Greece, end of. Celtic men and Roman men fucked boys and the majority of men in Renaissance Florence fucked boys. End of.

>The idea that the Lex Scantinia was not enforced is a figment of scholarly imagination because it pokes a massive hole in the everyone was gay theory
It was hardly enforced, and even if it was enforced, it wouldn't matter, Roman men fucked slaves, non-freeborn boys, and prostitutes.

>Athens
Solon's laws prohibit non-citizens from having sexual relations with freeborn boys. Solon was himself a boy-lover who wrote love poetry above boys. Funny how one of your two examples of Greek cities which outlawed pederasty didn't actually outlaw the practice, and the laws which you think did, were enacted by a man who himself was a pederast. Maybe Athens banned pederasty at a later date, but this was after the spread of Judaism.

>I do not particularly care what academics have to say on the matter, they have a Jewish agenda
Their Jewish agenda is being against pederasty. Pederasty is a highly pro-social institution which strengthens bonds between males, facilitates the handing down of knowledge and virtue, and fosters a masculine culture. Every time large amounts of White people practice pederasty, it leads to an explosion in intellectual and cultural achievement, such as in Greece, Renaissance Italy, and in British public schools. Jews do all they can to prevent White men from loving boys. Love is never wrong.

>>17773210
Nobody looked down on you if you were the one fucking the boys in Rome. Everybody and their grandmother knows about this (and it's true). Even if you were the one being fucked, it didn't necessarily mean people looked down on you, for example, Antinous, who was deified and worshiped as a god.

>>17773168
If I had to guess he pulled them directly out of his own ass. It isn't entirely unfathomable that certain Italian city states would be degenerate during the Renaissance though. The birth of his idea that antiquity was gay comes from around that time (coincidentally also when usury started to explode in popularity). His delusions primarily lie in the commonality of these perversities and also that he somehow represents a lost pre-Christian, Aryan tradition by doing exactly what the Jews want the gentiles to do (descend into sin and take their place as the object of divine fury). He is truly insane though, he genuinely believes that he could rape a little boy and have it be beneficial, there is no hope to make him see any degree of reason but you can make him look like a retard.

>>17773253
>It was an important and pervasive social institution in Greece, end of. Celtic men and Roman men fucked boys and the majority of men in Renaissance Florence fucked boys. End of.

Celts we lack evidence for, Greece did not always have explicitly sexual pederasty where it was accepted, nor was it pervasive. It is where it was most common in pre-Christian Europe given the evidence but it was not by any means pervasive or uncontroversial. Rome made it illegal, that is a very poignant societal condemnation of the practice, and persecution intensified as the centuries wore-on, even prior to the Christianization of the empire.

>It was hardly enforced, and even if it was enforced, it wouldn't matter, Roman men fucked slaves, non-freeborn boys, and prostitutes.

They did, and if they were sufficiently powerful/rich they might have even gotten away with it, but it wasn't pervasive or accepted. In fact it was illegal.

>Solon's laws

Athenian history does not end with Solon, I have a feeling you know that though. He wasn't even the main Athenian figure to come out against the practice.

>Their Jewish agenda is being against pederasty.

Alright so you are entirely divorced from reality.

>>17773168
>>17773259
>If I had to guess he pulled them directly out of his own ass
They're here >>17763238 and unless you can read 15th century Italian and have access to archives, you can read Michael Rocke's book Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence to learn about them.

>The birth of his idea that antiquity was gay comes from around that time
I wonder why the rediscovery of Greek and Roman literature would lead to the belief that Greeks and Romans engaged in homosexuality? Also, people knew about it before the Renaissance, just to a limited degree because they had less access to materials, and much of it was suppressed by the Church: >>17772415

>descend into sin and take their place as the object of divine fury
*Yahweh's fury; the Aryan gods want White men to love boys. Yahweh just wants you to sacrifice them in the Tophet and use their blood in magical rituals.

>he genuinely believes that he could rape a little boy and have it be beneficial
Loving, consensual relationships are almost always beneficial. For many boys, nothing would be more beneficial in their lives than to have a male lover, whether it be another boy or a man. Male love is a beautiful thing. Just imagine how much society would progress if boys weren't propagandized by Jews into thinking it's wrong to experiment with and to love other males.

>>17773282
>Celts we lack evidence for
False:
https://greek-love.com/index.php/antiquity/anthologies/ancient-celts

>Greece did not always have explicitly sexual pederasty
This was an ideal promoted by philosophers which was rare in practice (read The Phaedrus, Socrates himself makes note of this).

>Rome made it illegal
*with freeborn boys

>In fact it was illegal
*with freeborn boys

>Athenian history does not end with Solon
What other laws are you referencing?

>Alright so you are entirely divorced from reality.
Where is the organized effort by Jews to promote pederasty?

>>17773297
>False:
https://greek-love.com/index.php/antiquity/anthologies/ancient-celts

This source is just an exegesis of Greek sources which we have already shown to be problematic considering they weren't from the actual cultures. It also is very clearly biased towards a favorable interpretation and thus can be discarded.

>This was an ideal promoted by philosophers which was rare in practice

It was present and we have no knowledge of how common it was or wasn't, Socrates isn't the paragon of Greek history for Greece's entire history and he very likely did not know what the habits were. Enough uncertainty as to the nature and acceptance of the practice has been introduced that your point here can also be discarded.

>with freeborn boys

By definition this includes citizens

>What other laws are you referencing?

Solon was a figure in the early 6th century, who introduced the oligarchic reforms to Athenian despotism. Pericles introduced more sweeping anti-faggot reforms among many more things and this coincided with the Golden Age of Athens.

>Where is the organized effort by Jews to promote pederasty?

Again you need be outside of your mind to conclude that you are opposed to the goals of Judaism in any way. The trope of faggot emperors and sodomites is rife in Jewish interpretations of classical history, this serves two ends. One it normalizes homosexuality and inclines the white European man to "rediscover" his effeminate and indulgent past. Two it allows for a greater proliferation of their attempts to sexualize children, especially young boys, and sideline them to an extent they commit a sort of psycho-sexual suicide. This deprives the white man of the ability to defend himself and faggots tend to mimic the helplessness of women. This goes much deeper and is much more pervasive, but just look at the Jews of the 20th century and how hard they pushed for faggotry and homosexual pedophilia. Do I need to point out the origins of NAMBLA? Or Hirschfield?

>>17773297
>Loving, consensual relationships are almost always beneficial. For many boys, nothing would be more beneficial in their lives than to have a male lover, whether it be another boy or a man. Male love is a beautiful thing. Just imagine how much society would progress if boys weren't propagandized by Jews into thinking it's wrong to experiment with and to love other males.

Alright you are just an insane homosexual. I'll leave this post as evidence of your utter insanity.

>>17767906
lmao

>Shotacon thread is one of the most researched threads on /his/ with plenty of primary and secondary sources being cited

>>17774320
>This source is just an exegesis of Greek sources which we have already shown to be problematic considering they weren't from the actual cultures
The fact that there are several sources claiming the same thing lends credibility to what they are saying. Greek and Roman sources on neighbouring peoples have been remarkably accurate, as I have explained previously. Greek and Roman sources also do not attribute the practice of pederasty to peoples which we know were opposed to the practice, such as Jews. Plenty of facts which you likely believe about the Celts come from Greek and Roman sources, with less evidence than the fact that they practiced pederasty.

>It was present and we have no knowledge of how common it was or wasn't
The historical record shows us that it was very common. Furthermore, more recent and complete court records, among other evidence, from the 15th century onward show us that Mediterranean men have a profound propensity towards boy-fucking.

>It also is very clearly biased towards a favorable interpretation and thus can be discarded
No, they are accurate translations.

>By definition this includes citizens
Men could still have sex with non-freeborn boys, slaves, and prostitutes. In Renaissance Florence, the majority of man/boy sex that came to the attention of the Office of the Night happened between men and boy prostitutes, so these laws, even if enacted, would not preclude widespread sexual activity between men and boys.

>Pericles introduced more sweeping anti-faggot reforms
Post evidence.

>The trope of faggot emperors and sodomites is rife in Jewish interpretations of classical history
Jewish academics try to promote the theory that history was full of men who had sex with other men, which is a perverse modern form of homosexuality. They try to hide the pederastic nature of past European societies for obvious reasons.

>>17772911
>Likewise a society with a large proportion of homosexuals relative to heterosexuals would struggle to reproduce as efficiently as a majority heterosexual one.
I suspect this is a bot, but in the event that it is a real person I wanted to address this part specifically with a theory of mine. Beyond the obvious fact that hetero and homosexual behaviors are not mutually exclusive, I would argue that socially encouraged homosexuality could actually increase birth rates.
There is plenty of heterosexual sex going on today, and yet our birth rates have plummeted. People have gotten quite good at having sex without having children. And so it can be reasonably concluded that willingness to have children is of far greater importance than the amount of sex that's going on. Or rather, the willingness of woman to have children, as they are the ultimate gatekeepers of reproduction.
"But, anon" I hear you ask, "How could homosexuality make women want to have more children?" The answer lies in competition. I hate to use this word, but in our current "heteronormative" environment, straight* men are entirely reliant on women as the only approved source of intimacy. And so men will accept any deal to have it, even to the point of tolerating a woman not wanting to have children with him. If women had to compete for male attention, one of the most compelling things they would have to offer is children, as has been the case in the past.
Looking at history, it's unlikely that homosexual relationships between grown men can be normalized. But successfully creating a social environment where most boys are willing to have homosexual relationships with one another up to their early 20s seems entirely doable. This even seems to happen on its own if boys are isolated from girls. If successful, you would free those boys of their desperation for female attention at any cost. They would be willing to demand more; a proper wife and children.
*men who are not exclusive homosexuals

>>17774658
>Post evidence.

Shit nigga read Thucydides and look at laws from the Athenian golden age, no fagz allowed in Athens!

>>17774776
>I would argue that socially encouraged homosexuality could actually increase birth rates.
ok so all this babble an poorly thought out analysis on why homosex is actually le ebin epic is coming directly out of your ass? Thought so. The faggot quivers when you mention that their preferred method of sex causes infection and/or death prior to modern medicine.

>>17774658
>No, they are accurate translations.

It is titled greek-love and has softcore of a child being raped on the home page nigga. Try again faggot.

>>17774658
>The historical record shows us that it was very common.

The historical record shows us that non-sexual pederasty was very common, wow thanks for pointing that out.

>Jewish academics try to promote the theory that history was full of men who had sex with other men, which is a perverse modern form of homosexuality. They try to hide the pederastic nature of past European societies for obvious reasons.

There is no difference in terms of the orientation of a man who has sex with other men and a man who rapes little boys. Arguably the latter is worse but I view both as symptoms of the same problem. You are a faggot if you want to have sex with anyone who was born with a dick, assuming you are a male. In your case you are a faggot child-rapist, but still a faggot.

>>17774832
Can you post evidence suggesting that pederasty was banned during the Athenian golden age?

>>17774836
>their preferred method of sex causes infection
Pederasty isn't anywhere near as much of a disease vector as adult-adult homosexuality because (1) boys haven't accumulated disease unlike adult homosexuals, (2) there are clearly defined sexual roles (the fact that adult-homosexuals both get penetrated by and penetrate other men is a primary disease vector), (3) boys can't ejaculate/don't have the same quantity of ejaculate as men, (4) penetration is less frequent in man/boy and even boy/boy relationships, and (5) adult-homosexuals engage in an obscene amount of dangerous sexual contact. So again, you are promoting the Jewish psyop that pederasty and faggotry are of the same kind.

Women are massive whores who basically become petri dishes that carry the diseases of all their past partners. Boys are much cleaner than women. Most women have STDs.

>>17774840
>It is titled greek-love
Doesn't matter, those are accurate translations of historical documents.

>softcore of a child being raped on the home page nigga
You mean artwork on Greek pottery from 490 BC?

>>17774848
>The historical record shows us that non-sexual pederasty was very common
No it doesn't. Non-sexual pederasty is an oxymoron; the "non-sexual erotic love of boys" makes no sense. Even the ideal promoted by philosophers assumes the man is sexually attracted to the boy.

>There is no difference in terms of the orientation of a man who has sex with other men and a man who rapes little boys
Attraction to adult men and attraction to boys are entirely separate phenomenon. Boy-lovers are known to be masculine, virtuous men with excellent aesthetic sensibilities. Alexander the Great had sexual relations with women as well as boys, does this make him a faggot?

Having high testosterone levels and evolved aesthetic sensibilities what primarily causes attraction to boys.

>>17774926
>(1) boys haven't accumulated disease unlike adult homosexuals,

And the old men raping them haven't either? The old men would be the vectors not the boys.

5) adult-homosexuals engage in an obscene amount of dangerous sexual contact

So do pederasts, a man who rapes children will do whatever he pleases with them because he has given himself over to perverse desire. This is why you see such strong counterreactions and banning of pederasty within these same societies. The pedophiles never stop at clearly defined points, the existence of their perversion is based off of crossing unthinkable boundaries.

>Alexander the Great had sexual relations with women as well as boys, does this make him a faggot?

He never had sex with boys, you know there is absolutely zero evidence for this.

>Attraction to adult men and attraction to boys are entirely separate phenomenon.

No it is not. It is literally the exact same thing.

>Having high testosterone levels and evolved aesthetic sensibilities what primarily causes attraction to boys.

Having traumatic sexual experiences as a child leads one to later becoming sexually violent. So no, it isn't testosterone. If humans had no more of a frontal lobe than say a wolf we could credit something as simple as hormones with the presence of violent rape, but humans and their capacity for violence are much more than the endocrine system. You have a child like understanding of psychology if you genuinely believe what you typed here.

>>17775133
>He never had sex with boys, you know there is absolutely zero evidence for this.
Go ahead, deny the obvious implication of these accounts. Let everyone reading the thread know that you are a retard, and that your opinion is worthless and can be disregarded:

>There Nabarzanes, having received a safe conduct, met him [Alexander], bringing great gifts. Among these was Bagoas, a eunuch of remarkable beauty, and in the very flower of boyhood, who had been loved by Darius and was afterwards to be loved by Alexander; and it was especially because of the boy's entreaties that he was led to pardon Nabarzanes.

>It was in fact at this time that Alexander gave loose rein to his passions, and changed continence and self-control, eminent virtues in every exalted fortune, to haughtiness and wantonness. ...
>Three hundred and sixty-five concubines, the same number that Darius had had, filled his palace, attended by herds of eunuchs, also accustomed to prostitute themselves.

>Therefore he [Alexander] received the envoys of the Sakai courteously and gave them Euxenippos to accompany them; he was still very young and a favourite of the king because of his youthful beauty, but although in handsome appearance he was equal to Hephaestion, he was not his match in a charm which was indeed not manly.

>For when he had honoured all the friends of the king with gifts beyond their highest hopes, to Bagoas, a eunuch who had won the regard of Alexander through yielding his body, he paid no honour, and on being admonished by some that Bagoas was dear to Alexander, replied that he was honouring the friends of the king, not his harlots, and that it was not the custom of the Persians to mate with males who made females of themselves by prostitution.
The Histories of Alexander the Great by Curtius Rufus

>>17775170
>Moreover, when he came to the royal palace of Gedrosia, he once more gave his army time for rest and held high festival.
>We are told, too, that he was once viewing some contests in singing and dancing, being well heated with wine, and that his loved boy, Bagoas, won the prize for song and dance, and then, all in his festal array, passed through the theatre and took his seat by Alexander's side; at sight of which the Macedonians clapped their hands and loudly bade the king kiss the victor, until at last he threw his arms about him and kissed him tenderly.
Plutarch's Life of Alexander

>King Alexander, too, was quite excessively keen on boys: according to Dicaearchus in On the Sacrifice at Troy, he was so taken with the eunuch Bagoas that under the eyes of the whole theater he bent over to give him a kiss, and when the audience shouted and applauded, he very willingly bent over and kissed him again. Charon of Chalcis—so says Carystius in Historical Notes —had a beautiful boy who was devoted to him. Alexander remarked on his beauty during a drinking bout hosted by Craterus. Charon told his boy to give Alexander a kiss. “No!” said the king. “That would pain you more than it would please me.” Although he was a passionate man, Alexander was also self-controlled as regards decency and propriety: when he had captured Dareius’ daughters and wife (who was quite admirably beautiful), not only did he not have sex with them, he arranged that they should not even learn that they were captives, giving the order that they should continue to be attended just as if Dareius still ruled. That was why Dareius, when he learned of this, stretched out his hands to the Sun in prayer that either he or Alexander should be king.
The Learned Banqueters by Athenaeus

>>17775171
>>17775170

I feel like if the man who did something as unthinkable as conquering the known world fucked boys we would know about it. None of the excerpts state it, which you concede by suggesting that it must be implied, but if we are to take not only these accounts as reliable but their implications as clear, are you not committing the same sin you said I was? Let me try and illustrate this to you in a way that makes sense, I would say, regardless of time period, maybe 5% of the overall population has the thought of raping a child cross their mind in any serious capacity. That's being generous, the proportion is likely far smaller. Most people read these passage and the first thing they think about isn't, "well obviously he is going to fuck the boys", not because they are retarded or because of time time which they exist. No they don't think that because the thought does not even occur to them, in the minds of most it does not even appear as a pre-frontal cortex jolt. I realize this may be hard for you to understand considering you are a gay man who was abused as a child, but your reasoning is fundamentally broken.

>>17775183
>because of the time which they exist*

DO YOUR FUCKING JOB JANNIES AND DELETE THIS SHIT!

>>17759964 (OP)

THIS PEDO THREAD IS STILL UP BECAUSE JANNIES ARE COCK SUCKING FAGGOTS WHO CAN'T DO THEIR FUCKING JOB.

>>17775196
he gets protection from mods

>gets btfo
>cries to jannies
>over and over again
What causes this kind of derangement? Not even christkikery does this to a person.

>>17775183
>I feel like if the man who did something as unthinkable as conquering the known world fucked boys we would know about it
We do know about it.

>None of the excerpts state it
They do state it.

>which you concede by suggesting that it must be implied
I didn't concede anything, I knew you were going to deny the implications of the texts (which you did) because you have displayed throughout the thread that you are dishonest and make tendentious interpretations of texts which contradict your worldview.

>maybe 5% of the overall population has the thought of raping a child
Adult-child sex is not synonymous with rape; by using value-laden language, you only work to obscure your own argument and confuse readers.

Also, phallometric studies using community samples tell us that roughly one in four men show as much arousal to images of children as they do to adults. Phallometry in individual cases is already reasonably reliable, which you can verify yourself by looking at sexual stimuli which you find sexually arousing; aggregated phallometric studies are even more reliable when it comes to making judgements on a group level, and these studies prove that sexual attraction to children is common. Your contention that attraction to children is uncommon is untrue.

The majority of pederastic relationships in Greece occurred between men and adolescent boys; the boys Alexander had sexual relations with were likely teenagers, so we aren't even talking about children. Nice strawman.

Another bad argument debunked.

>>17775196
>>17775206
It's an on-topic thread which doesn't violate any rules. Keep crying about it.

>>17775368
Anti derangement syndrome is one of the most powerful types of derangement syndrome.

I'm not reading this thread but I notice a lot of people (including OP) confusing pedophillia for hebephilia and/or ephebophilia

>>17775401
>Also, phallometric studies using community samples tell us that roughly one in four men show as much arousal to images of children as they do to adults.

>according to my jewish scoience all men are actually secretly attracted to little boiysh. Oh deary me i droipped my bagel and lAchks.

25% demonstrate arousal towards what? Is it images of 13 year old women that, as a result of the proliferation of birth control and other estrogenic medicine, begin exhibiting secondary sexual characteristics and adult features at a young age? Or is it all pictures of little boys? The diagram you attached also surveyed in part chomos, sexual offenders, and exactly one which reviewed normal men. I found this within 5 seconds of looking at the image showed that. You conveniently let that slip out of your explanation did ya? Maybe you see the holes I'm poking, if you'd like I could expand on this issue.

>>17775368
>>17775406
nigga everyone knows its you and anyone with bare minimum technical proficiency knows its not me.

>>17775401
>The majority of pederastic relationships in Greece occurred between men and adolescent boys; the boys Alexander had sexual relations with were likely teenagers, so we aren't even talking about children. Nice strawman.

Alexander never had sexual relations with a boy. This is an impossible to prove statement, keep coping but there is zero evidence.

>>17775406
>25% demonstrate arousal towards what? Is it images of 13 year old women that, as a result of the proliferation of birth control and other estrogenic medicine, begin exhibiting secondary sexual characteristics and adult features at a young age?
The studies in that chart used pre-pubescent children and children in the early stages of puberty as stimuli, as stated in the chart. They wouldn't have used images of precocious individuals.

>The diagram you attached also surveyed in part chomos, sexual offenders, and exactly one which reviewed normal men. I found this within 5 seconds of looking at the image showed that.
That chart shows the control groups in the studies. You looked at the image for 5 seconds, and found nothing.

>>17775413
We have valid historical sources which state that he had sexual relations with boys: >>17775171 >>17775170

He also lived in a society where pederasty was widespread, there are no reasons to doubt those sources.

>>17775401
A man is in part defined by his control over urges as well. Just exhibiting arousal =/= going to have sex. I sometimes feel hungry or tired despite having eaten recently or slept well, unlike a child I control these urges and do not immediately gorge myself or sleep through the day as a result. You evidently do not.

>>17775418
I have never had sex with anybody.

>>17775417
responded to yourself didya?

>The studies in that chart used pre-pubescent children and children in the early stages of puberty as stimuli, as stated in the chart. They wouldn't have used images of precocious individuals.

Just because a 13 year old displays secondary sexuals does not give someone the excuse to have sex with them. Again though, you have no way of knowing what images they displayed. In fact the very nature of the conclusions this study leads you to I find to be very strange. Phallometry, which I assume measures blood flow to the specified organ, by no means reflects that the thought to have sex with the child crossed the mind of the viewers. Arousal is in part an involuntary response and not one which, even people lacking in self-control to significant degrees, will act on. It also does not necessarily mean a sexually pleasing stimuli was present to the more sophisticated bits of our sensory perception.

>That chart shows the control groups in the studies. You looked at the image for 5 seconds, and found nothing.

So it wasn't aggregate then, and just one study which found this? I think we are beginning to see the other hole I poked.

>>17775423
My reasonable assumption is that you are in poor physical shape and that is the reason why you are expending energy here attempting to justify raping little boys.

>>17775432
You're so fucking retarded that you didn't even stop to think you might have misread that table when you thought it was saying that a minority of child molesters are attracted to children.

>>17775432
>Just because a 13 year old displays secondary sexuals does not give someone the excuse to have sex with them
Irrelevant, entirely different point. I never made this argument. Also, not all of the stimuli showed in those studies was of pubertal individuals.

>Again though, you have no way of knowing what images they displayed
They gave descriptions of the images displayed. Pre-pubescents and early pubescents, i.e. children.

>reflects that the thought to have sex with the child crossed the mind of the viewers
Sexual arousal has an obvious connection to sexual thoughts.

>So it wasn't aggregate then
It is aggregate, there are several studies in that chart, and each study contains an aggregate of people in the control group.

>>17775433
I'm in excellent physical shape. I have never attempted to justify raping little boys. You have now devolved into making personal insults on an anonymous forum because every argument you have presented has been refuted.

>>17775440
Nigga I don't give a fuck about your outside angle conclusions on the sexual proclivities of chomos. This isn't a legal discussion, please remove yourself from the being alive community.

>>17775443
>Irrelevant, entirely different point. I never made this argument. Also, not all of the stimuli showed in those studies was of pubertal individuals.

The whole point of this thread has been for you to justify raping little boys.

>They gave descriptions of the images displayed. Pre-pubescents and early pubescents, i.e. children.

If I were trying to infer what this study might actually be, I would assume it as a feminist attempt to display men all as sexually violent predators. They display girls who, having been exposed to estrogenic medicine, exhibit uncharacteristically early secondary sexuals. They then see the men exhibit slight phallometric engorgement and conclude that all men are in fact attracted to little children. You are on the other end of the horseshoe from short form media feminists. Most men do not have significant interest, nor would act on said interest should it exist, regarding little children. Mind you we have no knowledge of the gender of the photos entailed. The real issue is that you vociferously criticize feminist and/or Jewish academia yet refuse to acknowledge that they may come to the conclusion about other men on the basis of your existence.

>Sexual arousal has an obvious connection to sexual thoughts.

Have you never experienced uncomfortable and unwarranted arousal? On second thought, yeah probably not, considering your extreme girth.


In conclusion you are the reason Jewish academia is able to condemn men. Because you are a vile predator that wishes to rape little boys openly, they can abuse and accuse men just as they did to you in your childhood. You perpetuate the abuse inflicted upon you and hate those that reject it, which is a characteristic of CSA survivors.

>>17775455
The cope begins.

>>17775466
he struck a nerve didn't he haha

>y-you're fat!
>y-you were raped!
>y-you want to rape little boys!
>y-you're being protected by the mods!
uh-oh looks like i broke anon, he's having a melty!

>>17775508
Nigga it's basically just the two of us in this thread.

>>17760070
That could make a good movie