>>508321395This power analysis of pedophilia is so stupid. You remind me of the Freudian experts from the 1950s who told us homosexuality was due to a close relationship to the mother, ignoring the fact that lots of fags get along with their mother and other women because spiritually they already always were feminine.
The problem is, you can't imagine having sex with kids anyway, you can't accept that kids can have a libido and sexual curiosity and needs that an adult can satisfy, you have limited or no experience with actual sexual relationships between adults and minors except the horror stories that hit the front page, you haven't seen any of the child-made CP that's floating around in the 10s of millions, and you buy lock stock and barrel into the discourse around pedophilia, that it's rape, that it's coercive, that it's violent and pathological, and you don't look for exceptions and outliers.
So the best thing you can come up with is parroting feminist talking points.
> rape is about power> the easiest power to get is over the weak> the weakest are children> therefore loser males rape childrenThis may explain violent situational offenders who attack whoever is available and vulnerable. It doesn't explain the why of pedophilia, any more than rancid Freudianism explained homosexuality in the 1950s.
And it says nothing about why children make so much child pornography. They can't all be grooming victims. They're just interested in sex, like everyone is.
There is sufficient space here for pedophilia to be understood as a sexual orientation in a usual sense, even if we must acknowledge the complicating factors, such as power differentials.
> Why are so many pedophiles in politics?Attraction to minors (under 18) is so common it's the rule.
> How could you even get a hard-on on a little creature with no ass and tits?1) Minors 11+ are pubescent. By 13-14 they're pretty much fully grown.
2) Children are beautiful.