Camille Paglia: a promoter of pedophilia?

[Chad]

It's possible she has since recanted from much or all of what she said and wrote in the 1990s. She certainly sounded, at the very least, like an 'apologist' for pedophilia back then. The quote the above video pulled from her book appears legit:

Yes, it's possible… or not. In any case, I think we should be careful not to fall into the trap of "critically correcting" when we're faced with material such as this which points to a pathological mindset (remember Rollo Tomassi? That should have taught us a lesson). I mean, sure you can regret opinions that you once held, or things that you said years ago, but she was already in her 50's when she wrote this, so we could hardly chalk it up to misjudgement due to youth/immaturity. I would also be wary of people who, for the sake of fighting political correctness or "shocking people into thinking" about certain issues, end up (what looks like) promoting really shocking and immoral things, on the avowed pretext of "shattering taboos". I wonder if Peterson is aware of her stance on pedophilia/"man-boy love" and if so, what he thinks about it.

With the additional information that's come through, while Paglia may no longer feel this way - and we have no real reason (at the moment) to suspect she has changed her mind - she would have her work cut out for her to repent and make right what she said in the past. It's odd - although it's now seemingly clear that Paglia is actually pretty messed up in the head so maybe it shouldn't be such a surprise - because in some of her more well known interviews, if i remember correctly, she states that the debauched tales coming from ancient history were a sign that the civilization was dying. Although now I can imagine she could hold the ideas she has in her head without seeing the contradictions, and much of it does scream ideological posession.

 

[nature]

How is it possible that this witch has been put on a pedestal? I too wonder about JP position towards her.
I agree Adaryn about being wary when an "intellectual" says it's to shoke, to this, to that. It's one of the psychopath's destabilising and confusing techniques.

She is overtly pro-pedophile.

To most people, these kinds of things [such as child pornography] are abhorrent. They can't look at them without being disturbed.

and wants us to not be disgusted ?

overtly pro-snuff movie

Let snuff films be made!

and wants the taboos being breaked, ie no more boundaries, no more prohibitions

But I'm saying that whenever there's a taboo, it's the absolute obligation of the artist and intellectual to seize on that taboo and to shatter it

(quotes provided in itellsya's post)

 

[SlipNet]

I'd not heard of Paglia before seeing her do a podcast with Peterson, and my response was favourable, but now I can feel nothing but shock and revulsion. It just goes to show you have to do your due diligence on people these days, you truly never know what might be lurking under the surface of fine words. Liberalism (and it's twin, libertines) is now little more than "do what thou wilt" Crowleyisms, absolutely disgusting. Perhaps also a fine illustration of Haidt's theory of the moral tastebuds differential?

 

[Joe]

What is it about the mentality among some (many?) high profile and nominally high intelligence Jews that they are driven to want to break down social and cultural norms and revolutionize society, apparently to create a situation where everything is allowed?

 

[Glenn]

I think it is a hunger inside these individuals that seeks out to counter creation, and it reminded me of a short passage in Ra, where it was discussed in rather simple terms. I think this is fundamentally at the root of these things:

19.17 ▶ Questioner: Can you tell me what bias creates their momentum toward the chosen path of service to self?

Ra: I am Ra. We can speak only in metaphor. Some love the light. Some love the darkness. It is a matter of the unique and infinitely various Creator choosing and playing among its experiences as a child upon a picnic. Some enjoy the picnic and find the sun beautiful, the food delicious, the games refreshing, and glow with the joy of creation. Some find the night delicious, their picnic being pain, difficulty, sufferings of others, and the examination of the perversities of nature. These enjoy a different picnic.

All these experiences are available. It is free will of each entity which chooses the form of play, the form of pleasure.

Are they not trying to take the perversities of nature, and turn them into the norm.

 

[Adaryn]

Are they not trying to take the perversities of nature, and turn them into the norm.

Yes they are. They're trying to convert everyone to their view of what a good picnic is, and should be. If you're repulsed by the food, it means you're the one with the problem. They'll say you are repressed, conditioned by "Judeo-Christian" (in fact, really Christian) dogma, when you're just having a normal, healthy reaction to something abhorrent.

I strongly disagree with what she wrote below (quoted earlier by itellsya):

The intellectual and artist have an obligation to deal with disturbing material, such as paedophilia, because, in Paglia's view, "I feel that's the only way we can keep ourselves from sliding into dogmatism. To most people, these kinds of things [such as child pornography] are abhorrent. They can't look at them without being disturbed. "46 Elsewhere, she says that she feels that "the function of the modern artist is to shatter all taboos, and that where the subject of the art work causes the most pain, that is where the artist is contributing the /; most to civilization.

Rather contributing to the collapse of civilization, I'd say. These twisted individuals feel so titillated by evil that they assume that because shocking art, child pornography or pedophilia are deeply disturbing to most people, there must be something really "interesting" in there to "explore" (read: to wallow in) in order to find some "deeper meaning" through the pain that exposition to such filth causes. I'm sorry, but the pain is just a normal reaction to pathology, that is all!

 

[mkrnhr]

I think the idea of "sexual liberation" (from what??) was rotten from the start, and the so called "intellectuals" went on with it, justifying it with psychological mumbo jumbo, because it responded to a sickness they had inside to begin with.

 

[Matthew]

She certainly seems to be ideologically possessed as itellsya suggested. Shame; I responded favourably to her when I saw her with Peterson in a few videos. However, the attempted normalisation of paedophilia and ephebophilia is something I have been expecting for some years. Not that I expect it to succeed. I think that will be a step too far for the majority of humanity. Hopefully. The C's always say that the STS forces will inevitably fail so that may be some comfort at least.

 

[DianaRose94]

What is it about the mentality among some (many?) high profile and nominally high intelligence Jews that they are driven to want to break down social and cultural norms and revolutionize society, apparently to create a situation where everything is allowed?

Paglia was raised Catholic, but is now atheist. But yes, the quest towards "liberation" is a hobby of many high intelligence people. Really, it proves how far one can go if they're good with words and brimming with god-like self-confidence.

 

[Joe]

Paglia was raised Catholic, but is now atheist. But yes, the quest towards "liberation" is a hobby of many high intelligence people. Really, it proves how far one can go if they're good with words and brimming with god-like self-confidence.

Castaneda says that the “flyers gave us their mind”, but I’m wondering if they didn’t give some humans more or their mind than others.

 

[Carl]

I think it is a hunger inside these individuals that seeks out to counter creation, and it reminded me of a short passage in Ra, where it was discussed in rather simple terms. I think this is fundamentally at the root of these things:

Ra: I am Ra. We can speak only in metaphor. Some love the light. Some love the darkness. It is a matter of the unique and infinitely various Creator choosing and playing among its experiences as a child upon a picnic. Some enjoy the picnic and find the sun beautiful, the food delicious, the games refreshing, and glow with the joy of creation. Some find the night delicious, their picnic being pain, difficulty, sufferings of others, and the examination of the perversities of nature. These enjoy a different picnic.

And still the strangest thing for me to grok is that the lovers of the "darkness" always find a way to spin it to seem like darkness is actually light. And this is not something we are conditioned to look out for. If you look at modern movies or TV shows for instance, quite often the bad guy will happily indulge in his own badness. He'll freely admit that everything is a pursuit of power and destruction. Think Voldemort, the sith, even Sauron.

In reality it seems they actually believe that their ideas and actions are all good because it leads to good things. Freedom for all, Justice for the oppressed, free "love" even for children! It's only ever good and they are always the saviors. Nobody is the bad guy in their own movie. They espouse a pale and mocking imitation of true forms of these actual values - a shadow side if you will.

As we grow up we're not really ever trained to look for this, and tend to take these explanations at face value and assume good intentions. Because the intentions are actually "good". If you're on the shadow side at least.

Yes they are. They're trying to convert everyone to their view of what a good picnic is, and should be. If you're repulsed by the food, it means you're the one with the problem. They'll say you are repressed, conditioned by "Judeo-Christian" (in fact, really Christian) dogma, when you're just having a normal, healthy reaction to something abhorrent.

I strongly disagree with what she wrote below (quoted earlier by itellsya):


Rather contributing to the collapse of civilization, I'd say. These twisted individuals feel so titillated by evil that they assume that because shocking art, child pornography or pedophilia are deeply disturbing to most people, there must be something really "interesting" in there to "explore" (read: to wallow in) in order to find some "deeper meaning" through the pain that exposition to such filth causes. I'm sorry, but the pain is just a normal reaction to pathology, that is all!

Yes, there we go again. They are freeing people from the oppression of Christian dogma. Breaking down "taboos" that hold us back. Exploring our dark unconscious in order to bring it to the light.

All fluffy sounding narratives for what is at its core a desire to break things, to cause chaos, to take pleasure at others' expense and most importantly to dominate, all with the goal of simply giving a big FU to creation.

Sexual abuse of children is probably the ultimate form of this desire that 3d beings are able to express, and anyone who supports it even for a minute, whether out of their own sick desires or just wanting to be edgy, should not be given any benefit of the doubt.

 

[Voyageur]

I'd not heard of Paglia before seeing her do a podcast with Peterson, and my response was favourable, but now I can feel nothing but shock and revulsion.

Same here. While JP was being beaten down around the time when he was fighting the new pronoun laws (he was invited to a hearing in Ottawa), Paglia started showing up with supporting spot news critiques to lend him a hand. That's when I started to pay attention to her support (the way it was framed).

Wow, what a lesson - 'look before you leap.'

I too wonder about JP position towards her.

There are always possibilities that he knew something, yet I have to agree with Renaissance's thinking on the matter:

Camilla Paglia didn't become familiar with JP until he was really popular, and it could very well be the case that JP didn't know who she was either. On top of that it's not like JP can know the whole body of work of everyone he has a discussion with. We saw that with the Zizek debate. And it's perfectly understandable as he's incredibly busy.

If you think back to when JP was somewhat isolated in the press, continuously being attacked and ridiculed, as was witnessed, a well know American comes along who is 'connected' on social issues while saying all the right things. One can see JP reaching out (he does not need more enemies), especially if he is getting advice that happens to leave out the devil of Paglia's historical details.

JP comes from Northern Alberta in pretty tough conservative country, so can't see him putting up with any of this nonsense.

 

[mkrnhr]

Sexual abuse of children is probably the ultimate form of this desire that 3d beings are able to express, and anyone who supports it even for a minute, whether out of their own sick desires or just wanting to be edgy, should not be given any benefit of the doubt.

Not only deviant 3D but one could assume that through them, 4D STS entities as well. There is a quite disturbing reference in the forum (can't find the link yet) to an abduction case where similar things are commited by lizard beings.

We often project our worldview into words. When we hear "freedom", we think "freedom to learn, to speak, to think, to travel, etc." but we often fail to ask the question of whatever this "freedom" means to others, especially the pathological ones.

 

[marek760]

We often project our worldview into words. When we hear "freedom", we think "freedom to learn, to speak, to think, to travel, etc." but we often fail to ask the question of whatever this "freedom" means to others, especially the pathological ones.

Yes, and also ,as one can see, they make every effort to make their "freedom" socially acceptable, they want to leave their hidden circles, they want to deprave and force the whole society to accept their sick way of thinking and acting.

 

[Anthony]

I think the idea of "sexual liberation" (from what??) was rotten from the start, and the so called "intellectuals" went on with it, justifying it with psychological mumbo jumbo, because it responded to a sickness they had inside to begin with.

Some of them (Frankfurt School) took up the idea of "sexual liberation" after the failure of Marxism as a way to explain why the proletariat would rather choose nationalism, the flag, etc. instead of rising up against their "oppressor". When you think about it, it doesn't make sense at all. Maybe they just wanted to create a situation where their pathologies would be regarded as normal, and as you've said, used all sort of mumbo jumbo to justify it.