Camille Paglia: a promoter of pedophilia?

[PhoenixToEmber]

She's clearly a highly intelligent scholar, but reading all of this leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even if the statements are decades old. I really enjoyed her lengthy discussion with Peterson, so now I'm not sure how to feel about her, exactly. Won't be a good look for Peterson, either, if this stuff gets blown up more and he gets pulled in by association, and if he doesn't address it himself.

 

[Scottie]

She's clearly a highly intelligent scholar, but reading all of this leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even if the statements are decades old. I really enjoyed her lengthy discussion with Peterson, so now I'm not sure how to feel about her, exactly. Won't be a good look for Peterson, either, if this stuff gets blown up more and he gets pulled in by association, and if he doesn't address it himself.

I was thinking about how JP might respond the other day. Obviously I'm not him, so it's difficult to say. But if I was in his position, I would say something like:

"Well, I think I understand where you're coming from there, because repressing sexuality is not good. This study showed that [BLAH]. But there's also [THIS] and [THAT]. At the same time, the question is: Where do you draw that line? If we say pedophilia is okay, then [insert results and statistics and clinical stories of the bad effects of that kind of thing]. So it's a very dangerous tightrope to walk."

Then she would respond with whatever... Then he would respond again, keeping it civil but bringing in data and looking at different sides from a more clinical perspective.

Now, privately, I imagine someone like JP would probably say something to the effect that if she thinks man-boy love is okay, she's got another think comin'.

I imagine he'd handle any "revelations" about her in the same way. Then again, given his interest in certain topics, I'd be surprised if he knew nothing about her in the first place. He seems to be quite familiar with feminist literature and its writers and various proponents.

But again, who knows?

 

[Adaryn]

I imagine he'd handle any "revelations" about her in the same way. Then again, given his interest in certain topics, I'd be surprised if he knew nothing about her in the first place. He seems to be quite familiar with feminist literature and its writers and various proponents.

But again, who knows?

The guy who made the Paglia video posted this in the comments section to his video:

Peterson has promoted Paglia for years, have a look at this article I just published: https://wolfish.neocities.org/posts/articles/camille_paglia_pedophile_sex_revolutionary/
He also promotes her book in which she defends pedophilia. Either he never bothered to read the book (before highly recommending it to his students and audience) or he doesn't see a problem with it.
At any rate, Peterson has been sent this video as well as my article, so he should now be informed about Paglia's views. Why don't you write to him and ask him to respond?

So, I guess it's bound to make waves at some point and Peterson will probably realize that he'll have to address the issue, eventually.

Added: someone also mentioned in the comments section they shared the video in some Jordan Peterson Facebook groups and that a lot of them were surprisingly receptive.

 

[Tuatha de Danaan]

'zionism' is just a silly ideology. It could be any number of similar subjective ideologies.

Joe, I've read this comment a few times but I'm unclear as to what you mean. "Zionism is just a silly ideology".
Sorry if I have totally missed the point. I've just finished reading FROM YAHWAH TO ZION.so I'm confused.

 

[Balance]

The guy who made the Paglia video posted this in the comments section to his video:

Peterson has promoted Paglia for years, have a look at this article I just published: https://wolfish.neocities.org/posts/articles/camille_paglia_pedophile_sex_revolutionary/
He also promotes her book in which she defends pedophilia. Either he never bothered to read the book (before highly recommending it to his students and audience) or he doesn't see a problem with it.
At any rate, Peterson has been sent this video as well as my article, so he should now be informed about Paglia's views. Why don't you write to him and ask him to respond?

So, I guess it's bound to make waves at some point and Peterson will probably realize that he'll have to address the issue, eventually.

Added: someone also mentioned in the comments section they shared the video in some Jordan Peterson Facebook groups and that a lot of them were surprisingly receptive.

Well... another article from the above website:

Jordan Peterson Dismantled

wolfish.neocities.org

Website design, emblems, advocating collectivism, grand conspiracy about the destruction of White Male while they have to unite and destroy the Enemy, far-right tone etc. -> Far-Right Ponerization at it's finest.
The source is everything but credible.

Anyhow, the question remains, why did Jordan entangled himself in discussion with her (I do not know who called first, did he asked for a discussion or the other way around)?
But even more importantly, was he informed about her work previously and did he read it thoroughly?

Maybe he did not want to discuss it for some reason...dunno. This one will be really interesting because he will have to discuss the issue with all the people who ever listened to him and his lectures and not some liberal hotheads with ideologically scripted answers.

 

[Adaryn]

Well... another article from the above website:

Jordan Peterson Dismantled

wolfish.neocities.org

Website design, emblems, advocating collectivism, grand conspiracy about the destruction of White Male while they have to unite and destroy the Enemy, far-right tone etc. -> Far-Right Ponerization at it's finest.
The source is everything but credible.

Yeah, they have a "far-right" agenda and, for some reason, they seem to have a beef with Peterson, and it looks like they're trying to make him guilty by association. However, the questions they raise about Paglia and her stance on pedophilia are worth asking. Except for 1 quote that someone, somewhere on the Internet, seems to have made up (see PoB's post), the rest is legit and documented, as far as I can tell.

 

[Aeneas]

Yeah, they have a "far-right" agenda and, for some reason, they seem to have a beef with Peterson, and it looks like they're trying to make him guilty by association. However, the questions they raise about Paglia and her stance on pedophilia are worth asking. Except for 1 quote that someone, somewhere on the Internet, seems to have made up (see PoB's post), the rest is legit and documented, as far as I can tell.

I noticed the same thing when I looked up the website and read through the comments to the video and skimming the same text that Balance found. Yes, somehow they connect JP with the degeneration of society and as anti-Christian etc, which is really bizarre, but then if they ever were supporters of JP, then they were very shallow thinkers if they turn on the spot without even letting JP have the chance to answer.

I think JP will come out of it Okay as he is a deep reflective thinker and might well answer along the lines that Scottie suggested. As for JP supporting those views that Paglia is holding, then I very much doubt it as they are in important ways quite the opposite.

It is also not surprising that there would be an effort to shut JP down. If 4D STS has the ability to travel back and forth in time and make subtle changes, then why not insert a tarbaby like Paglia to pull JP down and diminish his reach and ennobling efforts of young people in particular.

 

[Possibility of Being]

Well, it'd be really interesting to hear where she clearly stands today about "man boy" love. Notice she published (in 2018) a collection of her most "meaningful contributions", including extracts from Sexual Personae. Did she remove the most 'controversial' excerpts?

I'm not sure what did you mean by that question. Is it a rhetorical one? Or what's your opinion? Did she removed enough or it's still too much?

Adaryn, ALL the links and quotes that you posted since yesterday are from the 1990's. Even if a given article is from early 2000's, it relates to her writings/ interviews (then) a decade old. That was my main point: it's old. But you seem to be on a crusade. If Paglia doesn't advocate pedophilia, she is too ambiguous. You ignore ideology driven attacks if only you can use them for your cause. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to be judged by what I did or thought 20-30 years ago - only. I'm not a fan of Paglia, far from it. But I'm even farther from stoning her for her past views, no matter how repulsive they might have been. Even less so, when I think about her mostly positive opposition to today's gender/trans/PC insanity.

But I do wonder, why now. Who/ What is the attack actually against? Is it against Paglia? Or maybe against Peterson? Against pedophilia? Against some ideas? Who is behind that "Resurrection Europa" channel with 15K subscribers? From their "About"

Description ☨ RISE FROM YOUR GRAVE, CHILDREN OF EUROPA! I am Wolfish, and this is Resurrection Europa. Someone who is made an outlaw by the system is declared "caput lupinum", literally "wolfish head". Therefore a lion from the forest will slay them, A wolf of the deserts will destroy them, A leopard is watching their cities. Everyone who goes out of them will be torn in pieces, Because their transgressions are many, Their apostasies are numerous. - Jeremiah 5:6 Website: Wolfish

What other videos do they have?

Jordan Peterson Is An Anti-White Globalist
Jordan Peterson Is An Antichrist False Prophet
Jordan Peterson Roasts A Child
Jordan Peterson Is An Antichrist False Prophet
Lindsay Shepherd Is A Fake Free Speech Activist
The Anti-Hate Technocracy
Apex Predators [Seems to be their mission statement: Individually, wolves are apex predators on their own, but it is through the wolves' pack hunting instincts that they reign. The wolf pack manifests supreme, unchallenged domination of its territory.]

From their website - from article on Paglia (sorry, I don't feel like providing any links here)

Camille Paglia is a self-described libertarian feminist and is a professor of Humanities and Media Studies at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia.

For a number of years now, Paglia has been promoted by conservative pundits and media outlets as a sane voice of reason in the midst of an increasingly absurd and malevolent political climate. She is touted as being a renegade feminist, and as an unlikely ally who daringly opposes the most egregious excesses of modern feminist philosophy. YouTube abounds with videos dating all the way back to the early 90s of Paglia playing the foil to mainstream feminist currents.

Paglia has gone on Fox News to speak with Tucker Carlson, who recommended her most recent book, calling her "one of the more interesting people out there".

Breitbart recently published an article in support of Paglia, praising her as a renowned scholar, and applauded her criticism of "social justice culture on campus".

Paglia is frequently promoted by Ben Shapiro's online news publication, The Daily Wire, often to showcase her most recent takes on the subjects of transgenderism, feminism, and campus politics.

Dennis Prager has interviewed Paglia and championed her as a defender of civilization, stating "I have been admiring the person's [Camille Paglia's] thinking that I am about to speak to... One of the fine minds in the United States... She is what I rely on for civilization to continue, she doesn't go with the herd."

Jordan Peterson has promoted Paglia for years. He has recommended Paglia and her work to his university students, praising her as a brilliant genius whom he says he shares influences with, and in 2017 he invited her onto his podcast while recommending her 1990 book 'Sexual Personae'.

Paglia is a featured intellectual in Eric Weinstein's 'Intellectual Dark Web', alongside other illustrious "dark web intellectuals" such as Joe Rogan, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, Gad Saad, and Michael Shermer, among others.

So now we know. Of course it doesn't change our feelings about her past views, and perhaps even about some still held, but hopefully it adds a new perspective to that attack. Things are not always what they seem.

 

[Adaryn]

But I do wonder, why now. Who/ What is the attack actually against? Is it against Paglia? Or maybe against Peterson? Against pedophilia? Against some ideas? Who is behind that "Resurrection Europa" channel with 15K subscribers? From their "About"

Well yeah, I haven't delved into their website but I'm not completely blind; as I wrote above "They have a "far-right" agenda and, for some reason, they seem to have a beef with Peterson, and it looks like they're trying to make him guilty by association".

But you seem to be on a crusade. If Paglia doesn't advocate pedophilia, she is too ambiguous. You ignore ideology driven attacks if only you can use them for your cause.

I find those words a bit strong. However, you may have a point and maybe I got a bit carried away, since it's such a loaded topic? Anyway, I've decided to let it rest - I think we have exhausted the subject until/unless fresh info comes up and we know more about her current stance.

 

[Voyageur]

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to be judged by what I did or thought 20-30 years ago - only. I'm not a fan of Paglia, far from it. But I'm even farther from stoning her for her past views, no matter how repulsive they might have been. Even less so, when I think about her mostly positive opposition to today's gender/trans/PC insanity.

A good point, judgement, and not speaking for anyone else here, this subject is dear to a functioning society (I hope), and anyone who has had children and guided them (notwithstanding people who care) would grapple with these stated, albeit influential words that run contrary to a majority of peoples thinking (again I hope). Of course, you are correct in that what one says in the past (and has even thought) can be a heavy burden in retrospect - if conscious enough, and this does not mean that what one would say or think 20 years post is not without some self-reflection of said original spoken words or thinking. In many areas today which society is facing (as pointed out), Paglia has helped.

Paglia could, or not, reconcile her past thinking on this particular subject which could help to clear things up. As was pointed out, 20 - 30 years ago for her was not being exactly young with words and thinking, so I don't know how ingrained it all is, or was it just part of the inculcated messaging she became enamored with and spoke to create a reaction - which feed her at the time?

But I do wonder, why now. Who/ What is the attack actually against? Is it against Paglia? Or maybe against Peterson? Against pedophilia? Against some ideas? Who is behind that "Resurrection Europa" channel with 15K subscribers? From their "About"

Noted (with the rest). Thanks for pointing this out.

I find those words a bit strong. However, you may have a point and maybe I got a bit carried away, since it's such a loaded topic? Anyway, I've decided to let it rest - I think we have exhausted the subject until/unless fresh info comes up and we know more about her current stance.

Just noticed you're post.

The subject matter, as said above, is a difficult one to listen to, let alone speak to, and as you said it is a "loaded topic" full of triggers.

Agree with your bolded last.

 

[Joe]

Joe, I've read this comment a few times but I'm unclear as to what you mean. "Zionism is just a silly ideology".
Sorry if I have totally missed the point. I've just finished reading FROM YAHWAH TO ZION.so I'm confused.

Zionism, Yahweh, Judaism, are all narratives to justify a domineering and destructive impulse.

 

[Tuatha de Danaan]

Thanks for that Joe. I read it as being silly from the point of view as of no account or unimportant.

 

[monotonic]

I remember seeing the JP and Paglia interview and thinking something seems off here. They just got along too well and Paglia chanting "I knew it. We agree on everything" at the end didn't sit right with me. It wouldn't surprise me if she wanted to ride on JP's publicity or at least avoid a confrontation with him. I thought it was great at the time but in the back of my mind I was thinking "what do I do with this feeling that something is wrong here when by all accounts it seems everything is right".

 

[Ysus]

I watched the interview with her and Jordan Peterson at the time - at least most of it. All I would like to add is: while I thought she seemed to make quite a bit of sense, I found it emotionally strenuous to listen to her.

 

[Joe]

Since this entire topic revolves around a question: does Paglia stand by her comments of 20+ years ago, and since we've all been trying to answer that question based on subjective and limited information, I figured that I should do the obvious thing when people have a question about someone that they can't quite seem to answer: ask the person. So I asked her on FB. No idea if she'll answer or not.