Table
of Contents
1.
Anti-Bodyshaming Movement Helps All the Wrong People
2. Hunter
Biden's Shamelessness
3. Joe and Hunter Biden Are Both Child
Molesters
4. Hunter Biden's Defenders Don't Feel Bad for Him
5.
Shamelessness Helps Sexual Predators
6. Shamelessness Helps Karens
and Cancel Culture Resisters
7. Shamelessness Robs Children of
Their Childhoods
8. Shamelessness Promotes Vanity and Risky
Behavior
9. Shamelessness Promotes a Culture of Silence About
Objectification
10. Shamelessness Promotes the Cult of
Anti-Negativity
11. Conclusion
12. Author's Note on Additional
Resources
Content
1.
Anti-Bodyshaming Movement Helps All the Wrong People
“Alas, the time of the most despicable man is coming, he that is no
longer able to despise himself. Behold, I show you the last man.” ... "Give us this last man, O Zarathustra," they shouted. "Turn us into these last men!"
- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra
It
has been observed by others, and correctly, that the movement against
body-shaming helps all the wrong people.
Numerous
articles have been written, several by so-called “intersectional
feminists”, that the movement to stop people from heaping shame
upon others for their appearance – which should more appropriately
be defending people who are disabled, differently abled, or
disfigured, or paralyzed people (people who really need to know that
their bodies are not something to be ashamed of) – has come to
defend people who are slightly strange-looking, and people who are
morbidly obese or are otherwise unhealthy more or less because of
their own decisions.
(One
of such articles can be found
here: http://studybreaks.com/culture/body-positivity/)
But
there is a new problem, and it is much worse. The movement against
bodyshaming has begotten a culture of shamelessness.
This
has had, and will continue to have, vast, serious, and damning
repercussions upon the basic premises of decency and privacy which
previously kept our culture from drifting into sin, degradation,
vanity, materialism, denial of the need to solve problems, and
normalization of child sexual abuse.
2.
Hunter Biden's Shamelessness
When
pictures leaked in October 2020 (and then again in January 2021) of
Hunter Biden having sex with a female stripper who appears to be
under the legal age of consent, opponents of Joe Biden were enraged.
Some of Biden's defenders, and certain miscellaneous unconvinced
people, stooped to defending the new president's son, however.
Statutory
rape laws were instituted in order to put the burden of proof on the
older person involved in the sexual act, to prove that the younger
person was of legal age to consent, when there is any question. In
complete disregard of that fact – or, probably more likely,
complete ignorance – some Twitter users who saw the leaked Hunter
Biden photos, argued “You can't prove that the girl is underage.”
That is not how the law works.
The
details of that particular legal argument aside, the point is that
Hunter Biden is getting undue defense. It seems that the movement
against body-shaming might have something to do with this as well,
because some of Hunter Biden's defenders have been arguing something
to the effect of “It's not fair for Trump, or anybody else, to
'target' Hunter Biden like this. He clearly has a problem and you
have no right to shame him for it.”
It
may be true that we should not shame someone for having a cocaine
habit, which the president's son was obviously still struggling with
as recently as summer 2018 (when the photos were taken). But are we
to believe that grown men in their mid- to late 40s, who have sex
with teenagers, should never experience shame at having that fact
exposed to the public?
What
has Hunter Biden done, that he should have some protection and
defense from having to feel ashamed for what he has done? Even if you
think he has contributed to our society politically and financially,
is that enough to give someone immunity from shame?
3. Joe
and Hunter Biden Are Both Child Molesters
Between
the second wave of Hunter Biden photo leaks in January, and Joe
Biden's inauguration, Hunter's defenders were still citing the fact
that his father wasn't president yet, as a reason not to worry about
Hunter's behavior.
Hunter's
defenders argued additionally, “It's not like Hunter's behavior
means that Joe Biden
is a child molester. Hunter's actions shouldn't reflect upon his
father.” They continue to say this, even though it's been six years
since Joe Biden was shown live on C-SPAN, pinching the right nipple
of the young niece of Senator Steve Daines of Montana. That girl was
approximately eight years old.
Biden
also grazed the nipple of one of the daughters of Senator Michael
Bennet, probably intentionally. Biden has also been photographed with
his hand over a boy's mouth, his hand on a police officer's knee, his
hands on both sides of an Asian-American girl's face, and his hand in
a handshake position over a baby boy's crotch. Based on observations
from videos, it's also possible that Biden has been pulling little
girls back against his groin, and pushing his groin into their backs,
during congressional swearing-in photo sessions.
The
idea that Hunter Biden's pedophilic behavior shouldn't reflect on his
father is one thing. But the question is moot because Joe Biden has
been directly filmed live on television pinching a little girl's
nipple. Joe Biden is a child molester, and Hunter Biden has now been
photographed with a girl who is somewhere between the ages of 12 and
18.
It's
fair to assume that she is under 18, because: 1) of all the females
who appear in the leaked photos, she appears, far and away, the
youngest; and 2) one of the images leaked from Hunter Biden's phone
is a screenshot of a text message from a woman named Allie (probably
an ex-girlfriend of Hunter's based on context clues) who told Biden
that he had let a stripper take-over his life, whom she described as
“A CHILD”.
Did
I censor these photos in order to shame this girl?
Or
did I do it in order to protect her innocence,
and
to provide her with
what
little bare minimum of decency and privacy
that
she still needs and deserves
in
this sensitive situation in which a high-profile individual's
reputation
and freedom are at stake?
Neither
1) the fact that this girl is a stripper, nor 2) the fact that she is
wearing a thong, proves that she is of legal age to consent to sex.
Legally, the burden is on Hunter Biden, to prove that she was of age,
at the time when the photos were taken (summer 2018).
Don't
console yourself, or try to soften this blow, with thoughts of “If
she were underage, Hunter Biden would have been put away by now.” I
have been told for years that I am a dreamer and I need to get real,
yet now I'm the
one telling people to stop making “if” statements. Let's deal
exclusively with reality. Let's deal with what we know, based on the
photographic evidence, and previous reporting about Joe Biden's
corruption and about Hunter's "misbehavior".
Hunter
Biden is the president's son. He's gotten away with his misbehavior
for more than just the three years since those leaked photos were
taken. His father has gotten away with pinching girls for six years,
and staring at their chests for 40 years. Joe Biden swims in his pool
naked when he has guests coming, and his security guards know it, and
they help him make sexual advances against women. Hunter Biden's
uncle James once owned property near Jeffrey Epstein's island. The
Bidens have the Kerrys to protect their interests at Burisma, and the
Podestas to protect other related and unrelated interests in Ukraine.
Aside from Hunter Biden getting kicked out of the military for
cocaine use, and his father probably helping him escape consequences
for it.
Do
you really think this is all a big coincidence, and that Hunter Biden
would be punished if he were guilty? You are making an “argument
from benevolence”, which is typically used to make the case that
God could not allow something bad to happen because that would make
God evil. The government is corrupt; it is not infallible, and it is
certainly not of God.
Do
not deny what you see in front of your own eyes. Hunter Biden
probably committed statutory rape, and if he did, he probably also
enticed a minor into delinquency, and possibly also cocaine use or
even addiction. If the government is good, then it should arrest
Hunter Biden. It's as simple as that.
4. Hunter
Biden's Defenders Don't Feel Bad for Him
These
Twitter users, and other defenders of Hunter Biden's pedophilic
behavior, are not genuinely
sympathetic towards Hunter Biden. No normal person would react to the
possibility that a man in his mid-40s may have raped a minor child,
with sentiments expressing more of a focus on their sympathy
for Biden than
for the impressionable child who was taken advantage of.
Rest
assured that a fair quantity of Hunter Biden's
defenders actually think
that what he did is awesome.
If you ask enough of them, eventually one of them will admit that
they think having sex with underage strippers and doing cocaine is
“the life” and “the American dream”.
Well,
excuse me, but I want an American dream in which children do not have
to sell themselves for sex, and become coke whores and strippers, and
suck old rich guys' dicks in yachts in international waters, in order
to earn what they need to survive and thrive. I want an American
dream in which every child is fed, and every person is given shelter,
and nobody can be pressured to sell their body, or accept unwanted
flirting, in order to live comfortably.
5.
Shamelessness Helps Sexual Predators
The
culture against body-shaming has thus morphed into a culture which is
against all forms of shame in general. And there is nobody who is
less deserving of protection from shame than Hunter Biden. For one,
he is obviously attractive and fit, and probably has not experienced
much body-shame.
Except
for some perhaps undue attention to his five-o'-clock shadow in the
leaked photos, which make him look almost completely different
from his over-made-up, kabuki-like
mannequin look that he sported when stumping for his father in
campaign videos. It's too bad the make-up people did such a good job!
Biden's defenders have even said “That's not Hunter Biden, Hunter
Biden looks like the over-made-up mannequin we saw in the Joe Biden
campaign videos.” It's Hunter alright.
But,
getting back to the point, Biden needs no protection from shame. What
makes you think that Biden is even ashamed of what he has done? Or
that his supporters are ashamed of what he has done, instead of
thinking that he's pushing boundaries and being a rock star?
Shameless
people do not need any protection from shame. They already have
denial, and their own narcissistic egos and insane defense
mechanisms, to protect them from ever having to feel the shame for
what they have done. Narcissists, and psychopaths / sociopaths, do
not experience remorse in the same way that other people do. They are
incapable of accepting that they caused someone hurt or harm. They
have every tool they need to rationalize-away what they did, and
minimize its damage, and make others feel ashamed about completely
unrelated things that they might
have done, in order to avoid feeling shame, and in order to delay and
deny the delivery of the consequences.
Anti-shaming
culture protects the guilty, who are covert and use their lack of
shame and remorse to convince themselves that they're not guilty, and
convince others of the same. They have convinced themselves that what
they did wasn't wrong. They do not believe they have done anything
wrong; that is why their attempts at deflection and minimization can
seem so convincing. But the fact that they work hard to convince us
that what they did wasn't wrong, or didn't happen, or isn't as bad as
some would make it seem, does not mean that we have to tolerate
immoral people who lack a conscience and fail to understand the harm
they've done.
Child
sexual predators do not need to be defended from having to experience
shame as part of the consequences of their crimes. And whether they
are defended from shame or not, they certainly do not need to be
defended from prosecution and jail time.
Powerful
and rich people who abuse children typically get off with a slap on
the wrist. Hunter Biden has not been arrested yet. This means there
is absolutely no reason to withhold criticism of him, based on these
photos. He should be criticized, and loudly, so that – and until -
the authorities do something about his possible crimes. These photos
were apparently taken in Los Angeles, so the Los Angeles police or
the county police should charge Biden with criminal sexual abuse of a
child.
If
he isn't arrested,
then we should still be glad that we brought this issue to the
public's attention, because being publicly shamed will then be the
worst consequence he experiences as a result of what he did.
Especially considering the fact that Biden might claim that the
evidence is inadmissible since the photos were stolen. But if the
person whom Biden gave his hard drive to, to repair, turned these
photos over to authorities, and that is how we got them, then that
argument would be wrong. It's not clear yet (at least to me) whether
that evidence will be admissible or inadmissible if Hunter Biden is
charged with statutory rape.
A
simple answer of "I'm not guilty, I don't know what you're
talking about" is not enough. Non-Disclosure Agreements
(N.D.A.s) are not enough. As Richard Nixon said "The people have
a right to know whether or not their president's a crook", we
have a right to know whether our president and his son are child
molesters. If we continue to deprive people of trials - whether
they're terror suspects or child sexual abuse and assault survivors -
then we have a failed state on our hands. Charges must be filed
against Hunter Biden, which obligate him to prove that his stripper
girlfriend was of age.
6.
Shamelessness Helps Karens and Cancel Culture Resisters
We
should wonder whether anti-bodyshaming culture has combined with the
Karen culture, and with the culture that wants to protect racists,
and rapists, and fascists from experiencing consequences for their
actions (even non-violent, legal consequences, to which they react
like vampires having the curtains pulled open on them in the middle
of the day).
Apparently,
some white right-wing conservatives and Republicans, and some
neo-liberal middle-class suburban white women, believe that they have
the right to be blatantly homophobic and racist in public, to the
point where it interferes with people's ability to avoid feeling
shame at the fact that they are black, or transgender, etc..
They
believe that nobody has a right to resist them, and that if you call
the police on them for cutting black people off in traffic, and
screaming at them and calling them the N-word, then you
are shaming them. Additionally,
you are putting their life in danger because they might get fired
when their employer finds out they're a toxic racist who likes to
terrorize certain groups of people because they're different.
This
may seem unrelated to Hunter Biden, but virtually the same thing is
going on here. Someone white, who is in a position of wealth or
power, is committing a crime against a person of a lesser status.
Hunter Biden raped a minor, and old white women get away with being
racist against black people by screaming in fear and pretending
they're being attacked. And then calling
the cops on the person they're attacking, for attacking them.
In
the same manner, when Donald Trump criticized Hunter Biden in the
first presidential debate of 2020, Democrats rushed to defend Hunter
Biden, many of them having no clue about what the worst things were,
that he was suspected of doing. (Note: I will remind you that the
photos of Hunter Biden originally leaked no later than October 2020,
when the debates were occurring.) So an accusation of sexual
impropriety - even of raping a child - is now treated as an
attack in this country, because it puts the person at risk.
This
is what happens in a culture in which there is a taboo against
“making people feel shame”. People take it as free rein to be
racist, sexist homophobes who rape children. And then the seriousness
of what they did is diminished by the legal system that doesn't take
it seriously, and sentences the child rapist to a few classes, or
reading some pamphlets about how to avoid being so "stupid"
and "careless" that you "accidentally" rape
children all the time. You made a mistake! Read a book. No therapy
necessary.
People
accused of sex crimes and hate crimes may tell us, “You can't do
this to me.” Well, that was probably what your victim was saying
while you were victimizing him or her! “My reputation is at stake.”
Your pleas do not exist in a vacuum. Something brought this on. You
should have thought about your reputation, and your money and your
job, before you decided to rape a child, or cut off a black person in
traffic and scream racial epithets at them.
For
each “Karen”, there are many other victims aside from the one
black guy that one Karen was caught cutting off. And one reason
they're called Karens is because many people behave this way. And
like the “Karen” who gets caught one time cutting off a black guy
in traffic, Hunter Biden likely has other underage victims, and there
are certainly other people like Hunter Biden in politics (and likely
in the energy industry as well).
A
single photo of a probably underage girl next to Hunter Biden, both
nearly undressed, may not be enough to prove that Hunter Biden raped
a minor. But combined with what else we know about the Biden family,
and the way our government typically deals with wealthy people
accused of child molestation and rape, should indicate that something
bigger is going on here. Don't forget that Hunter Biden's now
deceased brother Beau praised a Delaware prosecutor who let DuPont
heir Robert H. Richards IV off with a light charge for his sex crimes
against his very young son and daughter.
It's
likely that Hunter Biden is involved with sex trafficking in Ukraine,
very likely involving minors, or at least, very young women. It's
likely that Hunter Biden is not just “having sex with, and partying
with, strippers who happen to be underage”. Maybe he used his
position of superior wealth and power to coerce some poor family into
giving up a daughter, like Jeffrey Epstein did with the help of
Jean-Luc Brunel.
But
even if Biden didn't seek out a girl in as direct a manner as that,
it's likely that he used his position to enrich himself at the
expense of the people of Ukraine, which indirectly resulted in
political turmoil and poverty, which would have made Ukrainians more
financially desperate, and thus more likely to consider resorting to
“uncouth” measures in order to make ends meet.
We
don't know what happened. There needs to be a trial. And
I'll be damned if I'm going to let some general
“anti-shame-ism” culture, treat Hunter Biden like an underage
baby who didn't know what he was doing, and wants to stop the big
mean man from putting the “shame-cuffs” on him. I just hope that
"cannibal-shaming" Armie Hammer isn't next!
This
man was 47 years old, having sex with a girl who was probably no
older than 17. The age of consent in California is 18. Hunter Biden
needs to be criminally charged.
7.
Shamelessness Robs Children of Their Childhoods
There
are several unspoken rules in American society. One is “Do not
discuss religion or politics”. Following this rule has led to
silence on the issue of corruption in government and the Church.
Another rule is “Don't take from another man's plate”, or “Don't
interfere with the way someone else makes his money.”
But
should that really extend to child traffickers? People like Jeffrey
Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, whom for years, worked in close
proximity with people sharing Biden's wealthy, elite profile?
This
generalized culture against shame, defends teenage
girls who want to become prostitutes the
best of all. After all, if you body-shame a child, you must be some
kind of sick, pedophilic monster! Why else would you be interested in
a child's welfare, unless you wanted to have sex with them!? After
all, there is no reason to pay attention to children other than for
sexual purposes, and that's how every normal adult thinks. Right?
Because
it's totally normal for every adult - as a part of being an adult -
to be obsessed with their appearance, and body, and sexuality, to the
point where it's a focal point of their identity, and even the basis
of their political opinions. Young people today act as if having gay
sex automatically makes them woke, or a socialist, or a minority who
is entitled to more rights than others, because they've been
oppressed. Like a high school boy can suck a dick, and all of a
sudden he's Harvey Milk or Marsha P. Johnson. Sucking a cock
doesn't make you a communist; it makes you a cocksucker. Not that
there's anything wrong with that. The point being: sexual liberation
is not, by itself, a complete or cohesive political ideology.
Gender
identity has become the most important identity among the younger
generation. Numerous articles have been written, which criticize the
sexually-obsessive undertones of "gender reveal parties"
(which have caused several wildfires). Kids today grew up with their
parents hyper-focusing on their children's bodies - dressing them in
tight clothes, and adult clothes, making them look like little
grown-ups - and many of them have shared embarrassing or revealing
photos or videos of their children on social media before they are
old enough to be able to consent to it. The worst parents think of
their children in terms of what their kids can do for them some
day, and think about their kids' potential to start working early,
and eventually be used and sold for their parents' profit.
If
kids grow up to think there's nothing wrong with talking about their
sexuality constantly, then they will have no cause to suspect it's
creepy when an adult fixates
on their sexuality. So shut the fuck up about your stupid fucking
pussy!
Being
obsessed with one's appearance, and constantly talking about other
people's appearances, has become so normal for adults, that now,
we're also going to make children feel
ashamed if they don't succumb to other kids' pressure to wear
revealing clothing, wear lots of makeup, dancing provocatively, and
having sex prematurely. Any child who minds being stared at, must be
hiding something! It's a "guilty until proven innocent"
mindset, but the aim is to prove guilt rather than innocence.
The
anti-bodyshaming culture happens to work well with, and is easily
cloaked by, the culture of bullying virgins and virgin-shaming in
schools. According to this widely accepted culture, which is rarely
regarded as the bullying which it is, any child who doesn't want to
have sex early, isn't cool! And, so the twisted "logic"
continues. Roughhousing, fun and games, risky behavior, pressuring
other kids during "Truth or Dare" games... this is just
part of being a child nowadays!
If
you don't want children to be in danger of being objectified and
exploited by adults - and only pushed into certain professions like
dancing and contortion because adults are looking for excuses to
touch and ogle their bodies - then you are shaming kids "for
being kids".
Any
child who doesn't want to get a titty-twister, and get pushed into
the pool, deserves it, because they're intruding on other kids' good
time! So some children's right to have fun, apparently pre-empts and
negates other children's rights to safety and innocence and decency,
and their right to say no.
Being
embarrassed or ashamed is the worst thing you can possibly do, among
young people these days. It is practically a sin to feel shy,
humiliated, or afraid, all of which are "negative"
emotions. The phrase "U mad bro?" is often used on the
internet to poke fun at, or shame, someone who is angry or
frustrated. All of this creates a culture in which children and young
people are afraid to voice objections, complain, or alert others when
they feel uncomfortable. We are creating a culture in which kids are
not free to say no.
We
are treating children as if they have a right to be protected from
knowing how much danger they are in. Forgive me for "danger-shaming"
children, but I believe that children should look and act like
children. They should not have to suffer so much hyper-focusing on
their appearance, and celebration of and attention to their
sexuality, because that robs
them of their childhood. Warning children that people are trying to
shame them about their looks, while disguising it as
being against body-shaming,
doesn't rob kids of their childhoods.
Telling
a child to wear more make-up, or telling a transgender person that
they need to pass - and saying that doing so will make them feel
better about themselves - is
body-shaming.
You are telling them that they are not currently acceptable, the way
they look. That is body-shaming, disguised as body positivity. Some
of these people who are against body-shaming are thus secretly in
support of it.
Additionally,
telling a minor what clothes or make-up to wear, is
grooming.
It's only pedophile grooming
when it involves unwanted touching. But adults who want to see
children in tight clothes - like Abby Lee Miller, and parents of
girls who take dance classes, and child molesting gymnastics coach
Larry Nassar - will often obsess over what girls are wearing, in
order to control what
they are wearing. Larry Nassar prohibited his female students from
wearing anything under their leotards. He may have had
rational-sounding explanations for this rule - probably that
underwear would restrict flexibility - and he probably got away with
that excuse for a while because "he's the expert", and you
wouldn't want to question him! How do we know he didn't make that
rule so he could ogle the girls' genitals more clearly? How do we
know he didn't pursue control over what they did with their leotards,
so that he could steal them, or sniff them, or wear them?
There
is no reason not to be on the lookout for suspicious behavior which
could be pedophile grooming. By the time you would notice behavior
like that, it is usually too late, and something has already happened
to your child. Always relentlessly question any adult's attempt to
make your child submit to touching, or control over their clothing,
even if that person claims to be an expert on something. The risk to
your children is too great, to worry about whether you are shaming
your child for "being excessively free with their body",
when what they are actually doing is submitting their body to the
control of adult authorities whom you barely know. You can shut the
fuck up with your nonsensical grasping at straws, and rationalizing,
and trying to find something wrong with what a man is telling you
about how children should be protected. Men have as much of a right
to try to protect children as women do, and we don't have time to
debate all the "what-ifs" that a rationalizing woman might
come up with, to justify her own child's "freedom
of sexual expression" (outside of her own bedroom) while also
justifying her own promiscuity as a teenager. Just because you were a
slut in high school, doesn't mean your kid has to be on Dance Moms,
and then come out as gay and have a million grown-ass adults talking
non-stop on Twitter about what effectively amounts to the fact that
your daughter wants to eat pussy. I'm talking about Jojo Siwa. And I
have nothing against her, nor do i wish to make an issue of her
sexuality, nor do I wish to dwell on "How are parents going to
explain Jojo being gay, to their children?". Jojo Siwa did
nothing wrong. Her dumbass mother chose to put her on a show for
pedophiles. The girl is innocent; she's a minor and can't be held
legally responsible for becoming an Illuminati mind-controlled sex
slave. The producers of that shitty show for pedophiles and child
molesters are the ones who did that to her and her family. They are
the reason Jojo Siwa had to live apart from her father and brother
for several years. The need to be rich and famous broke her family up
temporarily. She is not alone in this.
I
have no doubt that countless fathers have left their wives after
discovering that they intend to glam-up their daughters, and enroll
them in an endless parade of pageants, and let them date older
teenage boys while they're still 13, and drink alcohol and get
tattoos. Half of these mothers are probably doing it in order to get
close to their daughters' boyfriends. These mothers are sick, and the
fact that they are women does not shield them from shame, nor does it
prevent them from being wrong, nor does it make them liberal.
They are still conservatives - fascists - because they
support the sexual oppression and exploitation of young girls by
adults and by older teenage boys. As Wilhelm Reich explained, the
sexual objectification of the child begins at home, and fascistic
parenting predisposes children to sexual abuse. This is because of
the shame and secrecy involved in sexual repression.
Sexual repression is damaging to children, but it
is also damaging
to encourage a child to be too public about their sexuality. It makes
a child feel ashamed to dress conservatively (or even just
non-provocatively), and ashamed to refrain from having sex at an
early age. A child who is peer-pressured into having first sex
early, is
raped,
because pressured sex is coerced sex, and coerced sex is rape.
In my opinion, the remote possibility that children are
being mass-bullied into losing their virginity, is much more
dangerous than the absolute
certainty that
many moderately pretty girls in middle school don't yet view
themselves as sex symbols, or as worthy of their own TikTok dancing
channels.
8.
Shamelessness Promotes Vanity and Risky Behavior
Some
American women have become so obsessed with their appearance, that
they derive their entire sense
of self-worth from how they look. Not just to the point where
covering themselves with make-up makes them feel unashamed enough to
go out the door, but also to the point where the fact that they look
good covers
for the fact that they are shitty, toxic, amoral human beings who
value nothing except artifice and materiality and appearance.
Billy
Crystal's impersonation of Fernando Llamas described the 1980s
version of this attitude perfectly: "It is better to look good,
than to feel good." Now the sentiment is "It is more
important to look good, than to be a good person." This
sentiment is what allowed Shane Dawson to grasp onto his fifteen
minutes of fame, long
after everybody
knew he was a pedophile, by beginning to film and post videos of
himself applying layer after layer of multicolored make-up to his
face. Dawson evidently thought, "As long as you look like a
pretty transsexual clown with a big fake smile, you can talk about
looking up pictures of naked babies all day long." Maybe if he
had started applying make-up a day earlier, young people wouldn't
have cancelled him.
The
culture against shame thus protects both sexual predators and their
victims, whether they're good looking or not, and whether they're bad
people or not. This, and the culture against victim-blaming,
combine, to tell us that there
is nothing a victim can ever do to put themselves in a dangerous
situation!
Pointing out that a girl shouldn't become a prostitute, is
now victim-blaming
and victim-shaming,
because you're unfairly assuming that the sex trade is dangerous.
I
recently discovered that Jamie Peck, co-host of the Majority Report
with Sam Seder, was sexually victimized by photographer Terry
Richardson. We should support Peck because of what happened to her.
But having read Peck's subsequent comments on the incident, it seems
that she still holds the attitude that "not every photographer
is like that". In 2010, Peck wrote, "This man has built his
business/pleasure empire on breaking the cardinal rule of asking a
young girl you don't know to come over to your house and hang out
naked: don't be a fucking creep."
And
it is certainly true that you shouldn't be a creep. If you invite a
young girl you don't know to come over to your house and hang out
naked.
Excuse me, but did I miss something? Miss Peck evidently believes
that there is nothing intrinsically creepy about asking a young girl
you don't know to come over to your house and hang out naked.
I
am a man, and
I will say it now, loud and clear: Every
man is a potential sexual predator.
Everybody "might be" a sexual predator. Anybody might
sexually harass a woman. Anything bad, might happen, at
any time. Trust
no one. Especially not photographers, and especially not guys who
invite you over to their house and want to "hang out naked"
and don't
know you. Am
I the first person to say this to you? Don't shoot the messenger!
Women should not have to worry about rape, but men should not have to
be worried that women will criticize them for "stereotyping"
all guys who want to take naked pictures of barely legal women, as
potential sexual predators.
The following
excerpt from an article by Camille Paglia, published by Time
Magazine in
September 2014, says it perfectly: "Misled by the naive optimism
and [']You go, girl!['] boosterism of their upbringing, young women
do not see the animal eyes glowing at them in the dark. They assume
that bared flesh and sexy clothes are just a fashion statement
containing no messages that might be misread and twisted by a
psychotic. They do not understand the fragility of civilization and
the constant nearness of savage nature."
Rape victims are never at fault. However, the culture of female empowerment has become stubbornly headstrong, in the face of criticism. Some of that criticism of feminism is deserved, and some of it is not. That debate aside, some feminists treat adult women as so competent, and so empowered, that it's almost as if they could never lose control, and get raped.
That line of logic is actually a form of victim-blaming in its own way, because it causes men to worry that it would seem sexist to suggest that a woman could ever get raped. If you are drunk or on drugs, or a very young adult or a virgin, you could probably benefit from a few words of caution about sexual predators now and then! Just because Camille Paglia and her cohorts were right to fight against the universities' overly protective attitude towards young adult women, doesn't mean that everybody who is not a woman, is being overly protective towards young women.
I know a guy whose girlfriend left him for a guy that we had previously nicknamed "Stabby Jack". We called him that because he stabbed people. We had long since stopped hanging out with him after he tried to stab a friend of ours for throwing a donut at him. My friend tried to warn his girlfriend about Jack, and she refused to listen. I don't know if anything bad happened, but the point is that we have the right to tell people things they may not want to hear.
The
fact that I'm observing that lots of men are rapists, or potential
rapists - and saying that you should protect yourself - doesn't
mean I'm victim-blaming! The
fact that men are pigs does not relieve you of the duty to protect
and defend yourself when and if no man will. Yet it is almost
impossible to caution a woman or girl about danger, and to try to
anticipate possible dangers, without being accused of blaming the
victim.
As
if a single woman not being disgusted by the sight of Harvey
Weinstein naked in the shower, means that nobody has the right to
assume that Weinstein suddenly appearing naked before them, could
possibly be interpreted as an awkward sexual advance. There's nothing
awkward about it, because there is no shame! We are in Heaven, where
God has relieved us of our shame, as if we were in the Garden of
Eden! Harvey is free to show all the angels, and creatures of the
Earth, the filthy naked disgusting body he was born in, and nobody
gets to "shame" him by telling him to keep his penis to
himself! It's God's penis now! It's everybody's! We're all in a holy
marriage with God and Harvey Weinstein's penis!
Fuck
off!
But
no, you're shaming the
teenage girl on the basis of her profession - nude model, or whore,
or child erotic dancer (or "rhythmic gymnast", as they're called now) - which
she clearly chose of her own volition! Having so many additional
skills and opportunities to consider, at the age of eighteen! Right? And the girls on Dance Moms and Toddlers and Tiaras, I'm sure they gave fully informed consent to be involved in a show like that, since children are deemed as capable of consent for commercial purposes nowadays, as long as their parents "consent on their behalf".
The girls on these shows have no idea what kind of damage it will cause them, to have appeared in these shows, until they reach an age at which they are capable of consenting, and of fully understanding the consequences of allowing adults to dress them up and film them dancing in a cage, or on a stripper pole, et cetera. They will not understand what harm it did to them, and understand what it means to grow up famous in front of a large audience (including possibly having information about their sexuality or sexual history revealed in a very public manner).
But - we are told - discrimination on the basis of profession is wrong! Everybody knows
that sex work is not something
to be ashamed of; it is no less shameful than any other job! So just
because it is no less shameful
than other jobs,
it must be something dignified, right? The fact that a prostitute
doesn't want to work on an oil rig, must mean that prostitution is
all fun and games, and that oil is good for seals and penguins and
polar bears because the oil workers don't want to suck any cock. But
does that make sense? Is there pride in sucking cock for money, just
because you can use "whataboutism", think of a profession
that seems worse, and point to it?
By
that measure, Hunter Biden didn't have sex with a ten-year-old, so
it's almost like he didn't do anything wrong. By that measure, only
the single worst person alive should ever be in prison, and all the
other criminals should go free because what they did wasn't as bad.
9.
Shamelessness Promotes a Culture of Silence About
Objectification
You
and I have every right to warn teenage girls against “getting a
sugar-daddy” (a/k/a becoming
a child prostitute),
and Democrats have
no right to shame me for
wanting to protect children. How about that? How about "Don't
innocence-shame me", or "Don't prude-shame me"?
We
have the right to caution impressionable children against getting too
many piercings and tattoos, and having sex, at too young an age. We
have the right to caution children against the evils of imbibing the
deadly neurotoxin alcohol if their parents are irresponsible
alcoholic asses. We may risk being labeled "body-shamers"
for cautioning children that dancing on TikTok and Instagram, or
appearing on Abby Lee Miller's Dance Moms, is likely to lead to their
exploitation and objectification, but we retain the right to bring
this to their attention nonetheless.
Most
girls in this position are being exploited by their parents, so who
are we to say that we have no individual responsibility to stop such
an active case of child abuse? Did John Brown reckon that he had no
responsibility to set slaves free, since the slave-masters weren't
personally bothering him too much? No. This affects all of us.
If
we all have the right to be protected from shame, then where is my
protection from the shame I feel when the defenders of child
predators try to make me feel powerless to protect children?
Teaching
people not to be ashamed of their bodies, has nothing
to do with
our right to caution teenagers that sex work is dangerous. It is not
"conservative", nor "conformist", nor "uncool"
to be worried that an 18-year-old (or younger) who "enters the
sex trade" (i.e., allows
themselves to be captured as a sex slave, if they're still a minor)
will come to harm.
Ron
Paul once said that "Freedom is the right to tell people things
they don't want to hear." We have the right to tell people that
prostitution, and "having a sugar daddy" is dangerous. And
spending the prime of your youth having sex with old people for
money, isn't exactly something to be proud of. It's not so shameful
that you should kill yourself, but it's shameful enough that you
should ask yourself whether you were taken advantage of.
Is
that really so crazy to suggest?
10.
Shamelessness Promotes the Cult of Anti-Negativity
The
culture against bodyshaming can also be characterized as a pro- "body
positivity" movement. The phrase "body positivity"
exists because everything in our society has to be positive. Just as
we have a problem with shame in our society, because it's “negative”.
“Being
negative” is apparently the worst thing you can do, in a society
that's evidently still drunk on the feel-good, pro-human, positive
vibes that they discovered in the 1990s. If you complain, you're
being negative, and you should relax and be positive.
If
you criticize your government, you're being negative. Don't worry
about it. If you report a crime, or abuse against yourself, you're
being negative. Forget about it, it's not a big deal, nothing will
probably ever be done about it anyway. If you're so sad or depressed
from the government not doing anything about the molestation or rape
that you endured that you want to kill yourself, you're being
negative. Cheer up! It's your responsibility to be happy all the
time.
Even
if you're sad, distract yourself with happy thoughts, and "put
on a happy face" for others. Or else you're "being a
bummer" and "you need to bring something to the table if
you want others to treat you with respect".
This
is the attitude of a society that would have no problem if the
authorities started taking unproductive and unhappy people behind a
shed and shooting them. We are already being divided into "essential"
and "non-essential" workers, and strikes are done by
government permission. We're not far from that fascist vision of the
future.
We
are not supposed to fake happiness for our friends and family members
the same way we are paid to pretend to be happy at work. And even
that can result in depression, and possibly even a "split
personality disorder" such as dissociative identity disorder.
Employees at Tokyo Disneyland experienced this first-hand.
Our
society is so vehemently against all things negative, that
even liking
things and having
preferences have
been attacked. A British school once reprimanded a girl for having a
best friend. The rationale goes like this: having a favorite, or a
best friend, implies that all the other choices are "bad",
and that's negative, and therefore not allowed. It's also
hierarchical and discriminatory, in the minds of neo-liberal
schoolteachers who are trying to get credit as being "woke".
11.
Conclusion
We
must not let this cult of positivity and shamelessness blind us to
the need to improve society, and to file charges and arrest people
suspected of crimes so we can have trials for them and find out
whether they're actually guilty.
Maybe
we need a
little shame every now and then. This society clearly needs at least
a small dose of it. Hunter Biden, the Karens, and the fascists in the
Republican Party clearly need it.
12.
Author's Note on Additional Resources
I have previously written on the topics of Hunter
Biden's sex crimes, and the objectification of children. Those
articles are available here:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2020/09/how-your-children-are-sexualized-and.html
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2021/01/joe-bidens-son-hunter-does-drugs-next.html
Original meme by the author
Written
and published on January 29th, 2021
Edited
and Expanded on January 30th and 31st,
February 3rd and 6th, and May 8th, 2021
Meme added on June 23rd, 2021
