# Cesario, you're awfully sanctimonious for a pedophile **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 29, 2009, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973 "2009-09-29T14:48:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/121 "2009-09-30T03:32:07Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > No, it wasn’t. It was about statutory rape, but the girl in question wasn’t prepubescent. Besides, even if she were underage, it was still rape because of the forcible element. And wasn’t his point that the crime generally was rape, irrespective of her age? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/122 "2009-09-30T03:34:41Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, then, elsewhere is full of wimps because, frankly, you’re a putz. I love you too darling. I know you prefer the shallow end, but you should always remember to wear your water wings. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/123 "2009-09-30T03:36:49Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > He _doesn’t_ have to shut up. But neither do I have to scroll past his posts instead of declaring that he’s a sick pervert whose predelictions should be granted neither implicit respect nor dialogue. > > If you choose to interpret that as me trying to shut him up, fine. Unlike you I don’t believe every person is privileged to talk about any topic they like without outraged opposition, even when that topic is offensive and against common decency. We should be so lucky as to have our collective disapproval shut him up and get him to leave. In that event, he shouldn’t let the door hit him on the ass on the way out. > > This idea that any POV is a legitimate POV is exactly what I’m talking about, regarding the perniciousness of Tolerance when taken to absolutely ridiculous extremes. No, any point of view is worth expressing for the sake of argument, that doesn’t make it equally valid. That’s a fallacy that cuts both ways there. You’re right you have every right to be outraged. **Tubadiva** I am curious about the ethical standards of the SDMB regarding something like this. What kind of privacy rights do people have to not have their IP reported by Creative Loafing when expressing some disturbing ideas like this? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/124 "2009-09-30T03:38:54Z")
> [@LunaticFringette](#): > > Truly an odd choice for a reply, but remember who we’re talking about. Cesario takes every opportunity to turn the attention on himself. And I think Dio nails Cesario’s attempt as “trying to place it in the same kind of category as homosexuality, and share his story as if it belongs in the same discussion as just another sexual orientation.” That’s one of the things that really pisses me off about it. Now, maybe because I’m straight, it’s kind of patronizing, but the fact that he keeps comparing his “persecution” to that suffered by homosexuals; that he considers NAMBLA simply another gay rights group, tortured simply by homophobic bigots…it really, REALLY angers me. Dude, NAMBLA is NOT protecting itself from “homophobic bigots.” It just angers me, because I see so many people complaining about how gays shouldn’t be allowed to adopt because they’re “perverts.” People like him don’t help, when they use that kind of justification. (Please, PLEASE tell me he has no plans to become a parent!) ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/125 "2009-09-30T03:52:22Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > And wasn’t his point that the crime generally was rape, irrespective of her age? So if we’re agreed that the crime was rape no matter what, and she wasn’t pre pubescent, where is the pedophilia coming in? I mean, yes, it was statutory rape, but statutory rape doesn’t always involve pedophilia. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/126 "2009-09-30T03:53:52Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > Here’s the history lesson: > > [Miss Kaitlyn’s first day in the classroom.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=295309) > > He was outed as a fraud in [Get your fucking facts right (Kaitlyn/Priceguy)](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=303697&page=3) starting with post #108. > > I’m just hoping that **Cesario** is also just an attention whore and not really a pedophile. I’m still kind of amazed that so many people fell for that story hook, line and sinker. Re-reading those threads, it’s so _obviously_ a fiction. The wise, zen-like principal, the wife who accepts his transgenderism without a peep, and happily becomes a lesbian, the completely incurious school kids, the picture of the obviously biological woman he posted as himself. How did anybody fall for that? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/127 "2009-09-30T03:55:57Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > So if we’re agreed that the crime was rape no matter what, and she wasn’t pre pubescent, where is the pedophilia coming in? I mean, yes, it was statutory rape, but statutory rape doesn’t always involve pedophilia. He was saying there should be no age of consent at all. His intent was to use the Polanski case as an excuse to advocate for making it open season on children of all ages. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/128 "2009-09-30T04:02:35Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m still kind of amazed that so many people fell for that story hook, line and sinker. Re-reading those threads, it’s so _obviously_ a fiction. The wise, zen-like principal, the wife who accepts his transgenderism without a peep, and happily becomes a lesbian, the completely incurious school kids, the picture of the obviously biological woman he posted as himself. How did anybody fall for that? (Checking my sole post, and noting that I was amazed that such a tale could be true in Texas. Whew! 😉 ) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/129 "2009-09-30T04:08:07Z")
I remember thinking it was bullshit but not posting anything because I had no proof and would have been crucified. It was the super-supportive wife that rang the most false to me. It just doesn’t happen that way IRL. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/130 "2009-09-30T04:08:24Z")
ETA: It was in MPSIMS, and in that forum Dopers are supposed to be more supportive and less confrontational than in other fora. I gave up on MPSIMS because of that. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/131 "2009-09-30T04:10:07Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > No, any point of view is worth expressing for the sake of argument, that doesn’t make it equally valid. How do you get to “any POV is worth expressing for the sake of argument”? Where’s the argument in “It’s okay to diddle four-year-olds”? To consider the assertion even if only “for the sake of argument” necessarily implies that the answer might be “yes it is.” But the answer is always, in every case, NO, it’s not. If there aren’t two sides – and there aren’t on this – then there’s no argument to be had. ---
**Author:** ![Claude\_Remains](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/898d66/32.png) [@Claude\_Remains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claude_Remains)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/132 "2009-09-30T04:10:35Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Or a newborn ( **zero** to ten being the stated age range of attraction). When those babies gurgle, they’re just asking for it. > > On a level of creepiness though, fetus attraction would be even worse. Can you bust someone for amassing a video library full of fetal ultrasounds, and exchanging them with other fetophiles?\* > \*Could “macroscopic” become the new age of consent? Pregnant chicks are the best fuck cause you can get some pussy and a little head at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/133 "2009-09-30T05:58:54Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Nope. > > Regards, > Shodan My apologies. It was **aldiboronti**. No idea why I thought it was you. ---
**Author:** ![Scissorjack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c67d28/32.png) [@Scissorjack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scissorjack)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/134 "2009-09-30T06:12:08Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > **Tubadiva** I am curious about the ethical standards of the SDMB regarding something like this. What kind of privacy rights do people have to not have their IP reported by Creative Loafing when expressing some disturbing ideas like this? You’re not looking at the bigger picture: we’re still protected from panhandling Marxist malcontents and people who say “cunt”, aren’t we? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/135 "2009-09-30T06:12:43Z")
So I was watching _Deathstalker_ the other day… ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/136 "2009-09-30T06:17:47Z")
I wish you folks would stop muddying the water with discussion of 13 and 16 year olds who might conceivably have the cognitive ability, and the physical development, to understand what sex is. I’m even pretty certain there are places where the age of consent is lower than either of those. In the [Youth Suffrage](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=533004&highlight=suffrage) thread, [Cesario responded to a series of questions I asked another poster](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11594651&postcount=88), and **he made it explicitly clear that he believes there are 5 year olds out there mature enough to give consent for sex.** Oh, and just as an aside, mentioned that he might be willing to give a gun to a five year old as a gift, if it were legal to do so. This guy is really, seriously dangerous. I wouldn’t say this if his only issue was sexual attraction to children, even infants. The danger is that he has convinced himself that children feel sexual attraction to him, and that they are mentally mature enough to act on those desires. And finally, that the laws to prevent such activity are like sexual Jim Crow laws to discriminate against a particular class of people who would otherwise be law abiding citizens. And in a kind of perverted way, he’s technically correct. If murder became legal, murderers would indeed be law abiding citizens. He has no moral barriers to fucking a five year old. Even worse, be may see the act as a political as well as sexual one, a statement against the injustice of society. This is yet another one of thousands if times in my life I am glad not to have children. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/137 "2009-09-30T06:20:02Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > My apologies. It was **aldiboronti**. No idea why I thought it was you. Yep, it was the thread in which straights were asked for their feelings if they woke up to find a guy giving them a blow job. I replied that my feelings would be exactly the same as if I awoke to find a six-year old giving me head: repulsion and horror. **Cesario** , incredibly, said he’d let the child finish. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/138 "2009-09-30T06:36:31Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > This guy is really, seriously dangerous. I think he’s got a ways to go before what he is and what he implies he is overlap with a sufficiently high degree of confidence, i.e. he’d have to post quite a bit more, and consistently on this subject, before he goes from “quite possibly a troll” to something akin to lekatt or kanicbird, who clearly do indeed believe what they say (or if they don’t, their trollery ran for so long that it’s clearly a single-minded compulsion in itself). Anyhoo, it’s conceivable to me that this is an attempted leg-pull and will continue until he gets banned or bored. ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/139 "2009-09-30T07:37:32Z")
> [@](#): > > There are countless 13 year olds out there that think they understand what it means to have sex, and many of them do, but there’s a big difference between a 13 year old girl having sex with her 13 year old boy friend who is probably equally clueless, and her having sex with someone who is sufficiently older, knows that she may not understand, but could even potentially manipulate her consent (consciously or not) when she might not otherwise give it. Right on. Not to mention that back then you thought that you were all that and knew everything…and you look back and think " What a DORK I was!!!" And yes…I think that’s another reason why pedos are attracted to kids…Kids in general are very easily manipulated. I wonder if the pedos who were themselves molested, want to reinact the abuse they suffered b/c they think it will “heal them” somehow. Oh, and I do think that he may be real and not just a troll. As I stated in the other thread, I do think that part of pedophillia is being VERY clueless about social cues. That could be related to Asperger’s Syndrome…One symptom of Asperger’s is being fixtated on one particular subject. Not saying that pedos have Asperger’'s…just saying that they could have a related thing (being emotionally stunted and clueless about social cues) ---
**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973/140 "2009-09-30T08:13:16Z")
What I find interesting is that this is the first thread (that I’m aware of) about sex and/or children and/or himself that he hasn’t posted in. I wonder why? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cesario-youre-awfully-sanctimonious-for-a-pedophile/511973.md?page=8)