I’m 44 year old. I’m attracted to nubile young women in their 20’s with perfect bodies, preferably with long supple legs, and shapely little behinds.
On the surface most people would say, “get a life Jack. 20 year olds are not in your wheelhouse anymore.” Other’s might say, “you’re a nothing but a dirty old man.” To which I would reply, “that may be, but I guaran-goddamned-tee you, if I ever have a chance to fuck a 20 year old, with long supple legs and a shapely little behind … I’m gonna.”
This isn’t about rational daliances with fantasy partners. This is about this guy wanting something. Wanting it bad. If he has the chance, he’s gonna do it. Don’t fucking fool yourself.
During “amnesia weekend” Hostile Fetus (or whatever his name is now) posted a half-dozen very specific “How can we assassinate George W. Bush?” threads complete with his travel schedules and very specific ideas…it wasn’t silly stuff like “Drop a giant anvil on him” or something, it was psychotic “He’ll be here on this day and we can get a rifle and…” type stuff.
Yes, mods/admins were notified and no, nothing was done.
I’m glad no one called the secret service with links to those threads because if, as we’ve been told, that even the whiff of a lawsuit would get the board shut down forever, I was surprised that it was ignored.
So…ce’st la vie and I guess in that context, it explains why they’re ok with a guy advocating toddler-rape.
The rule apparently is “As long as it’s not file-sharing, or certain naughty words, you’re good to go.”
PS–no links to the assassination threads–everything from amnesia weekend was deleted.
I have an anger management problem severe enough that I have had years of therapy for it. I have regular urges to commit acts of violence and destruction–as in, I’ll be holding a coffee cup at work, drinking it calmly, while getting graphic fantasies of shattering said cup on the head of a coworker solely because they happen to be nearby.
I haven’t hit anyone in anything other than a martial arts class since I was in junior high. I don’t lose my temper any more, even if I sometimes have bitten a hole in my lip to help maintain some grip on the reality of where I am. Because losing my shit in rage will cause my wife to leave me, even if it’s fun and easy for me.
Maybe that’s why I have sympathy for the viewpoint of “I want to do it, but I can’t without consequences I’m not willing to accept”.
Zerial, your issue isn’t whether you want to smash a coffee cup over my head, but rather do you want to get irrationally angry. I judge by your screed that you do not; that it is something that troubles you and you wish it didn’t happen and that it’s something you’ve worked on correcting. The coffee cup smashing is just the medium through which your irrational anger may manifest itself.
**Cesario **wants to fuck kids. He *wants *to do it. That’s the difference.
Pedophiles openly advocating for their viewpoint on the Internet tend to end up Something Awful-ed. That is to say the higher profile they make themselves, the more likely it is they end up outed in real life by some Internet vigilante.
Cesario is probably the highest profile poster on this board at this point in time.
This doesn’t make sense if Cesario is what he says he is. It does make sense if he’s a troll.
Except, as it’s been phrased in the places I’ve seen it, it’s most often “Where should the line of ‘old enough to make sexual decisions’ be drawn?” coming from him.
He’s expressly said, IN THIS THREAD, that he doesn’t like the idea of having nonconsensual sex and therefore the lower limit of his range is certainly forever unavailable. He’s unsure of whether the upper end of the range is or could be and thinks it’s a meritorious topic of discussion–and he’s indicated that as far as this is concerned he’s unwilling to act on his urges until/unless society legitimizes them.
And hell, it’s not like there have not been civilizations/groups in the past (or for that matter, now) that have believed children to have their full decision making capabilities (from a moral standpoint, at least) as early as 7-8 (I remember this one from Catholicism), so it’s not like he’s braving ground that’s forever to this point been inviolate.
Here’s the thing: what is bothering people is not that he’s a out pedophile. It’s that he’s stated that he feels obligated to breaking an unjust law, and if he in fact did so in the future is devious and smart enough to get away with it, if he hasn’t already. It’s that he’s actively pursuing ways around it, even though he’s also claimed to be attracted to adult women. It’s that he doesn’t think it’s wrong to do so, but that society is wrong to make him not be able to do so.
Were he reasonable, “I like this I know it’s bad, I’m not going to act on it”, instead of “I like this I know you SAY it’s bad, but you’re all wrong, I’ll do it if/when it’s legal and lalala I can’t hear you. When you claim it will damage the child mentally or physically it’s irrelevant.”
He claims not to be attracted to females between the ages of 13-18. (0-12 and adult females) I call bullshit. According to him, a child’s innocence is ‘sexy’ and ‘attractive’ (urk), except when a teen is innocent and they start to have adult sex characteristics? Didn’t he also state that secondary sex characteristics didn’t do it for him? Which is true?
Why do you think I take marital arts? So I have a legitimate outlet for what’s inside me because on some level I DO want to punch things.
Cesario has said that he’s willing to abide by society’s concept of when consent can be given, he’s admitted that if society won’t give him an outlet then he’s not going to do it.
I guess since I know in the absence of martial arts classes I’d repress my urge to hit things that society says you can’t hit, I therefore believe Cesario (no matter how much he wants to) is capable of resisting the urge to fuck things that society says you can’t fuck.
I have no evidence to believe anything other than what he puts out at face value about what he’s doing. Effectively, it’d be like me advocating that the law be changed so I can punch assholes in bars–admittedly not as heinous as having sex with pre-pubescent children, but I don’t see a functional difference in the amount of willpower it’d take to resist it.
He has outright said that he thinks society is wrong in telling him he can’t fuck kids. Do you think society is wrong for telling you you shouldn’t smash a coffee cup over my head? Do you in fact wish that laws were changed so that you could randomly go around punching people? Do you surf PsychoChat boards so you can whack off with other anger management sufferers about how cool it is to see people bleed?
I appreciate that you are trying to give him the benefit of a doubt that I am not willing to offer, but I think you’re barking down the wrong road.
He comes across as one of these pasty losers with drawer full of little girl’s underwear, a hidden cache of illegal web-site addys, and belly full of “society just doesn’t understand me” bullshit.
I couldn’t care less about his fucking internal conundrums.
What he needs is psychological help, not a user name at GirlChat ferchrissakes.
You know, I think I have finally definitely decided that he is a troll, based on the fact that when people point out that an adult male can’t have sex with an infant child without physically damaging the infant child, his response is, “Ha ha, it’s so funny that you are overestimating the size of my equipment. Gee, thanks.”
This is so ridiculously over-the-top that it has to be trollery. Not to mention the fact that he has mentioned his supposed pedophilia in almost every thread he’s participated in on the SDMB.
He’s said a lot of internally contradictory things, true, but I’m really fundamentally pro-free-speech and the whole debate smacks of “thoughtcrime” if he’s NOT actually doing any harm to children, you know?
I think at this point I’d like to hear from the man himself:
Cesario: You’ve elsewhere on these forums proposed a systemic method for determining whether or not any given person is capable of consent to sexual activity. If hypothetically your method is passed as the legal way to determine capability to consent, and further that method determines that there are NO individuals under 12 years of age who are capable of giving consent–what is your response?
Do you drop the idea of having sex with children as clearly always statutory rape and therefore wrong due to the inability to give consent?
Or do you think such a result would prima fascie indicate that there was something flawed with the process?
On edit by Jack Batty:
I can’t disagree, necessarily, but part of the problem is that from his POV (and he’s posted at least some unrefuted cites in support) the prevailing view is at least potentially objectively wrong (and I don’t even necessarily disagree, just not to nearly the extent that he does–but then again, I’m in the cohort of “could have been arrested for rape due to girlfriend being 16 when I was 19”). Hence the intent of my question above–if he’s not trolling and answers honestly, I think it’ll tell us much of we need to know about him.
That’s the kind of thing that should be taboo. If Hostile Fetus were serious, he’s committed a fairly serious crime, and the board PTB were seriously remiss in not reporting it to legal authorities. Remiss to the point of risking a nice visit from The Well-Groomed Young Men And Women With No Sense Of Humor.
When did he say that? As far as I recollect, the answer is nowhere, nor has he even come close. He’s flat out stated that he won’t act on his urges in this society because of the psychological damage that would be done to the child in question. He might think the laws are unjust, but that doesn’t mean he feels obligated to break them, for Christ’s sake. You’re inventing a danger here that does not exist, assuming you take him at his word, which we pretty much have to, given that you can’t argue speculation as fact.
He’s *admitted *that it would damage a child mentally. The fact that he adds “in this society” is pretty much irrelevant, since I don’t see society changing it’s collective mind on it anytime soon. Do you really feel there’s any possibility of that happening?
People, he’s stated that he hasn’t and won’t act on his urges as long as society is such that the children he’d be having sex with would be psychologically damaged by our collective opinion that it’s wrong. Do you ever foresee believing that it’s alright for him to have sex with children? Do you ever foresee society as a whole believing that? Yeah, me neither.
So then it comes down to, do you take him at his word? Well, what else do we have to go on? He might be lying or misrepresenting himself, it might even be probable, but there’s no way of proving it one way or the other, which just makes it useless speculation. Decline to argue with him because you think he’s lying, fine, but don’t put words in his mouth.
The no sense of humor thing is a misnomer, when the Men in Black were crawling all over NYC after 9/11 I was at Grand Central when we thought something might be going down. We got out of there and a black SUV went past packed to the gills with these guys and one of them had a shit eating grin and he waved at us. I could see him winking from behind his mirrored shades even. I’ll never forget the image.
You have to scroll pretty far down to find this because Cesario’s posts are interminable. Anyway he did say he’d feel obligated to break the laws, but wouldn’t do it anyway, so you are probably technically right, supergoose. Nonetheless you can probably see why this gives people the creeps even compared to his other posts.
This comment was discussed on page two of this thread, which shows how low the signal-to-noise ratio is on this topic.
The whole hero schtick is something you have imagined in order to make a silly point since you have no point beyond the opportunity to throw brickbats at the staff. Given that there is not unanimity of opinion as to whether cesario should be permitted to post, I am simply one poster among several who hold for the affirmative. It takes neither bravery nor cowardice to simply hold the position one maintains when neither choice results in reward or punishment.
It is something you are making up because you have no serious point to make.
You will assume whatever you choose to assume without any input from me. Looking over this thread, I see a clear opinion that cesario is loathsome and quite possibly a troll, but I see no such unanimous opinion that he needs to be silenced. You will note that several posters, including at least one who has been a victim of the behavior that cesario champions, are not in agreement with your call to silence him. Your “cowardice” charge is just silly, as there is no threat to me for taking either position. The topic is merely something that makes you uncomfortable and you would prefer that the powers that be prevent you from seeing it.