No, none. I don’t expect a response. He’d be smart not to answer it honestly.
Well, if you are referring to me, I will say outright that our sexual practices derive culturally, and if we are talking about activities that are not physically damaging to the child, then yes, they very much is no reason to believe that a child would be traumatized by gentle stimulation in a society where that was considered normal. However, there is a moral and ethical obligation to raise kids to live in the society in which they inhabit. But we as a culture are very anti-touch in general, we distrust touch and this was trained intentionally as it was in vogue in the early 20th century psychological set that one shouldn’t hug and kiss their children regularly and all that jazz. Some people think of massages entirely within a sexual context.
So yeah, I am going to say that he is saying something that is intellectually relevant, in that he is making a commentary about where the boundaries for touching another person are, where these boundaries are set is very fundamental to the ordering of a society.
What he is saying basically that if in a society where it was normal and accepted he could diddle a child and it would be no more damaging than tousling their hair. And in that, he is probably correct, as repulsive as you might believe it to be. He has shown recognition that fucking a child would be damaging to them because of the size of his penis and the size of vaginal/anal openings. When it comes to penetration a person can probably make a sound physiological argument that it is damaging physically period at a young age. But where we touch each other and how we touch each other is a part of the culture.
So while I think that the attraction to younger children is a dangerous lust, I do think he has a valid point regarding societal restrictions on what constitutes normal touch.
If understanding this simple concept regarding human behavior makes me a potential pedophile in your eyes, I can probably live with that. Whether it is a societal stricture I follow or a biologically good idea, I don’t diddle children, nor do I have a desire to. My ideal sexual age is mid-thirties which corresponds to my Mother’s age when she died. That’s when people are old enough to have a little bit of wisdom, and women in their 30s are horny all the time and know what they are doing. 
So I can tell you my pathology is more socially acceptable and common though my wife is considerably younger than that age but she’ll get there I’m in no rush.
Nevertheless I do recognize that ‘inappropriate touch’ is socially defined.
He answered my email, and now is awaiting my reply.
One last clarification: I do not (and have not) accuse Cesario of thoughtcrime. His thoughts on fucking toddlers and children appalls and disgusts me beyond measure. His delusion that he could develop a test (or that one could be developed) to test for sexual readiness in children is so absurd as to be laughable. He can (and does) think what he likes. What bothers me is discussing this as if it is a legitimate topic of conversation–if only this world would adhere to his vision, how much better it would be etc. It lends credence to a loathsome premise: that adults can use children to as tools to sexually satisfy themselves. Please, don’t try to tell me that the kid is going to get anything out of it.
Now, me, I get off on setting kids on fire. Can’t help it, it’s just the way I’m wired. So let’s all discuss that, shall we? Feel for me, in my plight of never being able to see that particular pleasure come about. We should start a support group or something…
What I don’t understand is the sympathy Cesario has engendered here. To each his own, but honestly, is anyone willing to offer up their 5 or 10 or 12 year old to Cesario, so that he can have an orgasm? Sexual pleasure is more important than a child’s welfare? Really? This has nothing to do with our society being touch averse. Society has taken great pains to make sure that kids now know that it is wrong for Mr or Mrs Sunday School Teacher to touch you in certain places–would that we did as much for Uncle Frank. Is there some hysteria around this issue? Yes, there is, and that is sad. But a shoulder squeeze to show support for a bad grade is not the same as a shoulder squeeze to convey sexual interest in a child. IMO, you’re conflating two different things (as do many people).
There have been many a GD thread along those lines, albeit with the OP wishing for his vision of some absurd political utopia and resisting any challenges. In any case, anyone who finds it an illegitimate topic of conversion is free not to converse upon it.
So start a parody thread. I figure sooner or later at least some posters will discuss the topic seriously, exploring pyromania and psychopathic compulsions.
I don’t get the impression he has engendered any such thing. Rather, the notion that he should be silenced is striking some people as more offensive.
Again, where did anyone say that sexual pleasure is more important than child welfare? How does having sympathy for him being a pedophile translate into being willing to hand over young children for him to fuck?
Also, I don’t really get why his motivation is an issue. If his idea has no merit (and I agree that his test is unpassable by the vast majority of children and probably unfeasible) then surely you should be able to come up with convincing arguments against it without having to fall back on his icky motivation.
And if you truly got off on setting fire to children, I’d be interested in hearing more of your mindset. I believe that people are capable of anything that can be imagined, and I’m interested in the psychology/mentality behind bizarre predilections. I find it important to understand what makes people tick, even (or especially) the more incomprehensible/abhorrent ones.
Finally, Mr Happy, I’d like to know if I was the person you are alluding to as well.
Quibble: THREE year old. 9 year old is too close to the pervert’s upper limit. He’d have to spend all sorts of time grooming her and coaching her for the test and by that time, she might turn 10 and he’d have to ditch the old hag and start again.
Why in the world would you?
You could easily coach a precocious 5 year old with a good memory to pass that test. And with creatures like our sleazy pervert grooming little children, I can easily see a “Hey little girl: memorize the types of STDs and their methods of transmission and I’ll give you a nice, big lollipop to suck on…for practice.” situation.
The few questions that show actual thinking/judgement are so impossibly vague as to be completely and absolutely meaningless (“2.a.) Subject must understand that actions have consequences.”. Great, by that standard 99% of all people who’ve ever been members of Congress or the Senate are now excluded. :rolleyes: How in the world could that possibly be tested?)
What our child-raping pervert has done is created a test that sounds reasonable but anyone with a couple of weeks, a decent memory and some flashcards could easily pass. Which would make it easy for him to rape toddlers with the blessing of the law.
If it’s truely, seriously our society that has made children feel traumatized by sex with adults, then one has to wonder why Cesario has not moved to nations where there ARE no ages of consent. Just curious. I’m not being insulting here. I’m genuinely asking.
Oh, and Mr. Happy, while I seriously find Cesario repulsive, and the attempts to defend his point of view unsettling at best and disturbing at worst, I do not believe anyone here is in league with him, or shares his “tastes”. I’m guessing some are merely playing advocatus diaboli.
(We did once have someone who was interested in young boys – of the age Michael Jackson preferred – but he was banned after it was found that he was contacting several of our younger teen posters)
A) I was being sarcastic. Of course I know that’s not a limb to climb out on. There’s nothing heroic about being anti-pedophilia – it’s simply thinking rationally.
B) If you think I’m going to feel bad because some wannabe kiddy-diddler gets insulted, then you’re fucking deluded.
If he can only get sexual pleasure from molesting/raping kids (he claims it is not molestation, just so you know); his pleasure is more important than the welfare of the child–no matter if said child passes his “test” or not. You do realize there is no such test, right? And that if there were, as was said, the questions would be so vague as to be meaningless? And that children, needing to trust adults and also being easily manipulated could then be coached on this “gold standard” that is meant to exhibit some type of sexual readiness? What would be the passing mark? Would it be graded on a curve? Is it what NCLB is REALLY all about? And that if they do pass it, that is then “open season” on those kids–look, the new sex toys have matriculated!. How is this not putting the pedophile’s sexual release paramount to the child’s welfare?
And if you’re willing to concede to him that such a test could be created, whose children are going to take it? Your kids? Why not your kids? Don’t have kids? How about your niece or nephew? After all, as has been said, if there is every reason to believe that your children can’t pass the test, there’s no reason to fear such a test, right? And surely, we all know that test results are both completely reliable, valid and not subject to change; no such thing as test bias.
If you don’t understand why his motive (the sexual abuse of children–that is, inserting his adult sized penis into an immature vagina or rectum or having said child place this 6 or so inches into his or her mouth until the adult orgasms) is an issue, we really can’t discuss this.
I have already (several times) come up with “convincing” arguments against the test and the sexual abuse. Read my posts and don’t conflate them with others’. Here’s one: there is no such thing as consensual sex between a CHILD and an adult. There is no level playing field; there is no possible way the dynamic can be equal, given the disparity of development, life experience and maturity.
You really area concrete operationalist. Yes, that would be me–truly, earnestly desiring to set children on fire. And afterall, I can claim moral superiority on Cesario–MY marks are left on the kid for ALL to see and know. His are hidden from public view in the kid’s psyche and spirit. I almost feel bad for him: no trophy to show off. Is that incomprehensible or abhorrent enough to satiate your appetite for all things psychopathological? For all Cesario is (IMO) a sick, sad fuck, he is not a performing dog for you. See below.
Something else I find disturbing in this thread is this voyeuristic enjoyment going on. You’re “interested” in the mentality of bizarre predilections, eh? You’re a throwback to Victorian times when people used to tour insane asylums for entertainment.
By no means am I sympathetic to Cesario’s particular issue(obviously), but I am disturbed by the fascination that runs through this thread. It’s like reading or hearing about a serial killer in the news-some people honestly enjoy hearing about that kind of thing. But this is not something that happens to “other people”. This is real (as are the serial killers and their victims). But these are kids, whom we all have a duty to foster and nurture.
This is not some hypothetical intellectual wankery. “Discussions” of this kind only help lend a veneer of respectability to a real malevolence. These are REAL kids Cesario wants to abuse. This isn’t a game. These are children named Jane or David, with band-aids on their elbows and knobby knees; kids who want to grow up and be teachers or rock stars. Kids who are real people with real feelings and real futures. Yes,** Cesario** is real person as well, but I draw the line at his arrogance re “getting away with it if he tried” and his stance of a weary prophet trying to bring the Light to an ignorant people. I have lost a great deal of respect for the mods involved in this thread. Others have been banned for less. Again, because few read for comprehension, I do not ask for Cesario to be banned. I do not ask him to stop having these thoughts or urges. I do want him to stop posting about it and stop trying to “correct”/persuade people who know abuse and molestation when they hear or read about it.
If his pleasure really was more important than children’s welfare, he’d be out there raping and molesting children regardless of the pain and harm caused to them, not trying to come up with some way to determine if they are capable of meaningful consent.
I do confess that I find the threat he poses to be of no great concern. According to him, society would need to completely change its views on adults interacting with kids sexually (he believes society causes the harm children who have sexual interacting with adults suffer and says that he wouldn’t act on anything unless that changes), and I don’t see that ever happening. And of course no such test will be ever put in place or seriously suggested to the public. But it’s an interesting idea. So in a way, this *is *all hypothetical intellectual wankery, as you term it. All the more so because none of us have any way of knowing if he (or any one else here, really) is being honest.
I understand that the subject matter makes everyone afraid of saying something that would in any way encourage him to harm children, but I really don’t think that’s going to happen just by discussing his view point. No one here has expressed approval of him having sex with children or in any way explicitly (or subtly, in my opinion) encouraged him to. If I’m understanding correctly, you feel that even engaging him at all on the subject is doing so. I can really only agree to disagree with you on that. Neither of us really knows exactly what effect we’re having on him and I doubt any of us have the experience to know how pedophiles in general react to reasonable discussion on the subject. If anyone does know and has a reputable site and it turns out that you’re right, of course I will immediately stop, as would everyone else in this thread, I bet.
Also, if I’m interpreting him correctly, he knows that adults having sex with children is molestation and rape. He adds “in this society.” I don’t know if he is correct in that, and I don’t think it really matters. The point is, he doesn’t act on his urges because he acknowledges that it would harm the child involved and would only want to have consenting sex with a child. In reality, as far as I know, that isn’t possible. Clearly you feel the same way. But I think you see have sex with children as always meaning molestation and rape, when that is not the meaning he is using. His meaning of it doesn’t exist right not and probably never will, but that doesn’t change the definition he is using.
I’m tired of going to bat for him. I find his sexual attraction disturbing as well. Given the emotions that surround all of this, I know I’m damaging my reputation by defending him, and I’m selfish enough to not want that or to be associated in any way with pedophilia. I wish I could just read threads like this and not care that someone’s being piled on and flamed out of proportion to his transgressions (in my opinion) and worse than that, illogically. I’m probably not going to be able to hold myself to it, but I’m going to try to make this my last post in this thread.
My point is, motivation doesn’t change the validity of someone’s arguments. It might make you uninclined to take him at his word, or too disturbed to care to read it, but in my book, going after someone’s motivation is akin to using insults as an argument - it signifies that you don’t have anything constructive or convincing to say. I wasn’t referring specifically to you and should have made that clear. I apologize for that. I’ve been annoyed by other people in this thread seeming to do that and just saw echoes in your post of it.
You know what’s really interesting (and I mean interesting in a kind of icky way)? The most graphic, disturbing descriptions of adults having sex with children have come out of the mouths (so to…er…“speak”) of those who are the most rabidly horrified by it. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you’re trying to make a point in doing that. If not, you might want to consider it, since I doubt it is your intention to create graphic, disturbing images of sex with children.
[QUOTE=eleanorigbyYou really area concrete operationalist. Yes, that would be me–truly, earnestly desiring to set children on fire. And afterall, I can claim moral superiority on Cesario–MY marks are left on the kid for ALL to see and know. His are hidden from public view in the kid’s psyche and spirit. I almost feel bad for him: no trophy to show off. Is that incomprehensible or abhorrent enough to satiate your appetite for all things psychopathological? For all Cesario is (IMO) a sick, sad fuck, he is not a performing dog for you. See below.
Something else I find disturbing in this thread is this voyeuristic enjoyment going on. You’re “interested” in the mentality of bizarre predilections, eh? You’re a throwback to Victorian times when people used to tour insane asylums for entertainment.
By no means am I sympathetic to Cesario’s particular issue(obviously), but I am disturbed by the fascination that runs through this thread. It’s like reading or hearing about a serial killer in the news-some people honestly enjoy hearing about that kind of thing. But this is not something that happens to “other people”. This is real (as are the serial killers and their victims). But these are kids, whom we all have a duty to foster and nurture.[/QUOTE]
That’s a fair point, regarding my voyeurism. I’m not proud of it. My appetite is not for all things psychopathology, however. I find pretty much all people interesting and try to find them all understandable, mainly because I used to find them all to be thoroughly perplexing.
I also have trouble expressing myself sometimes, mainly in coming up with words. I wish I didn’t, but I can’t help it. I imagine a lot of what I write is awkward in vocabulary or phrasing. I go with the first word that comes to mind that somewhat adequately conveys what I’m trying to express. You seized on the words “bizarre” and “predilections” (rightfully), but I honestly just didn’t have any other words to use.
And if I ever found myself “touring” a Victorian insane asylum, I’d be just as horrified and saddened as anyone else. Please don’t assume that because I feel interest in psychopathology that I am incapable of feeling anything else about it as well.
I’m aware that the children involved would be real.
This is the pit, and you are understandably very emotional on the subject, but I would really appreciate it if you could tone down the sarcasm and demonization of me. It makes it hard not to return in kind, and I don’t want to do that.
Considering that Mr Happy has a grand total of 7 posts, I’m willing to put it down to “nonny sock” instead.
Actually, the premise is that children are capable of more than just being used. Something I think is debateable.
Are you asserting here that children are incapable of feeling any physical pleasure from sexual acts?
I highly doubt it. Do you have a 5yo kid, or ever had one?
Again with the bullshit lies and mischaracterisations.
Stop there at the bit I bolded. **Cesario **has directly refuted this, indicating an attraction to adult women too.
And FTR, I’d have no problem with my daughter taking such a test.
Why does the “playing field” have to be “level” for something to be consensual? You’re asserting by implication that all adults are immediately in a coercive position over all children, something I don’t agree with.
Oh, and this?
…is just appeal to emotion writ large. I swear I could hear the violins…
Yes…simple life experiance is ONE HUGE reason why you could never have a fair sexual partnership between a child and an adult. Even teens have the danger of being taken advantage of (and research has indicated that teens are still maturing!)
FAR FAR too many oppertunties for someone to take advantage of a child…hell you always hear about parents of special needs children being worried that someone’s going to take advantage of them. Children by their very nature are developmentally delayed. You see mentally affected adults “picking out” a “boyfriend” or a “girlfriend” just like in jr high…or being shocked when their boyfriend/girlfriend kisses them on the cheek or on the lips.
Kids think of “sex” and romance the exact way that developmentally delayed adults do!
Oh, and I know I said I wasn’t going to feed the troll…but I’ve been away from the net for a couple of days. Something also struck me, and it needs to be said.
Yes, I was in love with an underaged girl a while ago. The difference is that I was attracted to her b/c she was an AMAZING person. Not b/c she was a teenager.
I loved her b/c I loved her as an amazing wonderful person!
Which brings me to my next point. Pedophiles are not in love with someone who happens to be a kid. They are 100% FIXTATED on the fact that their “crushes” are young. Their attraction isn’t based on a mutual loving realtionship with all the trimmings of an adult realtionship. The attraction is 100% superfical.
We disagree here. You see someone wanting to find the perfect set of circumstances in which he can then (supposedly-we only have his word for this) and only then “indulge” himself. I see someone trying to make respectable the despicable and using a great deal of rationalization and manipulation to do so.
How do you know he isn’t a threat? Why are his words taken at face value? His integrity is right there: he wants to abuse the trust of children and the adults who are responsible for them. IMO, the threat posed is great enough to end the discussing. I can’t get behind the hypothetical, the “what if” for this issue.
[QUOTE]
I understand that the subject matter makes everyone afraid of saying something that would in any way encourage him to harm children, but I really don’t think that’s going to happen just by discussing his view point.
[QUOTE]
As has been stated, another poster was banned here after he attempted to contact some of our younger posters. I am NOT saying Cesario is doing or planning any such thing, but there is precedent here. Also, taking the Dope out of this, he doesn’t need encouragement–all he lacks is opportunity (the whole “I could probably get away with it” remarks). His posts read to me like one who is sending up a balloon. Obviously, YMDV.
I am relieved to read that no one approves of having sex with children. But we (and I’m as culpable as the rest of you) have given him a forum. I regret that.
I truly doubt it. Discussing the merits of “hypothetically” diddling children qualifies per the mods as NOT being a jerk, so I’m sure you all will discuss this important topic at some future date. I will not.
Not quite. He states that pedophilia and molestation are not the same thing. Denotatively, he is correct. He has a well constructed and detailed fantasy about making sex with kids a Good Thing for All. The caveat “in this society” that he uses shows his arrogance and narcissism–if only the world would be like he wanted it to be. Pity him, feel for him… enable him, by either condoning what he wants or making him an object of sympathy. You may not make that connection–I do.
There is no other meaning. Hey, I like to bandy around ideas and hypotheticals a great deal, but this is nothing but allowing the airing of sick fantasies. I am not about to wade back through his posts, but from what I recall he does not see sex with kids as harming them. That he won’t even acknowledge the possibility that perhaps it might not be a good idea is one sign that he is rationalizing his own desires. (and let me be clear: I am not talking about sex with a 14 year old, nor is he. I am talking about 10 or younger–his age range is 0-10).
Fair enough. I doubt you are damaging your reputation. I cannot agree that he has been flamed out of proportion to his “transgressions”. Consider this a huge reality check for Cesario–not that he’ll listen.
This makes no sense to me. Motivation matters. Context matters. IOW, other things matter than just the words on the page or thoughts expressed. Not everything needs or benefits from expression in a public forum.
Thank you, and know as well that often my answers tend to be geared toward the general group/tenor the conversation as well.
You’re last bit there is laughable. The reason the most graphic, disturbing descriptions have been from those “anti-Cesario” folk is because we have been trying to get you all to understand that THIS is what he is talking about. Getting graphic is one way of driving the point home. What do you think Cesario is talking about? Cuddling a sleepy child? Holding hands? 
Sex with children is just that. Intercourse, oral, anal etc. Don’t whitewash it to make it easier to talk about. It’s not easy to talk about. It shouldn’t be.
Most thinking people are. I am someone who wants just once for one of those school shooting perps to NOT successfully kill himself so that we can get inside his head. This is very different, in my book, from entering into a discussion with a “trench coat Mafia” type before hand to see what is the appeal/urge. (one could argue that talking ahead of time might stave off another Columbine, but I doubt it works that way for child sex offenders, so the analogy doesn’t hold up).
Fair enough again. I do not consider Cesario a monster–he’s a sad, sick man, IMO, until he lays a hand on a child. Even then, I don’t have any easy answers. I am against the death penalty. What to do (as a society)? I dunno. But feeding his narcissism and fantasy cannot be good.
Are you? Then why the puzzlement re the graphic descriptions? How is reading about it more disturbing than the possibility that it may happen, does happen?
This cannot be just an intellectual exercise. IF it is to be so, it needs to be presented and parsed a bit differently. I understand (and agree) that societal mores and rituals imbue certain acts with either honor or shame, and could tolerate a discussion about such things. That is not this thread. This thread is about a man who says he can get away with child sexual abuse, but don’t call it that! if he wanted to–and he really, really wants to. See the difference? If not, I’m done here.
Nicely done and I have tried to rein it in.
Gee, ya think?
Exactly. And even if, and it’s a huge IF, what Cesario’s saying to us is right, wouldn’t the relationship inevitably end when said child starts puberty?