Drareg
Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2016
- Messages
- 4,772
The messiah Michel Foucault of the woke brigade that is infecting our lives more so than covid19 is a paedophile, they use the word pederast, why I don’t know, the word was created by the ruling class to imply a difference between a paedophile and one who "only" has sex with teens, we know this depravity is a slippery slope to younger kids based on the hormonal profiles of paedo‘s, a teens prefrontal cortex is still growing and is generally formed to reasonable level at 18, before this their intelligence is limited, this is the case that needs to be made against paedo‘s going forward.
It’s not like we can trust the "pedarest" who claims to be solely attracted to teens because he was caught with teens, this is nothing more than a legal ploy for a lighter sentence.
Foucault was another obsessed with sex, Freud believed libido drives all, this is incorrect and a common mistake amongst the ruling class types, libido is number 2 in human drives, food and bioenergetic capacity is number one, being able to farm the land to acquire energy for the luxury of sex, the ruling class types suffer this fallacy/delusion because their resources are in place, resources are so familiar they have become invisible to them. Keep in mind in spite of an abundance of resource they still were incoherent bioenergetically speaking, they would have less stress to a certain extent if they didn’t poison themselves with alcohol, drugs and bad food.
They then proceed to entertain their sexual depravities and use said resources to get others to engage in said depravity.
Now what do we see today, the woke brigade are mainly middle class, in fact many folks quality of life today is far better than the past outside the homeless, their expectations are not been met so we get infantile rage and narcissism, the thing is with the woke middle class their resources are in abundance, inheritance is on the way so now they are focused on sex, just like Foucault it’s the depraved kind because they are incoherent bioenergetically from bad choices.
You may state the obvious and say we are sexually liberated in the west and have been for some time, so what gives? Most of the woke are verbose about sex rather than engaging in sex, many of them are not physically attractive, this isn’t a cheap shot, it’s an observable form within reality, we also know there is hormonal incoherency in society at large from SSRI use to contraception, because of this they need depravity to get aroused just like Foucault, they want depravity normalized and that means paedophilia, they were never going to come right out and say it, it’s gradual.
It’s even more interesting that this woke brigade were sent into overdrive not long after Jeffrey Epstein the child sex trafficker got arrested, it would explain why the ruling class support the woke so much, we know of course it’s multifaceted why the woke are pumped daily in the media, cover for banks bailouts, a cover for neo-colonialism, clickbait etc
Given that Foucault died of Aids and a series of biographies have not disguised his promiscuity, readers might expect some kind of self-revelation, or at least a self-justification, in this valedictory volume from beyond the grave. If so, they will be disappointed. But this book does offer insights into its elusive author, even if that was not his intention. Like the Marquis de Sade, whom he revered as the patron saint of libertines, Foucault studied the Christian theologians only to conclude from their diabolical view of human nature “that God created most men simply with a view to crowding Hell”.
It is possible that Foucault might have reverted to the question of how certain practices came to be viewed as perversions. For all the relativism, amoralism, even nihilism, that pervade his oeuvre like the odour of black leather, Foucault could not let Christian morality go.
Today, Foucault scholars and editors prefer to pass over his advocacy of pederasty in silence. It is striking that the volume of his Essential Worksentitled Ethics includes many interviews, but not one he gave in 1978. There he argued that it was “quite unacceptable” and an “abuse” to assume “that a child is incapable of explaining what happened and was incapable of giving his consent” to sex with an adult. (Note that Foucault takes it for granted that the child will be a boy.)
It is a matter of public record, however, that Foucault signed a petition to the Assemblée Nationale in 1977 calling for the decriminalisation of all “consensual” sexual relations between adults and children. Foucault was impressed by the fact that the Greeks “never admitted love between two adult men … [for them] love between two men is only valid in the form of classic pederasty”. He even told his biographer James Miller: “Besides, to die for the love of boys: What could be more beautiful?” For Foucault, pederasty was the only truly romantic form of love.
To this day, France — unlike most other European countries — has no law that treats sex between adults and minors automatically as rape. Hence it is, and has always been, possible under French law for children of 13 and over to consent to sex, which means that adults can only be charged with sexual assault, not rape. Moreover, a statute of limitations means that those who were abused as children can only bring charges until the age of 48. Paedophilia has in practice seldom been prosecuted in France. Indeed, sexual “liberation” for children was a fashionable cause among some leaders of the May 1968 protests, notably Daniel Cohn-Bendit (“Danny le Rouge”).
If Foucault were alive today, even at the age of 94 he would most likely face protests, if not prosecution. The is no sign that the public, even in France, is ready to entertain the philosopher’s special pleading on behalf of paedophilia. If anything, revulsion against the sexualisation of adolescence is stronger in France than ever before. Where children are concerned, the prophet of pederasty has completely failed to overturn Judaeo-Christian morality. Given the choice between Athens and Jerusalem, we have chosen the latter. What one might call Foucault’s pendulum has swung back against the libertines.
It’s not like we can trust the "pedarest" who claims to be solely attracted to teens because he was caught with teens, this is nothing more than a legal ploy for a lighter sentence.
Foucault was another obsessed with sex, Freud believed libido drives all, this is incorrect and a common mistake amongst the ruling class types, libido is number 2 in human drives, food and bioenergetic capacity is number one, being able to farm the land to acquire energy for the luxury of sex, the ruling class types suffer this fallacy/delusion because their resources are in place, resources are so familiar they have become invisible to them. Keep in mind in spite of an abundance of resource they still were incoherent bioenergetically speaking, they would have less stress to a certain extent if they didn’t poison themselves with alcohol, drugs and bad food.
They then proceed to entertain their sexual depravities and use said resources to get others to engage in said depravity.
Now what do we see today, the woke brigade are mainly middle class, in fact many folks quality of life today is far better than the past outside the homeless, their expectations are not been met so we get infantile rage and narcissism, the thing is with the woke middle class their resources are in abundance, inheritance is on the way so now they are focused on sex, just like Foucault it’s the depraved kind because they are incoherent bioenergetically from bad choices.
You may state the obvious and say we are sexually liberated in the west and have been for some time, so what gives? Most of the woke are verbose about sex rather than engaging in sex, many of them are not physically attractive, this isn’t a cheap shot, it’s an observable form within reality, we also know there is hormonal incoherency in society at large from SSRI use to contraception, because of this they need depravity to get aroused just like Foucault, they want depravity normalized and that means paedophilia, they were never going to come right out and say it, it’s gradual.
It’s even more interesting that this woke brigade were sent into overdrive not long after Jeffrey Epstein the child sex trafficker got arrested, it would explain why the ruling class support the woke so much, we know of course it’s multifaceted why the woke are pumped daily in the media, cover for banks bailouts, a cover for neo-colonialism, clickbait etc
Michel Foucault: the prophet of pederasty | Daniel Johnson | The Critic Magazine
Daniel Johnson says the fact that Foucault scholars now overlook his advocacy for sex with boys shows the great libertine failed to overturn Judaeo-Christian morality…
thecritic.co.uk
Given that Foucault died of Aids and a series of biographies have not disguised his promiscuity, readers might expect some kind of self-revelation, or at least a self-justification, in this valedictory volume from beyond the grave. If so, they will be disappointed. But this book does offer insights into its elusive author, even if that was not his intention. Like the Marquis de Sade, whom he revered as the patron saint of libertines, Foucault studied the Christian theologians only to conclude from their diabolical view of human nature “that God created most men simply with a view to crowding Hell”.
It is possible that Foucault might have reverted to the question of how certain practices came to be viewed as perversions. For all the relativism, amoralism, even nihilism, that pervade his oeuvre like the odour of black leather, Foucault could not let Christian morality go.
Today, Foucault scholars and editors prefer to pass over his advocacy of pederasty in silence. It is striking that the volume of his Essential Worksentitled Ethics includes many interviews, but not one he gave in 1978. There he argued that it was “quite unacceptable” and an “abuse” to assume “that a child is incapable of explaining what happened and was incapable of giving his consent” to sex with an adult. (Note that Foucault takes it for granted that the child will be a boy.)
It is a matter of public record, however, that Foucault signed a petition to the Assemblée Nationale in 1977 calling for the decriminalisation of all “consensual” sexual relations between adults and children. Foucault was impressed by the fact that the Greeks “never admitted love between two adult men … [for them] love between two men is only valid in the form of classic pederasty”. He even told his biographer James Miller: “Besides, to die for the love of boys: What could be more beautiful?” For Foucault, pederasty was the only truly romantic form of love.
To this day, France — unlike most other European countries — has no law that treats sex between adults and minors automatically as rape. Hence it is, and has always been, possible under French law for children of 13 and over to consent to sex, which means that adults can only be charged with sexual assault, not rape. Moreover, a statute of limitations means that those who were abused as children can only bring charges until the age of 48. Paedophilia has in practice seldom been prosecuted in France. Indeed, sexual “liberation” for children was a fashionable cause among some leaders of the May 1968 protests, notably Daniel Cohn-Bendit (“Danny le Rouge”).
If Foucault were alive today, even at the age of 94 he would most likely face protests, if not prosecution. The is no sign that the public, even in France, is ready to entertain the philosopher’s special pleading on behalf of paedophilia. If anything, revulsion against the sexualisation of adolescence is stronger in France than ever before. Where children are concerned, the prophet of pederasty has completely failed to overturn Judaeo-Christian morality. Given the choice between Athens and Jerusalem, we have chosen the latter. What one might call Foucault’s pendulum has swung back against the libertines.