Pedophilia has been brought to the fore of public consciousness through the Jefferey Epstein scandal and now Kiwi YouTuber, Ed from the Outer Light channel asks us what proponents of Queer Theory would make of Jeffery Epstein’s abuse of children?
Much like the debate of whether transgender females (aka biological men) should compete in female sports, this is an area where intersectionality begins to eat itself.
Ed drops in a clip from a college lecture by radical enviromentalist, anarcho-primitivist “opponent of civilization”, Derrick Jensen, in which he plays “Queer Theory-Pedophilia Jeopardy” with his students, citing French philosopher Michel Foucault, who advocated the abolition of age of consent law – and which was actually was just reduced in France to 15 years of age – as well as the founder of queer theory, Gayle Rubin.
The latter, who has tenure at the high-status University of Michigan is also a heroine of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), for being the first to declare in her 1978 book, Leaping Lesbian that, “The self-interests of the feminist and the gay movements are linked to simple justice for stigmatized sexual minorities…we must not reject all sexual contact between adults and young people as inherently oppressive.”
Ed asks if such advocates of radical sexual politics would have any problem with the purported activities of a Jeffrey Epstein, Prince Andrew or even Jimmy Savile? No!
Ed then asks, “Can you support gay rights at the same time you have to believe in pedophile rights?” and he suggests that such double binds and their proponents have been artificially seeded into our mass culture and into our institutions of higher learning to purposefully create cognitive dissonance and confusion; to keep the populace off-balance, all the better to fleece and to control.
Ed makes the great point that all of this intersectional talk about the rights of a given community is based on Marxist philosophy, which seeks to remove the rights of the individual and does not care about the well-being of the infant who would suffer permanent psychological, if not physical damage as a result of the practice of their radical theories.
All of this focus on transgender rights and whether trans-women should be allowed to receive uterus transplants from female cadavers, in order to experience pregnancy and childbirth (which is, I think what Democrat presidential candidate, Julian Castro meant, when he said, “reproductive justice” during the first debate) all just serves as a tremendous distraction from the outrageous criminality within governments or spiritual development or any number of important topics.