>Archelaos the tyrant of Macedon—for that is what Plato calls him, not king—was killed by his favourite boy Krateuas, who fell in love with tyranny with the same intensity of feeling that Archelaos displayed to him as his favourite. Krateuas killed Archelaos on the assumption that he would become tyrant and enjoy great good fortune. But after three or four days in power the adolescent was in turn the victim of a plot and died at the hands of others.The most appropriate comment on this Macedonian episode would be “while preparing to hurt another man he dealt himself a blow to the liver.” They say that Archelaos had failed to honour a promise to let him marry one of his daughters; when Archelaos married the girl off to another man, Krateuas was enraged and killed him.
— Aelian, Historical Miscellany

File: aristotlelove5.png (295 KB, 668x794)

295 KB PNG

Aristotle, Politics (the most accurate account):

V 8 xi-xiv
>And many risings have also occurred because of shameful personal indignities committed by certain monarchs. One instance is the attack of Krataias on Archelaos; for he was always resentful of the association, so that even a smaller excuse became sufficient, or perhaps it was because he did not give him the hand of one of his daughters after agreeing to do so, but gave the elder to the king of Elimeia when hard pressed in a war against Sirras and Arrabaios, and the younger to his son Amyntas, thinking that thus Amyntas would be least likely to quarrel with his son by Kleopatra; but at all events Krataias’s estrangement was primarily caused by resentment because of sexual favours. And Hellanokrates of Larisa also joined in the attack for the same reason; for, despite having enjoyed the prime of his youth, Archelaos would not restore him to his home although he had promised to do so, he thought that the motive of the familiarity that had taken place had been insolence and not passionate desire. […]

>Also Dekamnichos took a leading part in the attack upon Archelaos, being the first to stir on the attackers; and the cause of his anger was that he had handed him over to Euripides the poet to flog, Euripides being angry because he had made a remark about his breath smelling.

V 9 xiii, xvii
Discussing what tyrants must do to stay in power:
>And furthermore not only must he himself be known not to outrage any of his subjects, either boy or girl, but so also must everybody about him, and also their wives must similarly show respect towards the other women, since even the insolences of women have caused the fall of many tyrannies. […]

>And again he should carefully avoid all forms of outrage, and two beyond all, violent bodily punishments and outrage of the young. […] Hence the tyrant should […] appear […] to indulge in the society of the young for reasons of passion, not because he has the power

File: alexanderaristotle.jpg (3.05 MB, 1334x2048)

3.05 MB JPG

Was Aristotle into boys? Most likely. His writings show complex views on the matter of pederasty, never taking a condemnatory tone, perhaps suggesting he had personal experience with pederastic relationships. His teacher Plato wrote extensively on the topic of pederasty. The Suda states that he had male lovers on the basis of ancient (lost) sources:
>[Aischrion] of Mitylene, an epic poet, who joined in the expedition of Alexander the son of Philip. He was an intimate of Aristotle and beloved by him, as Nikandros of Alexandria [says] in On the Students of Aristotle.
— Suda ai354

>[Palaephatus] of Abydos, an historian. [He wrote] Cypriot History, Attic History, Delian History, Arabian History. He lived under Alexander the Macedonian; and he was a boyfriend of Aristotle the philosopher, according to Philon under the letter E in his book about surprise in history, volume 1, and Theodoros of Ilion in the second [volume] of Trojan History.
— Suda pi71

>And Socrates the philosopher, who despised everything, was, for all that, subdued by the beauty of Alcibiades; as also was the venerable Aristotle by the beauty of his pupil [Theodectas] of Phaselis.
— Athenaeus: The Deipnosophists BOOK 13

Aristotle would famously become the tutor of Alexander when the latter was 13 years of age.

On Philip II:

Philip crying upon seeing the fallen Sacred Band of Thebes:
>It is said that the band remained undefeated until the Battle of Chaeronea, and that when Philip, surveying the casualties after the battle, stood at that place where the three hundred chanced to lie dead, men who had faced the Macedonian long spears and were now a jumble of bodies and armor, he was struck with admiration. And when he learned that this was the band of lovers and beloveds, he wept and exclaimed, “May utter destruction fall upon those who suppose these men did or suffered anything disgraceful!”
— Plutarch, Pelopidas

This is a fragment from a largely hostile lost work on Philip II. This passage insults him by implying he surrounds himself not with cute boys, but with men who have sex with each other. In ancient Greek culture, being accused of having sexual involvement with other men was generally viewed as an insult, whereas sexual involvement with boys was generally viewed as a compliment:
>Indeed, if there was anyone among the Greeks or among the foreigners lewd or outrageous in character, all these were gathered at Macedon and were called “companions” at the court of Philip. For Philip generally neglected those who were well behaved in their manners and who were mindful of their personal possessions, but he honored and advanced those men who spent extravagantly on their drinking and dice-games. For that very reason he not only arranged for these men to have these things but he made them “athletes” of every injustice and abomination. With what shameful or terrible deed were they not associated? From what good or serious deed were they not dissociated? Some would shave themselves and make themselves smooth, although they continued to be men. Others would mount each other although they had beards. They caroused about with two or three companions, and they would furnish the same services to those companions.

>From which fact one could not rightly take them to be companions, but rather courtesans, and one could not call them soldiers, but rather brothel-whores. For being man-slayers by nature, they were man-sluts by habit. To put it simply, so I may cease from expatiating, and above all since so many concerns are inundating me, I consider these friends and so-called companions of Philip to have been such beasts as were neither the Centaurs who inhabited Pelion, nor the Laestrygonians who settled on the plain of Leontini, nor any other such creatures.
— Theopompus, Philippica (fragment)

Philip II was also murdered by a male lover due to a quarrel, much like Archelaos:
>Risings provoked by insolence are aimed against the person; and though insolence has many varieties, each of them gives rise to anger, and when men are angry they mostly attack for the sake of revenge, not of ambition. For example […] the attack on Philip by Pausanias was because he allowed him to be insulted by Attalus and his friends […]
— Aristotle, Politics

Why is homosexuality and pedophilia so intertwined?

The account on the murder of Philip from Diodoros of Sicily, Library of History:
>Every seat in the theatre was taken when Philip appeared wearing a white cloak, and by his express orders his bodyguard held away from him and followed only at a distance, since he wanted to show publicly that he was protected by the goodwill of all the Greeks, and had no need of a guard of spearmen. Such was the pinnacle of success that he had attained, but as the praises and congratulations of all rang in his ears, suddenly without warning the plot against the king was revealed as death struck. We shall set forth the reasons for this in order that our story may be clear.

>There was a Macedonian Pausanias who came of a family from the district Orestis. He was a bodyguard of the king and was beloved of him because of his beauty. When he saw that the king was becoming enamoured of another Pausanias (one of the same name as himself), he addressed him with abusive language, accusing him of being a hermaphrodite and prompt to accept the amorous advances of any who wished. Unable to endure such an insult, the other kept silent for the time, but, after confiding to Attalos, one of his friends, what he proposed to do, he brought about his own death voluntarily and in a spectacular fashion. For a few days after this, as Philip was engaged in battle with Pleurias, king of the Illyrians, Pausanias stepped in front of him and, receiving on his body all the blows directed at the king, so met his death.

>The incident was widely discussed and Attalos, who was a member of the court circle and influential with the king, invited the first Pausanias to dinner and when he had plied him till drunk with unmixed wine, handed his unconscious body over to the muleteers to abuse in drunken licentiousness. So he presently recovered from his drunken stupor and, deeply resenting the outrage to his person, charged Attalos before the king with the outrage.

>>18028994
>The incident was widely discussed and Attalos, who was a member of the court circle and influential with the king, invited the first Pausanias to dinner and when he had plied him till drunk with unmixed wine, handed his unconscious body over to the muleteers to abuse in drunken licentiousness. So he presently recovered from his drunken stupor and, deeply resenting the outrage to his person, charged Attalos before the king with the outrage.

>Philip shared his anger at the barbarity of the act but did not wish to punish Attalos at that time because of their relationship, and because Attalos’s services were needed urgently. He was the nephew of the Cleopatra whom the king had just married as a new wife and he had been selected as a general of the advanced force being sent into Asia, for he was a man valiant in battle. For these reasons, the king tried to mollify the righteous anger of Pausanias at his treatment, giving him substantial presents and advancing him in honour among his bodyguards.

>Pausanias, nevertheless, nursed his wrath implacably, and yearned to avenge himself, not only on the one who had done him wrong, but also on the one who failed to avenge him. In this design he was encouraged especially by the sophist Hermokrates. He was his pupil, and when he asked in the course of his instruction how one might become most famous, the sophist replied that it would be by killing the one who had accomplished most, for just as long as he was remembered, so long his slayer would be remembered also. Pausanias connected this saying with his private resentment, and admitting no delay in his plans because of his grievance he determined to act under cover of the festival in the following manner. He posted horses at the gates of the city and came to the entrance of the theatre carrying a Celtic dagger under his cloak.

Women and boys look about the same, don't you guys think? Size, voice pitch, maybe even strength. Maybe its a hetero male issue, dunno.

>>18028995
>When Philip directed his attending friends to precede him into the theatre, while the guards kept their distance, he saw that the king was left alone, rushed at him, pierced him through his ribs, and stretched him out dead; then ran for the gates and the horses which he had prepared for his flight. Immediately one group of the bodyguards hurried to the body of the king while the rest poured out in pursuit of the assassin; among these last were Leonnatos and Perdikkas and Attalos. Having a good start, Pausanias would have mounted his horse before they could catch him had he not caught his boot in a vine and fallen. As he was scrambling to his feet, Perdikkas and the rest came up with him and killed him with their javelins.

>Such was the end of Philip, who had made himself the greatest of the kings in Europe in his time, and because of the extent of his kingdom had made himself a throned companion of the twelve gods.

This account of Philip's murder doesn't mention any sexual aspect:
>And so when Pausanias, who had been outrageously dealt with at the instance of Attalus and Cleopatra and could get no justice at Philip’s hands, slew Philip, most of the blame devolved upon Olympias, on the ground that she had added her exhortations to the young man’s anger and incited him to the deed; but a certain amount of accusation attached itself to Alexander also. For it is said that when Pausanias, after the outrage that he had suffered, met Alexander, and bewailed his fate, Alexander recited to him the iambic verse of the “Medeia”:

>“The giver of the bride, the bridegroom, and the bride.”

>However, he did seek out the participants in the plot and punished them, and was angry with Olympias for her savage treatment of Cleopatra during his absence.
— Plutarch, Life of Alexander

This is a biased Roman account (you can detect the seethe against both pederasty and Philip) from the Epitome of the Philippic Histories of Pompeius Trogus:
>He did not even keep his hands from kindred brother either; for he decided to drive from his throne Arrybas, king of Epirus, who was a very close blood-relation of his wife, Olympias, and then he summoned to Macedonia Arrybas’ stepson Alexander, a good-looking and virtuous young boy and the brother of his own wife, Olympias. Philip summoned him in his sister’s name and then made every effort to seduce him, holding out the promise of his stepfather’s throne and pretending to be in love with him, until he drove the boy into a homosexual liaison with him. His motive was to gain greater submissiveness from the boy, either from a guilty conscience or the prospect of the throne.

>>18029002
>So when Alexander reached the age of twenty, Philip gave him, though he was hardly more than a boy, the throne which he had taken from Arrybas, and thus was villainous in his dealings with both. For in the case of the man from whom he took the throne he failed to respect the rights of kinship; as to the other to whom he gave it, he made him a catamite first, and then a king.

>In the meantime, as the auxiliary troops from Greece were assembling, Philip celebrated the marriage of his daughter Cleopatra to the Alexander whom he had made king of Epirus. The day was remarkable for its sumptuous preparations which befitted the greatness of the two kings, the one giving away a daughter and the other taking a wife. There were also splendid games. Philip was hurrying to see these, flanked by the two Alexanders, his son and his son-in-law, without bodyguards, when Pausanias, a young Macedonian nobleman whom no one suspected, took up a position in a narrow alleyway and cut Philip down as he went by, thus spoiling with the sorrow of a funeral a day intended for merriment. In the early years of puberty Pausanias had been sexually outraged[2] by Attalus, and to that indignity had been added a further outrage: Attalus had taken him to a banquet, made and him drunk and subjected him not only to his own carnal desires but, like a prostitute, to those of his fellow-diners as well, so making the boy an object of universal ridicule amongst his peers. Outraged by this treatment, Pausanias had frequently complained to Philip, only to be put off by various excuses, not without ridicule as well, while he could at the same time see his enemy honoured with the rank of general. He then directed his rage against Philip himself, and exacted from the unfair judge the vengeance he could not exact from his enemy.

On Alexander:

Implies that Aeschines made sexual comments towards the then ten year old Alexander, which goes to show how homoerotic this culture was; no boy, not even the prince of Macedon, was left unmolested.
>Yet though these issues have been defined so clearly, Demosthenes will discover many diversionary arguments. The wickedness of his statements on the main issue might not arouse so much resentment. But the irrelevant arguments he will drag in to the detriment of the city’s system of justice deserve your anger. Philip will be there in plenty; and the name of his son Alexander will be thrown in too. For in addition to his other faults this man is a crude and insensitive individual. His offensive remarks against Philip in his speech are uncivil and inappropriate, but less serious than the wrong I am about to mention; for his abuse will be directed incontrovertibly against a man, for all that he himself is not a man. But when with the use of labored ambiguous language he drags in shameful insinuations against the boy, he makes a laughing stock of the city. In an attempt to spoil the audit I am about to undergo for my service on the embassy, he alleges that when he was giving the Council an account of Alexander the other day, how he played the lyre to us while we were drinking and recited speeches and debated with another boy, and was telling the Council all he knew about the matter, I grew angry at the jokes against the boy as if I were not one of the envoys but a relative. In fact, I have not spoken with Alexander, naturally, because of his youth. But Philip I praise right now for his auspicious statements. If his conduct towards us matches his present promises, he will make it a safe and easy task to praise him. I criticized Demosthenes in the Council chamber not out of a desire to curry favor with the boy but because I felt that if you listened to such things the city would appear to share the speaker’s lack of decency.
— Aeschines, Against Timarchus

Ancient Macedonia is such an interesting country with remarkable achievements done by great people, you would want to know maybe about their military or their society or for whatever reason they could do what they did. But out of all things you ask yourself if they were possibly homosexual, why is that? Even if they were (or not), why should I care?

Hephaestion became a page at the age of 13, which is potentially when Alexander became acquianted with him and began doing gay stuff with him (which was a tradition among Macedonian pageboys). His lack of sexual interest in women during his teenage years was likely due to his sexual involvement with Hephaestion. They were too busy doing gay stuff together for Alexander to care about females.

In the words of esteemed scholar of ancient Greece Paul Cartledge from his 2004 book Alexander the Great: The Hunt for a New Past:
>Almost certainly, at one or more stages (early adulthood, possibly, as well as adolescence) the love between them was physically expressed. Efforts to expunge all trace, or taint, of homosexuality from their relationship are in any case seriously misguided. There was no stigma attached to homoerotic relations as such in ancient Greece, and homosexual and heterosexual experiences were not felt to be either emotionally or socially incompatible.

On Alexander lacking an interest in foids in his youth (likely due to his sexual satisfaction with his teenboy friend):
>So Hieronymus, in his Epistles, quotes Theophrastus as saying that Alexander was not well-disposed to sexual love (aphrodisia). Olympias, at any rate, and Philip were aware of this, and actually caused the Thessalian courtesan Callixeina, who was a very beautiful woman, to lie with him; for they feared he might prove to be a womanish man (gynnis), and Olympias often begged him to have intercourse with Callixeina.
— Athenaeus: The Deipnosophists

On Alexander's close relationship with Hephaestion:
>Alexander laid a wreath on Achilles' tomb and Hephaestion on Patroclus', hinting that he was Alexander's eromenos, as Patroclus was of Achilles.
— Aelian, Varia Historia 12.7

>In the course of those proceedings, Hephaestion, one of his friends, died; a man who was a great favourite with Alexander, at first on account of his personal qualities in youth, and afterwards from his servility. Alexander mourned for him longer than became his dignity as a king, built a monument for him that cost twelve thousand talents, and gave orders that he should be worshipped as a god.
— Epitome of the Philippic Histories of Pompeius Trogus, Book XII

>If you wish to become beautiful and good, throw the rags on your head and come to us. However you will not be able to do it, because you are held by Hephaestion's thighs.
— Diogenes, Letter 24 to Alexander (in the Cynic epistles)

>Alexander ordered the temples of Asclepius to be burned, when his eromenos died.
— Epictetus, Discourses 2.22.17 (written by his pupil Arrian)

Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander (the same that wrote Discourses; mentions the burning of the temples of Asclepius in direct relation to Hepasetion):
>Different authors have given different accounts of Alexander’s grief on this occasion; but they agree in this, that his grief was great. As to what was done in honour of Hephaestion, they make diverse statements, just as each writer was actuated by good-will or envy towards him, or even towards Alexander himself. Of the authors who have made these reckless statements, some seem to me to have thought that whatever Alexander said or did to show his excessive grief for the man who was the dearest to him in the world, redounds to his own honour; whereas others seem to have thought that it rather tended to his disgrace, as being conduct unbecoming to any king and especially to Alexander. Some say that he lay prostrate on his companion’s body for the greater part of that day, bewailing him and refusing to depart from him, until he was forcibly carried away by his Companions. Others that he lay upon the body the whole day and night.

File: HephaistionDeath.png (549 KB, 1486x913)

549 KB PNG

>Others again say that he hanged the physician Glaucias, for having indiscreetly given the medicine; while others affirm that he, being a spectator of the games, neglected Hephaestion, who was filled with wine. That Alexander should have cut off his hair in honour of the dead man, I do not think improbable, both for other reasons and especially from a desire to imitate Achilles, whom from his boyhood he had an ambition to rival. Others also say that Alexander himself at one time drove the chariot on which the body was borne; but this statement I by no means believe. Others again affirm that he ordered the shrine of Asclepius in Ecbatana to be razed to the ground; which was an act of barbarism, and by no means in harmony with Alexander’s general behaviour, but rather in accordance with the arrogance of Xerxes in his dealings with the deity, who is said to have let fetters down into the Hellespont, in order to punish it forsooth.

More from the Anabasis of Alexander:
>In fact the death of Hephaistion had proved a great misfortune to Alexander himself, and Alexander, I believe, would have preferred to have gone first himself rather than experience it during his lifetime, just as I think Achilles would have preferred to die before Patroclus rather than to have been the avenger of his death.

Failed plot to assassinate Alexander by pageboys who were gay for each other:
>It was a custom introduced by Philip, that the sons of those Macedonians who had enjoyed high office, should, as soon as they reached the age of puberty, be selected to attend the king's court. These youths were entrusted with the general attendance on the king's person and the protection of his body while he was asleep. Whenever the king rode out, some of them received the horses from the grooms, and brought them to him, and others assisted him to mount in the Persian fashion. They were also companions of the king in the emulation of the chase.

>Among these youths was Hermolaos, son of Sopolis, who seemed to be applying his mind to the study of philosophy, and to be cultivating the society of Callisthenes for this purpose. There is current a tale about this youth to the effect that in the chase, a boar rushed at Alexander, and that Hermolaos anticipated him by casting a javelin at the beast, by which it was smitten and killed. But Alexander, having lost the opportunity of distinguishing himself by being too late in the assault, was indignant with Hermolaos, and in his wrath ordered him to receive a scourging in sight of the other pages; and also deprived him of his horse.

>This Hermolaos, being chagrined at the disgrace he had incurred, told Sostratos son of Amyntas, who was his equal in age and lover, that life would be insupportable to him unless he could take vengeance upon Alexander for the affront. He easily persuaded Sostratos to join in the enterprise, as his lover.

>They gained over to their plans Antipatros, son of Asklepiodoros, viceroy of Syria, Epimenes son of Arseas, Antikles son of Theokritos, and Philotas son of Karsis the Thracian. They therefore agreed to kill the king by attacking him in his sleep, on the night when the nocturnal watch came round to Antipatros's turn.

The plot being spoiled when one of the boys involved in the conspiracy revealed it to another boy he was gay for (all the pageboys in the Macedonian court were basically in a promiscuous polycule with each other):
>The next day, Epimenes son of Arseas, one of those who took part in the conspiracy, spoke of the undertaking to Charikles son of Menandros, who had become his lover; and Charikles told it to Eurylochos, brother of Epimenes. Eurylochos went to Alexander's tent and related the whole affair to Ptolemy son of Lagos, one of the confidential body-guards.

Rumours of Alexander being poisoned by more pageboys that were lovers:
>I am aware that many other particulars have been related by historians concerning Alexander's death, and especially that poison was sent for him by Antipatros, from the effects of which he died. It is also asserted that the poison was procured for Antipatros by Aristotle, who was now afraid of Alexander on account of Kallisthenes. It is said to have been conveyed by Kassandros, the son of Antipatros, some recording that he conveyed it in the hoof of a mule, and that his younger brother Iollas gave it to the king.

>For Iollas was the royal cup-bearer, and he happened to have received some affront from Alexander a short time before his death. Others have stated that Medios, being a lover of Iollas, took part in the deed; for he it was who induced the king to hold the revel. They say that Alexander was seized with an acute paroxysm of pain over the wine-cup, on feeling which he retired from the drinking bout.

>… These statements I have recorded rather that I may not seem to be ignorant that they have been made, than because I consider them worthy of credence or even of narration.

boys are simply based, I wish I had known this early on and made use of my twink years but alas.

Plutarch's Life of Alexander:

Refusing to purchase boy sex slaves because he is a gentleman:
>Moreover, when Philoxenos, the commander of his forces on the sea-board, wrote that there was with him a certain Theodoros, of Tarentum, who had two boys of surpassing beauty to sell, and enquired whether Alexander would buy them, Alexander was incensed, and cried out many times to his friends, asking them what shameful thing Philoxenos had ever seen in him that he should spend his time in making such disgraceful proposals. And on Philoxenos himself he heaped so much reproach in a letter, bidding him send Theodoros to perdition, merchandize and all.

>He severely rebuked Hagnon also for writing to him that he wanted to buy Krobylos, whose beauty was famous in Corinth, as a present for him. …

>And he used to say that sleep and sexual intercourse, more than any thing else, made him conscious that he was mortal, implying that both weariness and pleasure arise from one and the same natural weakness.

A failed plot to assassinate Alexander by his general Limnos, which was spoiled by his young boyfriend:
>Meanwhile, however, a Macedonian named Limnos, from Chalaistra, conspired against Alexander's life, and invited the young Nikomachos, whose lover he was, to take part with him in the undertaking.
>Nikomachos would not accept the invitation, but told his brother Kebalinos of the attempt, and he, going to Philotas, ordered him to conduct them into the presence of Alexander, on the ground that there were matters of great importance about which they must see him.

>>18029024
Thats before you were brainrotten by the internet so you werent interested in being a fucktoy for older men yet.

Concering Bagoas, a eunuch boy lover of Alexander:
>Moreover, when he came to the royal palace of Gedrosia, he once more gave his army time for rest and held high festival.

>We are told, too, that he was once viewing some contests in singing and dancing, being well heated with wine, and that his loved boy, Bagoas, won the prize for song and dance, and then, all in his festal array, passed through the theatre and took his seat by Alexander's side; at sight of which the Macedonians clapped their hands and loudly bade the king kiss the victor, until at last he threw his arms about him and kissed him tenderly.

Curtius Rufus, The Histories of Alexander the Great:

Concering Bagoas:
>There Nabarzanes, having received a safe conduct, met him [Alexander], bringing great gifts. Among these was Bagoas, a eunuch of remarkable beauty, and in the very flower of boyhood, who had been loved by Darius and was afterwards to be loved by Alexander; and it was especially because of the boy's entreaties that he was led to pardon Nabarzanes.

One of Alexander's boy lovers dying (in the same way Hadrian's lover Antinious did):
>When the king was floating down the river, Hektor, a son of Parmenion, in the fine flower of his youth and one of Alexander’s greatest favourites, desiring to overtake him, embarked upon a small craft, which was loaded with more men than it could carry.

>So the boat sank with the loss of all on board. Hector struggled for a long time with the river, and although his drenched clothing and the sandals which were tightly fastened to his feet interfered with his swimming, nevertheless made his way half-dead to the bank; but he was tired out, and as he was trying to ease his breathing, which fear and the danger had strained, since no one came to his help—for the others had made their escape to the opposite bank—he died.
>The king was filled with great grief for the loss of his friend, and when his body was recovered, buried it in a magnificent funeral.

>>18029027
>brainrotten by the internet

This only happened after I became /lit/, I stay out of tranny internet circles.

Alexander filling his palace with concubines and eunuchs:
>It was in fact at this time that Alexander gave loose rein to his passions, and changed continence and self-control, eminent virtues in every exalted fortune, to haughtiness and wantonness.

>Three hundred and sixty-five concubines, the same number that Darius had had, filled his palace, attended by herds of eunuchs, also accustomed to prostitute themselves.

More on Alexander's love of boys:
>King Alexander, too, was quite excessively keen on boys: according to Dicaearchus in On the Sacrifice at Troy, he was so taken with the eunuch Bagoas that under the eyes of the whole theater he bent over to give him a kiss, and when the audience shouted and applauded, he very willingly bent over and kissed him again. Charon of Chalcis—so says Carystius in Historical Notes —had a beautiful boy who was devoted to him. Alexander remarked on his beauty during a drinking bout hosted by Craterus. Charon told his boy to give Alexander a kiss. “No!” said the king. “That would pain you more than it would please me.” Although he was a passionate man, Alexander was also self-controlled as regards decency and propriety: when he had captured Dareius’ daughters and wife (who was quite admirably beautiful), not only did he not have sex with them, he arranged that they should not even learn that they were captives, giving the order that they should continue to be attended just as if Dareius still ruled. That was why Dareius, when he learned of this, stretched out his hands to the Sun in prayer that either he or Alexander should be king.
— The Learned Banqueters by Athenaeus

Plutarch's Life of Demetrius:
>But Demetrios, who ought to have revered Athena, if for no other reason, at least because she was his elder sister (for this was what he liked to have her called), filled the acropolis with such wanton treatment of free-born boys and native Athenian women that the place was then thought to be particularly pure when he shared his dissolute life there with Chrysis and Lamia and Demo and Antikyra, the well-known prostitutes.

>Now, to give all the particulars plainly would disgrace the fair fame of the city, but I may not pass over the modesty and virtue of Demokles. He was still an adolescent boy, and it did not escape the notice of Demetrios that he had a surname which indicated his comeliness; for he was called Demokles the Beautiful. But he yielded to none of the many who sought to win him by prayers or gifts or threats, and finally, shunning the palaistras and the gymnasium, used to go for his bath to a private bathing-room. Here Demetrios, who had watched his opportunity, came upon him when he was alone.

>And the boy, when he saw that he was quite alone and in dire straits, took off the lid of the cauldron and jumped into the boiling water, thus destroying himself, and suffering a fate that was unworthy of him, but showing a spirit that was worthy of his country and of his beauty. Not so Kleainetos the son of Kleomedon, who, in order to obtain a letter from Demetrios to the people and therewith to secure the remission of a fine of fifty talents which had been imposed upon his father, not only disgraced himself, but also got the city into trouble.

>For the people released Kleomedon from his sentence, but they passed an edict that no citizen should bring a letter from Demetrios before the assembly. However, when Demetrios heard of it and was beyond measure incensed thereat, they took fright again, and not only rescinded the decree, but actually put to death some of those who had introduced and spoken in favour of it, and drove others into exile; furthermore, they voted besides that it was the pleasure of the Athenian people that whatsoever King Demetrios should ordain in future, this should be held righteous towards the gods and just towards men.

Comparing Demetrius to Mark Antony:
>And that vice which one would think least associated with such wanton enjoyments, namely, the vice of cruelty, this enters into Demetrius’ pursuit of pleasure, since he suffered, or rather compelled, the lamentable death of the most beautiful and the most chaste of Athenians, who thus sought to escape his shameful treatment.

On how pederasty became popular in Rome after contracting it from the Macedonian kingdom:
>The first direction taken by Scipio’s ambition to lead a virtuous life, was to attain a reputation for temperance and excel in this respect all the other young men of the same age. This is a high prize indeed and difficult to gain, but it was at this time easy to pursue at Rome owing to the vicious tendencies of most of the youths. For some of them had abandoned themselves to amours with boys and others to the society of courtesans, and many to musical entertainments and banquets, and the extravagance they involve, having in the course of the war with Perseus been speedily infected by the Greek laxity in these respects. So great in fact was the incontinence that had broken out among the young men in such matters, that many paid a talent for a boy-beloved and many three hundred drachmas for a jar of caviar. Regarding this, Cato once said in a public speech that it was the surest sign of deterioration in the republic when pretty boys fetch more than fields, and jars of caviar more than plowmen. It was just at the period we are treating of that this present tendency to extravagance declared itself, first of all because they thought that now after the fall of the Macedonian kingdom their universal dominion was undisputed, and next because after the riches of Macedonia had been transported to Rome there was a great display of wealth both in public and in private. Scipio, however, setting himself to pursue the opposite course of conduct, combating all his appetites and molding his life to be in every way coherent and uniform, in about the first five years established his universal reputation for strictness and temperance.
— Polybios, The Histories

Im saving this thread for the future when my head isnt being pulled apart in ways that distract me from being able to absorb and discern all of this with the care it warrants

>>18028979
>uneducated chuds say that pederasty only became common during the decline of Greece
>cites a whole bunch of sources from the Hellenic period
>literally the decline of classical Greece

>>18029195
>The Hellenic period refers to the era of ancient Greek history from around 507 BCE, marked by the establishment of democracy in Athens, until the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE. This time is characterized by significant cultural, political, and artistic achievements, often referred to as the Golden Age of Greece.

>>18029201
Most of your sources are either about Alexander or written post-Alexander about Alexander. Pederasty receives no mention in the epics of homer beeteedubs

File: Hermes_and_Ganymede.png (714 KB, 710x1181)

714 KB PNG

>>18029195
>>18029243
Pederasty in ancient Greece was most widespread during the Classical and Hellenistic periods, during the territorial and cultural zenith of Greek civilization. The Hellenistic period is considered to have begun after the death of Alexander. Pederasty declined in popularity as Greek civilization declined. The love of boys goes hand in hand with high civilization.

The epics of Homer would have been orally composed during the Greek Dark Ages and written down during the beginning of the Archaic period. The Iliad mentions the myth of Ganymede:
>Ganymede who was comeliest of mortal men; wherefore the gods carried him off to be Zeus' cupbearer, for his beauty's sake, that he might dwell among the immortals.
— Homer, Iliad 20:233-35

Later Greeks believed that Achilles and Patroclus were a homosexual pair, whether or not Homer intended it.

>>18029307
I think the biggest issue is calling young men 'boys' and creating a huge misconception in peoples minds. Even in the picture you posted the younger man still looks older than most women that men find attractive.

>>18029325
What kind of cope is this even supposed to be?

>>18029355
The kind that is real?

Damn, this is such an epic assortment of primary sources OP. I used to think I was the greatest homohistorian on 4chan, but I have been bested. I kneel

>>18029307
Alexander is from the late-Hellenistic period and definitely marks the downswing in terms of cultural contributions, though he would achieve the greatest territorial gains for Greece. As for the rest of your GPT paraphrase, sure later authors hypothesized as to the nature of Achilles and Patroclus, the fact that both were men at arms in a military expedition means that they likely were not lovers in the original imagining of the story.

File: The Gymnasiarchic Law of (...).png (778 KB, 783x858)

778 KB PNG

>>18029452
Hellenistic law dated to between 180 and 167 BC from the Macedonian town of Beroea found inscribed on a marble stele in 1949:
>With regard to the boys, let no one of the young men approach the boys, nor let any chat with them, but if one does, let the gymnasiarch punish him and let him keep the one doing it away from them. . . . With regard to those who should not have a share in the gymnasium: let neither a slave strip down for the purpose of exercise nor a freedman nor their sons nor an apalaistros nor a male prostitute nor craftsmen nor a drunk nor a madman. And if the gymnasiarch knowingly permits any of those known to be such to be oiled, or if someone reveals this situation to him and proves it, let him pay a penalty of one thousand drachmas.

This law is argued to be similar to the law attributed to Solon preventing the seduction of paides by men in the gymnasium.

>>18029570
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenistic_period
>In classical antiquity, the Hellenistic period covers the time in Greek and Mediterranean history after Classical Greece, between the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC and the death of Cleopatra VII in 30 BC

You could have just googled that.

File: plutarch solon.jpg (346 KB, 680x1239)

346 KB JPG

>>18029592

>>18029599
Insane that Leather Aproncels actually used Solon to argue that homosexuality was criminalized in ancient Greece.

>>18029603
Has he ever admitted his errors?

>>18029605
Not that I'm aware of.

You have to realize that none of the excuses the ancients gave were in good faith and all just various ways of trying to find a semantic loophole to say "I'm not gay". Basically it goes like this: More or less every culture that has ever existed has viewed Homosexuality as disgusting at best and deserving of death at worst. But something that is also pretty much universally true about cultures is that men at a certain level of the social hierarchy/level of wealth are not subject to the law in the way the hoi polloi are. And like all groups of humans, statistically some of them will be gay. And these rich men, gay or straight, be they Athenian statesmen, Japanese Daimyo, or Victorian Gentleman, know that they can use their position to coerce an underage person of their preferred gender into sex. The straight ones don't have to worry much, they just tell that teenage maid she's fired and out on the streets if she refuses to fuck them and that's that. The gay ones had to put in a little more work of course. Since being gay wasn't really socially accepted you had to at least create a bullshit excuse about "mentorship" or "wakashudo" or some other excuse for why you were keeping a little boy in your bedroom. But they were just that, excuses. It was that a rich guy wanted to fuck a person and that person couldn't say no and he was too privileged to be punished. All the philosophical babble was just a way for society to try and pretend these people weren't flagrantly breaking the rules and no one was stopping them.

>>18029622
cope

>>18029622
>More or less every culture that has ever existed has viewed Homosexuality as disgusting at best and deserving of death at worst
But the culture being discussed in this thread had a favourable view of homosexuality.

>>18029625
And I just explained how it really didn't. Ancient Greece, like all cultures before and since, had to mentally juggle between various contradictory sets of laws, mores, and hierarchy. Constantly having to create justifications for why what they wanted or needed to do did not contradict what their professed traditions or beliefs said they should be doing instead.

>>18029631
You need to demonstrate that homosexuality was viewed as disgusting by the lower classes

>>18029603
Homosexuality, between peers, was very much grounds for socio-legal ostracization. Now should the partner have been a child, then the "between peers" part did not apply. That is not to say that the child who was raped did not suffer the same social humiliation as an adult male passive partner, rather if they were of sufficient diminutive social standing, then this denigration did not matter to the Greeks. Usually to find a family that was willing or otherwise indisposed enough to allow this to occur, you would have needed to head to the market.

>>18029633
What words did the Greeks have for homosexual?

>>18029592
Nothing about the content of my post has changed, the question is whether or not you will admit that pederasty is a practice inherited from barbarism or not.

>>18029631
>And I just explained how it really didn't.
...you just posted your retarded opinion without providing any evidence.

>>18029650
>Homosexuality, between peers, was very much grounds for socio-legal ostracization
Examples?

>Now should the partner have been a child, then the "between peers" part did not apply. That is not to say that the child who was raped did not suffer the same social humiliation as an adult male passive partner
The rape of freeborn children was not legal in ancient Greece.

>>18029656
He posted quite an insightful diagnosis of cultural, legalistic hypocrisy. It is so strange you seem to cling to the morality of a practice as abominable as pederasty.

>>18029659
>Examples?
Against Timarchus
>The rape of freeborn children was not legal in ancient Greece.
slaves are not freeborn

>>18029661
>Against Timarchus
Can you explain why you believe the speech Against Timarchus supports your position?

>>18029660
>He posted quite an insightful diagnosis of cultural, legalistic hypocrisy
He posted his own (wrong) personal opinion without offering any historical evidence whatsoever.

>>18029666
Funny that your post number ends in the triple six, it is fitting for someone like you. Timarchus was prosecuted for prostituting himself (pederasty) during his youth. Aeschines begs the family of the offended to seek retribution, and if they would not -- in some cases even if they did -- then ostracization was all the remained.

>>18029668
Why do you believe it was wrong? Because you need the practice to have been consensual and pure? What delusions you have! It was adult men raping little boys, if you had half the spine you project then this would not bother you in the slightest.

File: Pothos The archaeological(...).jpg (67 KB, 751x1000)

67 KB JPG

>>18029670
>Timarchus was prosecuted for prostituting himself (pederasty) during his youth
He was prosecuted for prostituting himself, not for pederasty. This statement is misleading. Aeschines was himself a pederast and makes it clear throughout the speech that he does not take objection to pederasty.

You haven't explained how Against Timarchus supports your assertion that homosexuality between peers was "was very much grounds for socio-legal ostracization" in ancient Greece.

>>18029671
>Why do you believe it was wrong?
Because his opinion contradicts what I know about Greek pederasty on the basis of the historical evidence I have encountered, and he provided no evidence which would make me reconsider this knowledge (he provided no evidence whatsoever).

>Because you need the practice to have been consensual and pure? What delusions you have! It was adult men raping little boys, if you had half the spine you project then this would not bother you in the slightest
1. It was typically between a man and an adolescent boy (not a little boy)
2. There is no indication in the Greek historical sources that the typical pederastic relationship was non-consensual, and the rape of boys is condemned in the sources
3. Representative surveys conducted in the modern day show that the majority of sexual relations between men and adolescent boys are consensual, being viewed as positive experiences by the boys involved (which makes me skeptical of claims that pederasty is invariably abusive/non-consenting)

It is on these grounds that I believe there is no reason to suppose that ancient Greek pederasty was non-consensual.

>>18029682
only pedophiles drawn a distinction between a 13 year old and a 10 year old

>>18029682
>It is on these grounds that I believe there is no reason to suppose that ancient Greek pederasty was non-consensual.

All sexual relations between minors and adults are non-consensual

>>18029682
>You haven't explained how Against Timarchus supports your assertion that homosexuality between peers was "was very much grounds for socio-legal ostracization" in ancient Greece.

Because Timarchus was ostracized for participating in a pederastic relationship, which is what prostituting himself means, as Aeschines never mentions an exchange of money in his case

>>18029690
>Timarchus was ostracized for participating in a pederastic relationship, which is what prostituting himself means
This is wrong and you have no basis for making this claim.

>as Aeschines never mentions an exchange of money in his case
This is also wrong; he does mention an exchange of money.

You haven't read the text you are attempting to argue about, nor have you engaged with any of the secondary literature regarding it.

>>18029701
>he does mention an exchange of money. he does not
Yes he does
>This is wrong and you have no basis for making this claim.
more cope?

>>18029703
he does not*

>>18028979
who is that swedish boy in op pic and how is he related to op post

>>18029687
Heterosexual men were fucking and marrying girls these ages openly and without shame up until a few years ago. And he probably meant something like 16, not necessarily 13.

>>18029739
>a few years ago

more than that faggot

>>18029756
What? Like 10 years ago? 20 years ago? Heterosexual men honk at little girls waiting for the bus. Its never changed its just that nowadays you dont hear about someones mother offering their teenaged daughter to a family friend and thinking its cute like it was in the 70s.
I just dont get why heterosexual men and women put themselves on a pedestal, but especially hetero men since their object of affection is closer to a child in looks than that of homosexual men.

>>18029779
You come up with your own stories to assuage yourself of guilt.

Boypill me on France.

File: 1739198724892.jpg (561 KB, 1333x2000)

561 KB JPG

>>18029801
I think its the other way around. I like men whose bodies do not resemble children, for they are healthy, well built, chiseled and unmistakenly developed.

File: 1740754550273.jpg (666 KB, 1280x1507)

666 KB JPG

>>18029813
Men are turned into boys so it matches their "mother goddess" imagery

>>18029823
yet you still feel guilt

>>18028992
They were considered more of the same until the faggots cabal in then XX pushed them as two whole different phenomenoms

>>18029813
Maybe I'll make a thread on the French boypill, I would have to do more research. The Gauls purportedly practiced pederasty, but apart from that it's mostly scandalous.

>>18029825
Ah, I see you have the "intuition" of a woman.

>>18029874
whatever cope you need it doesn't bother me, but you are more deluded than I thought if you truly imagine me as a woman

>>18029904
Feisty!

>>18029962
bluster is unconvincing

>>18029718
The ancient Greeks were White.

>>18029243
ganymedes being mentioned in the iliad

>>18030505
(he hasn't actually read the Iliad)

After the conquest of Macedon, Romans explicitly blamed Macedonian cultural imports for new sexual fashions.

>So great in fact was the incontinence that had broken out among the young men in such matters, that many paid a talent for a boy-beloved and many three hundred drachmas for a jar of caviar.
>one talent for a boy
Thats like 26 Kilograms of Silver $900,000 USD
>three hundred drachmas
$45,000 USD

Goddamn the aristos were loaded back in the day, casually dropping 900K on boipucci and 45k for caviar.

File: faggotryingreece.png (851 KB, 956x3414)

851 KB PNG

>>18031458
true

>>18031815
>>18031817
I saw your original post anon, you posted these together!

File: Charles_Bartlett_-_Captiv(...).jpg (1.12 MB, 3000x2364)

1.12 MB JPG

>>18031815
retvrn

Pederastyanon is actually a good example of what happens when you completely ignore or otherwise lack the pre-frontal cortex checks you get in day to day life. Have you ever been behind an old lady at the supermarket and thought for a brief moment, maybe I should kick this old lady down those stairs over there? You of course would never do it, it is just a momentary thought and then it leaves, sort of like your brain checking to make sure you are still at the wheel and awake. Every time this check happens, however, right behavior and right action is being enforced and it emerges indigenously to your own thoughts, independent of external factors. It is why he cannot conceive of any genuine and organic disgust people might have in response to his behavior. He has no internal moderation of his impulses and thus anyone that might have that is just a puppet of his judeo-feminist boogeyman that seems to effect everyone else but him. This gives a misplaced indignance and he reinforces that with arrogance when continually confronted; i.e he is so far gone he doesn't even realize just how far gone he is.

It is also a likely explanation for why he likes children. Children, lacking most of the neurodevelopmental markers in the key decision making centers of the brain, rely on the limbic system for most of their decisions. It is why we understand them to be whimsical, if a bit stupid. Assuming he does not have significant brain damage, he likely does have a developed pre-frontal cortex, so his decision making abilities are still far in advance of his desired partners but he is unequipped for adult-adult relationships and -- if he has attempted them -- likely found himself to feel overmatched by his partners leading to deep feelings of insecurity and inadequacy. Children, as he conceives of them, play perfectly to his idiosyncrasies and likely often mirror his poor emotional regulation and behaviors, as they are inclined to by nature.

File: 120689.jpg (39 KB, 600x600)

39 KB JPG

>>18031876

In children, therefore, he believes himself to have found perfect partners. A mirror which only reflects what he wants to see in himself, and not what he actually is. In that way it reinforces itself, likely doubly so by the fact that he doesn't often engage with them (hopefully), allowing his mind to create a perfect partner that will -- ironically -- forever be out of his reach and/or temporally bound. It is almost a tragedy, but it is a good thing that his delusions are so deep because it will isolate him socially, a sort of self imposed quarantine that will cauterize his deleterious behaviors.

>>18031880
Well you are quite an interesting entry in the "retards I met on the internet" category I'll give you that

>>18031876
I think you hit the nail on the head, a few days ago he made a thread about the moral philosophy of pedophilia and there were quite a few interesting peaks into his psyche as a result. In a more general sense he addressed the idea that someone might feel attraction or desire without it actually being what they want with such incredulity it definitely made me think he lacked the ability to internally moderate. For him his erections were basically a dousing rod to what is true and right, any denying of those impulses was simply a conjuration of feminist thought. He waffled for a bit on that before I think he realized how untenable it was, then, ironically enough, he gave an example about guys who watch tranny porn. It was quite funny that was literally the first thing that came to his mind, but I digress.

As we know a lack of sexual inhibition is a vice of habit, and I think we can probably pretty easily map how he got to where he is given that. What was especially interesting, however, was when he realized just how far removed he was from even aesthetic sensibilities. Children are generally gross and kind of dumb/annoying, on those grounds alone they are usually insufficient sexual partners forgetting any moral compunctions. He sort of insisted that he could not meaningfully distinguish between adults and children in any of the usual hang ups of childhood/adolescence but I don't even think he believed it. At the end he sort of just realized that not only were his behaviors morally out of line, but that they also reflected a maladaptive understanding of even aesthetic sensibilities. The thread exploded because sharty teens raided it but it was extremely funny while it lasted.

File: Schustertable.png (76 KB, 787x829)

76 KB PNG

>>18031968
Consistently being sexually aroused by something means you are sexually attracted to that something, whether you admit it or not. A high percentage of men are consistently found to be sexually aroused by children. Being sexually attracted to children is normal for men. This is a descriptive fact.

Does the historical and ethnographic record attest to this widespread sexual attraction towards children/adolescents by men? Absolutely.

>>18031876
Does writing this way make you feel smart?

>>18031972
By the numbers on this table alone the percentages are just that, percentages and not even pluralities, and that's not even accounting for any species of moderation.

>>18031980
It's funny that you respond with anger because, ironically enough, that post is a blueprint to overcoming the isolation and frustration you feel.

File: AristotleLove.png (430 KB, 626x829)

430 KB PNG

>>18031968
I never argued that being sexually aroused by something meant that it was morally permissible to have sex with that thing. An analogy involving rape should have made that obvious.

You seem to have difficulty following along with logical arguments. Perhaps you could learn from Aristotle's Prior Analytics, considered the founding work of formal logic, of which pic rel. is a passage from.

>>18031980
Bringing up irrelevant neuroscience trivia is one of the premier signs you are dealing with a complete and utter pseud. A true Reddit university graduate.

>>18031995
Pedophilic relations are rape, the fact that you draw a distinction is just another one of the many bits of moderation that you lack. That is immaterial though, your desires are disordered on even an aesthetic level, and if I had to guess this disordered nature to your attraction rose for compulsive and continuous consumption of highly explicit material. What likely primed you for this hypersexual self expression was a traumatic incident in childhood, I can guess what it was but I see no point as the more pressing issue is your current predicament.

File: 1755494899595419.jpg (88 KB, 1026x1279)

88 KB JPG

>the foundational work of formal logic contains logical examples using man/boy sex, written by a guy who had sex with boys, who was a student of a guy who wrote dialogues about sex with boys, who existed within a culture where everybody had sex with boys
Is this why antis HATE and refuse to use logic? They don't want to use the tool of their opponent? Or is it because had they ever bothered to use logic, they would never hold the bizarre positions they do? We may never know...

>>18031995
>Bringing up irrelevant neuroscience trivia

Still sore about dendritic pruning I see

>>18032004
*rape as in, the two parties involved in the relationship may consent to the relationship, but a third party objects to the relationship

>>18032010
That's precisely what you fail to grasp, there is no third party. Most people inherently understand why it is wrong and why it is rape, you lack any degree of internal moderation and so thus view it as some external force influencing everyone else. The truth is the system and people around you are not acting at the behest of some cabal's agenda, you are simply acting without accounting for things everyone else perceives, this is true from on an aesthetic level and an ethical one.

>>18032019
>on aesthetic level and an ethical one*

>>18032024
>on an aesthetic level and an ethical one

haha damnit

File: 1659618548786244.png (201 KB, 582x527)

201 KB PNG

>Most people inherently understand why it is wrong and why it is rape
Except for basically everyone who lived before feminism. Oh, and 2 billion modern day Moslems who also don't seem to inherently know that it's rape for some reason:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tgjnVzTpESw

File: 17585747816110.jpg (764 KB, 1756x866)

764 KB JPG

>>18030423
They were not whiter than 1/3 Slavic modern Greeks.

>>18032030
Opposition on a moral to pedophilia is not a new or novel idea, moreover its differing aesthetic sensibilities have always separated it from the mainstream. You do get historical outliers but even when the average life expectancy was 50 people generally still waited until at least puberty.

>>18032034
>opposition on a moral basis*

>>18031989
>anyone who doesn't like me is angry

>>18032052
Uhh anon, that's exactly what informs anger

File: GyLo3CHWkAA_OIL.jpg (505 KB, 3584x4096)

505 KB JPG

>>18032034
>Opposition on a moral to pedophilia is not a new or novel idea
It isn't a universal and it isn't an inherent belief.

>You do get historical outliers but even when the average life expectancy was 50 people generally still waited until at least puberty
In both Ancient and Medieval Europe (persisting through to the modern era in Eastern Europe), marriage to teenage girls was the norm, and child marriage was tolerated/common, both of which are considered morally reprehensible in our modern feminist society. There are plenty of cultures which have practiced child marriage and allowed adult-child sex. Sex with children was legal in Europe and the United States until the late 19th century.

These are just some of many examples proving that attitudes towards adult-child and adult-adolescent sex are in large part culturally relative.

>>18032059
How have you decided that my reaction is angry and not calmly contemptuous?

>>18032075
>It isn't a universal and it isn't an inherent belief.

It is not universal, but it is inherent

>marriage to teenage girls was the norm

Sure, a 23 year old ploughman marrying a 16 year old farm hand might be seen as morally repugnant by our current society, but that's not the situation you desire. Moreover the modern stand in for that 23 year old ploughman is probably not too bothered he can not mess with a highschooler, because that is not what those relationships were about. While there were no defined AoC laws until well into the modern period, it does not mean that there were no customs and expectations of those relationships, all of which almost always precluded pedophilic relations. You do have historical outliers, but the fundamental truth is kids are gross, retarded, and generally make poor companions. The fact you deny this, and also have a complete lack of inhibitions on any moral basis due to your perception of judeofeminist thought, indicates a deeper immaturity in your world view that is terminal.

>>18032093
I want you to read this post again and then feel like a retard for having hit post

>>18032103
You can't always get what you want.

>>18032093
>Be careful guys!
>The pedofag feels calmly contemptuous

what a stupid girly little faggot you are

File: meanfemalemarriagebritish.png (195 KB, 4200x4800)

195 KB PNG

>>18032100
>but it is inherent
No it isn't, this assertion has been refuted already ITT, and you have not offered any countervailing evidence.

>You do have historical outliers
Child marriage was not a historical outlier in Ancient or Medieval Europe. It was common. It has also been common historically in a number of other cultures.

>>18032107
I'm glad I impressed upon you how stupid that post made you look

File: HajnalMedievalMarriage.png (2.41 MB, 2304x5947)

2.41 MB PNG

>>18032109
More on Medieval marriage patterns. The average Medieval man would have been considered to have been committing a form of "child sexual abuse" in our modern feminist, anti-natal society.

>>18032108
I hate pedos

>>18032109
>and you have not offered any countervailing evidence.

Let me point it to you like this, the intrinsic disgust that pedophilia causes in most people is equitable (if not greater) to the disgust they might feel at seeing someone eating feces. Pair that with the fact most people want to bring children into this world and then anger enhances disgust.

>Child marriage was not a historical outlier in Ancient or Medieval Europe. It was common. It has also been common historically in a number of other cultures.

Child marriage as we define it today, but you definitely ignored the rest of that post. Sure people got married earlier before modern medicine, but women also tended to start puberty much later as well, and homosexual marriage is very much an incredibly new invention.

>>18032110
I accept your concession

>>18032116
then I am curious why that post made you so angry

>>18032125
feeling calmy contemptuous today aren't we haha

>>18032122
>the intrinsic disgust that pedophilia causes in most people is equitable (if not greater) to the disgust they might feel at seeing someone eating feces
Do you have any evidence for this claim? Why are one in four men equally aroused by children as they are by adults? >>18031972 Why has pedophilia been commonplace in a wide variety of cultures throughout history? >>18032030 >>18032075 >>18032109. This position does not hold up to basic scrutiny.

>Child marriage as we define it today
No, marriage to children was common in Ancient and Medieval Europe.

>and homosexual marriage is very much an incredibly new invention
This is totally irrelevant and I'm not even sure why you would bring it up. It seems you're arguing with a boogeyman you invented in your mind.

>>18032131
>Why are one in four men equally aroused by children as they are by adults?

One in four men might experience *some* degree of arousal, does that mean they would ever act on that? A vagina looks like a vagina no matter how old the person attached to it is, now obviously having that response to an infant or very young child would be indicative of something, but to an 11 or 12 year old? Even so I experience arousal in neither case, I share this disinterest with 75% of men, but you see most people do not use their penises as dousing rods, nor do they always listen to their base instincts, this is what makes them man and not beast.

>Why has pedophilia been commonplace in a wide variety of cultures throughout history?

A wide variety of cultures had sadistic tendencies like slavery and genocide, does that not make the concept of it still morally reprehensible?

>This position does not hold up to basic scrutiny.

It holds up to the highest scrutiny. You have dedicated a large part of your waking life to ignoring, debasing, or otherwise discarding this judgement and it still leaves you silent and grasping for straws. It is undeniable to anyone who isn't as poisoned as you are.

>>18032131
>No, marriage to children was common in Ancient and Medieval Europe.

Again, almost all cultures waited for puberty, or at the very least delayed consummation to when the bride could safely conceive. Those marriages, moreover, were not usually affairs of love but affairs of duty.

>This is totally irrelevant and I'm not even sure why you would bring it up.

It is because you are a homosexual pedophile, specifically interested in young, pre-puberty boys.

File: 1758696249945404.png (374 KB, 736x981)

374 KB PNG

>>18032137
>One in four men might experience *some* degree of arousal
One in four men is equally aroused by children as they are by adults.

>I share this disinterest with 75% of men
75% of men do exhibit a lack of interest in preteen children; the majority are aroused by preteens to some degree according to phallometry, it's just that one in four is equally aroused by them as they are by adults — this is the criteria the American Psychiatric Association uses to "diagnose" pedophilia under their medicalized framework.

>A wide variety of cultures had sadistic tendencies like slavery and genocide, does that not make the concept of it still morally reprehensible?
I never once argued that pedophilia was morally acceptable because it was practiced by other cultures. I brought up the fact that it is commonplace in a variety of cultures as a reason to be skeptical of your claim that most people are intrinsically disgusted by pedophilia in they same way they are by coprophagia. You exhibit a complete inability to grasp basic logic and aren't even addressing the arguments being made.

>It holds up to the highest scrutiny
You have not provided an iota of evidence supporting your claim that people are intrinsically disgusted by pedophilia, on par (or greater) than the disgust they feel upon viewing someone eating feces. I have provided plenty of evidence which makes this position highly unlikely.

>>18032142
>Again, almost all cultures waited for puberty
The average age of marriage when taking an overview of all cultures that have existed historically has coincided with menarche, but child marriage has been common in many cultures, including Ancient and Medieval Europe, which I have provided evidence for. You on the other hand, have provided none.

>>18032156
*75% of men do not exhibit a lack of interest in preteen children

>>18032156
>One in four men is equally aroused by children as they are by adults.

And what degree of arousal was this? Are we talking ragers? Do you know?

>75% of men do exhibit a lack of interest in preteen children; the majority are aroused by preteens to some degree according to phallometry, it's just that one in four is equally aroused by them as they are by adults

Woah! 75% is a pretty big number, and only 1 in 4 exhibit equivalent arousal to adult women. Tell me how much arousal might a nude picture of an adult woman produce in most men? Are we talking an instant bathroom break? Are most men able to watch movies with nude scenes without feeling the immediate need to go jack their shit?

>this is the criteria the American Psychiatric Association uses to "diagnose" pedophilia under their medicalized framework

I doubt this, but even if that is what they use to classify pedos, then they are pretty stupid.

>You have not provided an iota of evidence supporting your claim that people are intrinsically disgusted by pedophilia, on par (or greater) than the disgust they feel upon viewing someone eating feces.

I do not need to pilpul this out to know what is true. Pedophilia is disgusting for obvious aesthetic and ethical reasons. You have been shown studies which directly counter your narrative many times and yet you still deny reality, what would one more on the equivalent disgust responses to pedophilic relationships do? How would you even measure disgust?

>>18032156
>The average age of marriage when taking an overview of all cultures that have existed historically has coincided with menarche, but child marriage has been common in many cultures, including Ancient and Medieval Europe, which I have provided evidence for. You on the other hand, have provided none.

What were the purposes of the relationships that occurred pre-mensis, culturally speaking. Was consummation expected immediately? Was it arranged?

>>18031893
>In children, therefore, he believes himself to have found perfect partners
That's just heterosexual men, honey. Women are as tall and sound like children, and they are children spiritually so there's that.

File: Archäologisches_Museum_Th(...).jpg (520 KB, 1920x2880)

520 KB JPG

>>18032179
>I do not need to pilpul this out to know what is true. Pedophilia is disgusting for obvious aesthetic and ethical reasons.
Okay, well I've presented plenty of evidence proving that this is not a universally held belief. I have provided evidence proving that an aversion to adult-child sex is unlikely to be something intrinsic: to the contrary, it is actually the case that a large proportion of men exhibit a significant sexual interest in children, and some degree of sexual interest in children is normative.

You haven't provided any evidence whatsoever in favour of your claims: in particular, the claim that people have an intrinsic disgust towards adult-child sex on par (or greater) than the disgust towards coprophagia.

You seem more interested in disrupting this thread and insulting people than actually discussing history or the humanities. You have already detracted from the original purpose of the thread (discussing pederasty in Macedonia), and are now refusing to provide any evidence for your absurd claims.

>>18032235
>Women are as tall and sound like children

No, lmao

>and they are children spiritually so there's that

Maybe, men and women are not equal in all respects that much is certain. A woman exceeds where a man might struggle and likewise a man exceeds where a woman might struggle. Are we really going to have a discussion about dimorphism? You yourself cannot distinguish between an 11 year old and a 22 year old.

>>18032237
>Okay, well I've presented plenty of evidence proving that this is not a universally held belief.

I never argued it was universally held, just that it was inherent.

>I have provided evidence proving that an aversion to adult-child sex is unlikely to be something intrinsic: to the contrary, it is actually the case that a large proportion of men exhibit a significant sexual interest in children

25% of men exhibit equivalent arousal, does this account for a majority of men? Does the arousal mentioned mean that 25% of men would rape a child? Maybe read the post again, answer it in its entirety, and then talk about the evidence you have provided

>in particular, the claim that people have an intrinsic disgust towards adult-child sex on par (or greater) than the disgust towards coprophagia.

I know this because I am human, and that is the disgust it provokes in me, I would imagine I am not alone in this and I know that I am not alone in this. You maybe begin to see how disgust informs ethics here, but with your selective hearing I have some doubts with that.

>and some degree of sexual interest in children is normative.

It is not

>You seem more interested in disrupting this thread and insulting people than actually discussing history or the humanities

I am responding to you, you direct the discussion, if you are not pleased with where it has taken you then maybe you have some things to think about.

>>18032156
>I never once argued that pedophilia was morally acceptable because it was practiced by other cultures.

NTA but that is what literally all of your posts have implied

>>18032249
There is absolutely nothing that woman can do better than men. Even men are better at raising children than women.

And I would absolutely know about what hetero men like, because they love my short height, small hands, and childish sounding voice.

I have no idea where you even came up with that last sentence because it says more about you than me lol

>>18032882
>There is absolutely nothing that woman can do better than men.

Breastfeeding

>Even men are better at raising children than women.

Children are meant to be brought up in a household with two parents

>And I would absolutely know about what hetero men like, because they love my short height, small hands, and childish sounding voice.

So you have no idea what hetero men are like and just project the shadiest sounding traits on to them to solve for your affliction.

>I have no idea where you even came up with that last sentence because it says more about you than me lol

You insisted you were unable to distinguish between an 11 year old boy and a 22 year old woman before, I am simply reminding you of your position.

>>18033371
>So you have no idea what hetero men are like
Ive fucked quite a few. I know.
>You insisted
Are you schizophrenic? I did say that young women are almost indistinguishable to under 16 girls for hetero men because I have seen men almost break their neck to oogle teen girls with barely any hips and tits. And Ive gotten honks while waiting at bus stops when I wasnt even 12 yo.

Know yourselves.

File: femalepreds.webm (1.6 MB, 320x320)

1.6 MB WEBM

>>18033455
>Ive fucked quite a few. I know.

So you have had sex with other gay men and insist that you can understand heterosexual men from that? Interesting concept.

>I did say that young women are almost indistinguishable to under 16 girls for hetero men because I have seen men almost break their neck to oogle teen girls with barely any hips and tits. And Ive gotten honks while waiting at bus stops when I wasnt even 12 yo.

So now you are a woman? I am confused and doubt this, but your inclination towards children would not surprise me, female pedophiles are quite common and usually quite ignored.

>>18032005
>the foundational work of formal logic contains logical examples using man/boy sex

are you talking about aristotle? I haven't read him yet

>>18033473
Samefagging yourself again? After pretending to be a woman randomly for a post? top fucking kek dude you are so hilariously mental ill

>>18033478
You need medication brother.

>>18033371
>You insisted you were unable to distinguish between an 11 year old boy and a 22 year old woman before,
Thats ridiculous, boys are much cuter than hags!

>>18033482
Your disordered aesthetic sensibilities are put on display once again

I've been inspired to become a homohistorian, the amount of seething is incredible

>>18033509
Your final cope, squirted out at the end of this shit thread.

>>18028979
They were extremely boypilled. All enlightened societies acknowledge it. All societies know it. Boys are the superior human form that demands hypersex.

File: OP.gif (201 KB, 220x164)

201 KB GIF

Hey OP I found this gif, it reminded me of you

>>18033572
wtf where did you get this

>>18033588
your mom gave it to me last night after our appointment (sex)

>>18028979
You're a pedophile.

>>18033600
This guy has had the exact neurochemical imbalances that occur as a result of CSA and the neurodevelopmental signifiers absent in children explained to him in excruciating detail. He lives in a mind palace where all of this irrelevant trivia and we actually are channeling Dworkin's force ghost by explaining to him that what he is doing is wrong. Calling him a pedophile for the ten billionth time will not change his mind, enjoy his little disaster piece spin outs, they are comical after a while. Sometimes I wonder if his point here is to make all pedophiles look like emotionally stunted retards, but then he talks about how calmly contemptuous he feels and you start to realize that he really is that damaged.

File: troonjak switch.png (1.18 MB, 1633x2030)

1.18 MB PNG

>boypilled

>>18033765
imagine having this saved

File: 1732085805834652.png (203 KB, 850x1000)

203 KB PNG

>>18033763
>This guy has had the exact neurochemical imbalances that occur as a result of CSA
You posted a review of a bunch of methodologically flawed studies authored by Indians paired with a strictly theoretical discussion on neurochemical trauma pathways that was authored by a bunch of women.

>He lives in a mind palace where all of this irrelevant trivia
It is trivia which has no relation to your claims regarding adult-child sex. It's irrelevant trivia.

It also seems you've been insinuating that various other posters are actually me for the last couple of hours, and are referring to posts made by other posters as though I made them. It seems you are quite obsessed. It would be a fair assessment to say that I am living in your mind rent free.

>>18028992
Liking pretty boys is more natural than being an androphile, and I am 100% genuine.

>>18033845
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.771511/full

This is the study you claim has methodological flaws?

>>18033877
This isn't a study, it's a "narrative minireview", and the studies reviewed all suffer from the flaws typical of the psychological literature on "CSA", but instead of measuring psychological maladjustment, they measure some biomarker instead.

>we measured the cortisol levels of a bunch of self identified rape victims at the "sexual abuse clinic" and it differed compared to controls so therefore adult-child sex caused it
The fact that this is the among the best evidence in favour of the theory that adult-child sex causes harm, after decades of "research" really goes to show how weak the position is.

>>18033955
>This isn't a study, it's a "narrative minireview", and the studies reviewed all suffer from the flaws typical of the psychological literature on "CSA",

It was a meta-analytic review, the methodology section of the paper expounds upon why it is termed a narrative mini review but structurally it is identical. It was also not authored by Indians, nor do your methodological critiques hold water given your unfamiliarity with what constitutes actual scientific study.

>The fact that this is the among the best evidence in favour of the theory that adult-child sex causes harm, after decades of "research" really goes to show how weak the position is.

They did far more than analyze cortisol levels of rape victims, which by the way includes all cases of CSA, as CSA can never be classified as anything other than rape. They term it here:

>As with other forms of abuse, CSA is characterized by the complex manipulation and coercion of the perpetrator and the unbalanced and power-based relationship that is established by leveraging and exploiting vulnerability.

>Childhood sexual abuse includes sexually connotated physical contact or non-contact activities. The former includes intercourse, attempted intercourse, or oral-genital contact with the penis, fingers, or any object; masturbation; and fondling the genitals or other erogenous areas through the clothing or directly. The latter entails forcing a child to participate in adult sexual pleasure (such as sexual harassment and prostitution) or exposing a child to adult sexual activities, such as pornography, voyeurism, and exhibitionism

It is a bulletproof study, which is precisely why it makes you so angry.

File: results1.jpg (261 KB, 2118x1111)

261 KB JPG

>>18033978
Here's just one part of the results they found and all the resultant neurobiological markers that indicated stress in CSA victims. It's quite in depth, in particular the observations of telomere length and oxidative stress, speaking about epigenetic consequences is probably a bit above your head considering you think they were measuring plasma cortisol levels directly and not inferring them from other bio markers markers.

It's ok to be retarded and have no idea what you are talking about, continuing to do so actually strengthens my position.

File: c997d7eeea5850b4aa30691b5(...).jpg (1.09 MB, 1510x2048)

1.09 MB JPG

>>18034027
>It was also not authored by Indians
I never claimed it was, I claimed the studies reviewed were authored by Indians (many of them are), and the review itself was authored by women. Learn to read.

>given your unfamiliarity with what constitutes actual scientific study.
It isn't a scientific study. You don't understand what constitutes a scientific study. They collated a bunch of studies together, and offered a verbal description of the results with no mathematical analysis whatsoever. If this is what constitutes a scientific study, then we are conducting a study in this very thread.

>as CSA can never be classified as anything other than rape
It's an empirical fact that consenting sexual relationships between adults and children produce differing outcomes to non-consenting sexual relations between adults and children, so whether or not you want to define it as rape is largely irrelevant when it comes to empirical studies.

>>18034041
>Here's just one part of the results they found
*one table of studies they collated; they didn't find any results because they conducted no original research.

>considering you think they were measuring plasma cortisol levels directly and not inferring them from other bio markers markers
So they measured cortisol levels (through a proxy). Nice failed attempt at trying to one-up me with irrelevant trivia.

You aren't anywhere near as intelligent as you think you are.

>>18034062
>I never claimed it was, I claimed the studies reviewed were authored by Indians (many of them are), and the review itself was authored by women. Learn to read.

Your critique of female authorship means little because despite them being women they still are far more familiar than you are with the subject matter.

>They collated a bunch of studies together

That's how meta analyses work, this does not diminish the veracity of their findings and it in fact enhances it.

>no mathematical analysis whatsoever

Hypothesis testing is necessary for them to have conducted this research and is included in all their component papers.

>It's an empirical fact that ...

The medical and scientific field do not have a word for "consensual" relations between a minor and an adult. By definition a minor is incapable of consent, the definition of CSA the paper gave above is very clear about this, you should try reading it again.

>*one table of studies they collated; they didn't find any results because they conducted no original research.

They reviewed research in a meta-analytic format ... we have been over this.

>Nice failed attempt at trying to one-up me with irrelevant trivia.

It is not irrelevant trivia, you mentioned cortisol levels (only one component of the review) and you didn't even bother to read what they were actually testing before dismissing it out of hand.

>You aren't anywhere near as intelligent as you think you are.

You are right, I do not believe myself to be very intelligent, I just actually read things before I post them and familiarize myself with their contents.

>>18034062
I do find it especially hilarious that anyone who actually reads evidence before they post it is just brining up "irrelevant trivia". You've embarrassed yourself multiple times by linking sources that directly contradict your narrative all because you got lazy and refused to read what you posted before ripping it off newgon. This is like the fourth time in recent memory alone that you have stumbled into making such an amateurish mistake and one would really think that you would learn from your mistakes rather than stubbornly refusing their existence.

>>18034260
It's moments like these that really make me think his purpose here is to portray himself, and more broadly pedophiles, as childish retards completely incapable of any higher order discussion or critical thought. The edge of insecurity too in the

>You aren't anywhere near as intelligent as you think you are.

means that he literally thinks you are trying too hard to be "smart" when you actually engage with the material

File: newgonmethodologicalflaws.png (2.62 MB, 2337x5511)

2.62 MB PNG

>>18034253
>That's how meta analyses work
A meta-analysis is not just collating a bunch of studies together. Under this definition, pic rel. qualifies as a meta-analysis. The review you posted explicitly refers to itself as a "narrative minireview", nowhere do the authors claim it is a meta-analysis. Just as with your hilariously incorrect claims on history, this could have been avoided if you had just used Google and read the first thing that came up:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis

>Hypothesis testing is necessary for them to have conducted this research and is included in all their component papers.
They did not conduct any original mathematical analysis on any of the studies collected. The fact that the studies they reviewed contained mathematical analysis is completely irrelevant; you are a complete idiot for even bringing this up. This is more irrelevant trivia.

>The medical and scientific field do not have a word for "consensual" relations between a minor and an adult.
Irrelevant for reasons already explained.

>It is not irrelevant trivia
Yes it is.

>I just actually read things before I post them and familiarize myself with their contents
You haven't even read the excerpt of the review you posted, otherwise you wouldn't have refereed to it as a study.

>>18034260
>I do find it especially hilarious that anyone who actually reads evidence before they post it is just brining up "irrelevant trivia".
Bringing up a factoid about measuring cortisol when it doesn't pertain to the discussion at hand is irrelevant trivia, actually.

File: fec8e5840b29a60a3c0df9cf5(...).jpg (16 KB, 399x399)

16 KB JPG

>a meta-analysis is just when you collect a bunch of studies together and present their results
We're reaching levels of retardation hitherto unknown

>>18034360
>A meta-analysis is not just collating a bunch of studies together. Under this definition, pic rel. qualifies as a meta-analysis. The review you posted explicitly refers to itself as a "narrative minireview", nowhere do the authors claim it is a meta-analysis. Just as with your hilariously incorrect claims on history, this could have been avoided if you had just used Google and read the first thing that came up:

They are structured very similar, what this one lacks in indigenous granularity it compensates for in reviewing the entire body of medicine concerned with the neurobiological consequences of CSA. It is a meta-analytic review, you can read their methodology if you do not believe me. Again this is an exhaustive article that neither merits categorical dismissal nor is dismissed by anyone but yourself, an amateur pedophile attempting to argue about biology he does not understand.

>They did not conduct any original mathematical analysis on any of the studies collected.

They conducted hypothesis tests and re-examined the results of component papers in the graphics I posted (pic rel)

>Irrelevant for reasons already explained.

Except it is highly relevant, the outright dismissal of this imagined clause in CSA by both clinicians and researchers, paired with the very topic of this review, means that your fabled ideal of consensual sex between adults and minors is intellectually unfeasible in light of current research.

>Yes it is.

Is it as relevant as when you didn't read the next section of the paper that explained how dendritic pruning informed neurodevelopment? Maybe not, but it is still highly important, especially because you claimed that cortisol levels were the only piece of evidence this paper meaningfully discussed here>>18033978

>You haven't even read ... otherwise you wouldn't have refereed to it as a study.

Study, review, article ... the terms are not identical but as short hand reference it is not some grievous mistake

>>18034360
>Bringing up a factoid about measuring cortisol when it doesn't pertain to the discussion at hand is irrelevant trivia, actually.

Again it is highly relevant as you ignored the entire rest of the paper and referred to what you were dismissing incorrectly. This sort of intellectual dishonesty paired with a genuine ignorance of the biological phenomena you tersely cast aside does not lend itself to an observant or informed party. You seem to cast aside the medical realities of this issue just as fast you cast aside moral compunctions, or aesthetic confusion. It is all immaterial to you, yet even acknowledging that you do not care about these things is similarly unacceptable, it's as if you are waiting for some act of God that delivers you from the dissonance inherent to your stance.

File: Palazzo_Tosio_nudo_di_rag(...).jpg (1.03 MB, 1200x1601)

1.03 MB JPG

>>18034253
>>18034260
>>18034287
Let's do a quick Google search to found out what a scientific review is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Review_article

Interesting, the page says the following to differentiate a review from a meta-analysis:
>A meta-study summarizes a large number of already published experimental or epidemiological studies and provides statistical analysis of their result.

Did the review posted perform a statistical analysis of the studies collected? No. Do the authors refer to their review as a meta-analysis? No.

Once you witness how confidently and vociferously this anon will defend a position which is easily verifiably false, you can gain an appreciation for how truly retarded he is.

File: woah.jpg (951 KB, 1221x1980)

951 KB JPG

more evidence from the review ...

>>18034382
A component part of everyone one of the papers they used included a statistical analysis, this usually involves a hypothesis test of some sort, which the review then re-examined. These papers and reviews are not unscientific in nature if that is what you are implying.

>>18034382
I realize it might be upsetting, finding yourself at odds with nearly every authoritative body on this topic. I know you perhaps feel victimized and even indignant, but you surely must know you have no one to blame but yourself. The best way for you to move on from this sorry chapter in your life is to acknowledge the reality which surrounds you and work to rectify yourself with it. Denying it to such an extent that it makes you look foolish will only serve to dig a deeper hole for yourself and eventually push you past the bounds of sanity and recovery completely.

>>18034382
Think of it like this. Either the medical field, society, and the very epistemology of attraction is unified in sole opposition to you in a large overarching conspiracy requiring almost inhuman effort, or you simply never got over that baby sitter touching you as a little boy. Given your lack of achievement in life and the other "quirks" to your psychology that have become apparent over the course of this thread, perhaps the latter case is more likely. I don't know, I think you will continue irreverently denying every piece of evidence and argument offered to you, with each denial enhancing your delusion, until one day it becomes untenable and you must admit what you refuse to now. The longer you cling to delusion the harder it becomes to separate yourself from it and you will, in all likelihood, literally die on this hill. Imagine if instead of being miserable and alone for the rest of your life, masturbating to pictures of animated children in your hikineet dungeon, you actually talked to someone about how it made you feel to be violated as a child.

The person you will become after doing this is so much infinitely better than the ball of insecurity and perversion that you are now. Or don't and stick around as someone I can bully guilt free, the choice of yours.

>>18034405
>the choice is yours*

File: 1666801437743546.jpg (473 KB, 1920x2560)

473 KB JPG

>>18034393
>finding yourself at odds with nearly every authoritative body on this topic
No study ever published has established a link between consenting sexual relations between men and boys and psychological harm. The garbage pseudoscientific review you posted (and didn't read) certainly doesn't, for reasons already explained.

Is it true the majority of psychologists believe that consenting sexual relations between men and boys are causative of harm? Presumably (although there does exist a lot of dissent). Is it nonetheless true that consenting sexual relations between men and boys aren't causative of harm? Yes: this is what the evidence supports. This discrepancy in empirical reality and mainstream opinion is due to sociopolitical bias, as is also the case with research on racial differences.

>>18034405
>Either the medical field, society, and the very epistemology of attraction is unified in sole opposition to you in a large overarching conspiracy requiring almost inhuman effort
It was the opinion of the majority of doctors, and most people in the general public, that homosexuality can be transmitted like a disease just a few decades ago. This belief is now considered pseudoscientific and is now only held by a minority of the general public.

Did the widespread belief in homosexual seduction theory require a large overarching conspiracy requiring almost inhuman effort to be the case? No. Is it necessary that a large overarching conspiracy theory requiring almost inhuman effort exists preventing the truth regarding age discrepant sexual relations to proliferate? No.

>>18034412
>No study ever published has established a link between consenting sexual relations between men and boys and psychological harm

Studies which establish direct causal relationships, especially in the field of psychology, are very very difficult. They do not really exist in large part because they are informed by fields like neurobiology, neurochemistry, developmental biology, as well as many, many others. Funnily enough establishing the neurobiological pathways through which stress is impacted upon victims of CSA is actually the highest possible bar of evidence if you are looking for potential causal links.

Let me give an example, to this date, almost no RCTs meeting some people's parameters for a casual relationship have been established between smoking and lung cancer. And determining cause in that situation is, at the very least, far more straight forward than it is in psychology, a comparatively younger field and one whose markers are much more difficult to measure. You have set an impossibly high bar for research knowing full well it can not be met while simultaneously dismissing every study that is working to establish that causal link out of hand. If you knew almost anything about the actual study of CSA and psychology you would understand just how important that paper I linked above is, and what it means for your thesis.

>Is it true the majority of psychologists believe that consenting sexual relations between men and boys are causative of harm? Presumably

And why do you think they believe this, do you think it is because they are less informed than you? That they do not understand these things like you would? You realize that you dismiss them out of hand on the basis of bias rather than a genuine interest in what is true.

>>18034412
>It was the opinion of the majority of doctors, and most people in the general public, that homosexuality can be transmitted like a disease just a few decades ago.

Apples to oranges here, the language surrounding CSA in the literature is not that of an infectious disease. The damage being caused is identified in the most specific possible terms. It is damage to chromatin or methylation/oxidative stress being considered here, there is no miasma surrounding this.

>>18029009
This is a history and humanities board. We're discussing an ancient society's culture. Don't get upset that we're shining light on its embarrassing aspects.

>>18034426
>Studies which establish direct causal relationships
No study ever published has established an association between consenting man/boy sexual relations and harm. The best studies on this issue which have been published show that the majority of the association between "CSA" and maladjustment is not causal, and better explained by confounding factors. Consenting sexual relations aren't harmful, and most children that experience "CSA" do not suffer any type of long term negative consequences.

>If you knew almost anything about the actual study of CSA and psychology you would understand just how important that paper I linked above is
You posted a review of studies that measure biomarkers among non-representative groups of individuals, almost all of whom self identify as victims of rape/abuse — this is totally irrelevant to establishing the presence of harm among the general population, as well as people who had consenting sexual relations with adults as minors.

>>18034427
>Apples to oranges here
No it isn't. A widely believed theory, both among the scientific establishment and the general public turned out to be false, and this didn't require a large conspiracy to be the case. The specifics of the theory are irrelevant, although, researchers probably would have told you about the neuroendocrinological basis of homosexual seduction theory, just as people now claim a neuroendocrinological basis for child sexual abuse theory.

Also, the scientific establishment and the general public did not believe that sexual activities between adults and children were a significant cause of psychological harm before the 1980s; child sexual abuse theory is a relatively recent theory which emerged due to second wave feminism.

>>18034456
>The best studies on this issue which have been published show that the majority of the association between "CSA" and maladjustment is not causal, and better explained by confounding factors.

But they do not, the "best" studies on this issue are the granular explorations of pathways by which CSA causes harm, that is if your goal is to understand how/why CSA is so positively associated with negative consequences. Obliquely mentioning Rind for the 7 billionth time does not make his claims as to the confounding supposedly inherent to the clinical understanding of CSA any more compelling. Mind you that you are pointing to him in the face of a field that now has literature on the causal pathways and biological signatures of harm, which at the time of 98 study, were still an unknown quantity. Again it is really not good to talk about these things if you understand so little, Rind and his work is not the pillar you imagine it as.

>You posted a review of studies that measure biomarkers among non-representative groups of individuals

Which is not the bombshell you think it is

>almost all of whom self identify as victims of rape/abuse

No, there is a clear definition given as to what meets the criteria for CSA in the review I mentioned it here >>18034027

> this is totally irrelevant to establishing the presence of harm among the general population

It is actually highly relevant because the presence of these biological markers means that CSA and its negative consequences can be diagnosed from them.

File: MichaelBaileyOnRind.png (247 KB, 590x911)

247 KB PNG

Researcher Bruce Rind published an excellent article a few years ago which explores the issue of bias in relation to research on adult-minor sex. It's a long article, but it comprehensively explains the research on the issue, and why/how the opinions of so many professionals diverges so far from the empirical truth regarding adult-minor sex.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-29148-7_30
>This chapter examines moral-political bias in psychological knowledge about child sexual abuse (CSA). Before the 1980s, most professionals saw CSA as immoral but generally not harmful, absent aggravating circumstances. By the early 1980s, professional beliefs radically shifted, seeing CSA as intrinsically traumatic, often causing severe maladjustment. This shift, however, came from advocacy and politics, not systematic empiricism, and soon occasioned moral panic (e.g., daycare satanic-ritual abuse, recovered memories). The moral panic, in turn, amplified the bias in scientific understanding of CSA. Researchers began interrogating various claims, such as, were memories of CSA true or implanted. With several colleagues, I interrogated core claims concerning trauma and harm, finding them to be highly overstated. Our research was politically attacked. Subsequently, I researched the nature of pederasty (a later major target of the moral panic) and was attacked. In this chapter, I detail moral panic bias, my research, the political attacks, and my responses.

The article is too long to post here, but it was published in the book Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology which is available on libgen. It is well worth reading for anyone interested in the subject. The respected researcher Michael Bailey, known for pissing off trannies, also has an article published in the same book, where he endorses the findings of Rind's studies.

>>18034477
>the "best" studies on this issue are the granular explorations of pathways by which CSA causes harm
Which still suffer from the myriad of methodological flaws, elaborated in this review: >>18034360

The best studies conducted on this issue are the ones published by the researcher Bruce Rind.

>No, there is a clear definition given as to what meets the criteria for CSA in the review
Which in no way negates the obvious issue of sampling bias, and the fact that the majority of the subjects in these studies self-identify as victims of rape/abuse.

>>18034456
>The specifics of the theory are irrelevant, although, researchers probably would have told you about the neuroendocrinological basis of homosexual seduction theory

Yes it followed that if one could be infected with homosexuality than in some way messing with their hormones would bring them back from the affliction. We all know about the testosterone prescriptions and hysterectomies, the differences in this case is that this is examining victims and it is examining in particular the biological markers of harm caused by CSA. Again no theory of infection follows from this, it is looking directly at which stressors exist in those that have been victims of CSA, no inductive reasoning to identify treatments, merely looking at the somatic stress. Again apples to oranges.

>Also, the scientific establishment and the general public did not believe that sexual activities between adults and children were a significant cause of psychological harm before the 1980s; child sexual abuse theory is a relatively recent theory which emerged due to second wave feminism.

This is very blatantly polemical and false, feminism has never been the sole cause for a "reimagining" of the rights of children, there were many different nexuses for this and they go back further than the 80s. In the scientific field there was not much study but that is because science as a field was nascent for most the 20th century, especially the field of psychology and especially in the field of child psychology.

>>18034483
>Which still suffer from the myriad of methodological flaws, elaborated in this review

A newgon page is not a review and Rind is not an esteemed researcher nor are his conclusions in line with the most up to date research in the field, making his postulates not only too broad but out of date.

>Which in no way negates the obvious issue of sampling bias

They are not making errors in sampling bias, you only believe that because you have little to no understanding of how this study occurs and are misled by polemical nexuses such as newgon into their (deliberately flawed) understanding of the field.

>>18034484
>Again apples to oranges.
No it isn't. The specifics of the theory are irrelevant to the analogy.

>This is very blatantly polemical and false
No, it's true. The majority of both researchers and the general public did not believe that sexual relations between adults and children were a cause of significant harm; whether or not they believed it was moral or acceptable is irrelevant.

>>18034490
>A newgon page is not a review
You are once again ignoring all contrary evidence to your position.

>They are not making errors in sampling bias
Can you explain how they aren't?

>>18034491
>No it isn't. The specifics of the theory are irrelevant to the analogy.

They are highly relevant because they demonstrate that the analogy is making a false equivalency ...

>No, it's true. The majority of both researchers and the general public did not believe that sexual relations between adults and children were a cause of significant harm; whether or not they believed it was moral or acceptable is irrelevant

You ignored the entire rest of that section for a reason.

>You are once again ignoring all contrary evidence to your position.

I post actual evidence from respectable and legitimate publication, newgon is a pedophilewiki, you probably wouldn't take evidence I posted seriously if it came from a fandom.wiki right? Yeah.

>Can you explain how they aren't?

There studies are published and peer-reviewed to ensure that these exact things are not occurring. Especially a mistake as basic as sampling bias would simply be highly unlikely, especially considering the volume of published, peer-reviewed research on this exact topic.

>>18034495
>They are highly relevant because they demonstrate that the analogy is making a false equivalency
A theory once held to be true, which was widely defended as true by both scientists and the general public turned out to be false. This is not a false equivalency and the specifics of the these scientific theories are irrelevant (and the differentiation you've attempted to draw between the two theories is false).

>I post actual evidence from respectable and legitimate publication
1. Appeal to authority
2. The Newgon review is of studies published in legitimate scientific journals

>There studies are published and peer-reviewed to ensure that these exact things are not occurring
Oh so your explanation is "just trust me bro". You aren't actually going to explain how they aren't making errors in sampling bias. Got it.

>Especially a mistake as basic as sampling bias
Yes, mistakes of sampling bias have never been published in a journal, ever. Scientific studies on non-representative populations have never been published in a journal, ever.

>>18034498
>A theory once held to be true, which was widely defended as true by both scientists and the general public turned out to be false. This is not a false equivalency and the specifics of the these scientific theories are irrelevant (and the differentiation you've attempted to draw between the two theories is false).

One is a theory, the other is an observation of somatic stress in people who have been victims of CSA

>Appeal to Authority

They are reliable unless you entirely disregard empirical epistemology, I am not pointing to the law givers, I am pointing to how we create knowledge on this exact topic. If you have issues with empirical observation, perhaps this is a different discussion.

>The Newgon review is of studies published in legitimate scientific journals

It is a pedophile wiki with a deliberate lens as to the articles it choses to include on the basis of a poor understanding of the scientific field it purportedly hosts. Indians have produced better data than anything hosted on newgon.

>Oh so your explanation is "just trust me bro". You aren't actually going to explain how they aren't making errors in sampling bias. Got it.

what exactly do you think "peer-reviewed" and "publication" means?

>Yes, mistakes of sampling bias have never been published in a journal, ever. Scientific studies on non-representative populations have never been published in a journal, ever.

Mistakes happen of course, you are however alleging that several entire fields all make the same basic sampling mistake in every study conducted across decades of research because of evil straight people. Your position is one of delusion.

File: 1758837897807633.jpg (260 KB, 1000x1000)

260 KB JPG

>>18034508
>One is a theory, the other is an observation of somatic stress in people who have been victims of CSA
The analogy involved homosexual seduction theory and child sexual abuse theory, not an observation.

>what exactly do you think "peer-reviewed" and "publication" means?
Here is a peer reviewed study published in the American Psychological Association:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9670820/

>It is a pedophile wiki with a deliberate lens as to the articles it choses to include on the basis of a poor understanding of the scientific field it purportedly hosts
Obviously you're too far gone and are unwilling to engage with any evidence whatsoever (you don't even bother to read the slop you post), but anyone reading the thread can read the evidence presented there and make a determination for themselves. At this point you've just devolved into appeals to authority because you are incapable of defending your own position.

>you are however alleging that several entire fields all make the same basic sampling mistake in every study conducted across decades of research because of evil straight people
Studies conducted using clinical and legal samples of subjects who have experienced "CSA" don't generalize to the population: if anyone claims they do, they are making a mistake.

>>18034525
>The analogy involved homosexual seduction theory and child sexual abuse theory, not an observation.

CSA in not theoretical, it is a term for relations between minors and adults, this might make you upset but you can't call it a theory when that is not what it is.

>Here is a peer reviewed study

The Rind study was critiqued for many valid reasons and does not mean what you think it means, moreover is is nearly 30 years old and has lost most of its applications, in terms of your advocacy, in the face of the research I linked above.

>Obviously you're too far gone and are unwilling to engage with any evidence whatsoever

You can produce no evidence but old Rind studies and screenshots of Newgon, you simply have poor quality or otherwise outdated sources that do not lend any credibility to your claims or stand up to scrutiny.

>but anyone reading the thread can read the evidence presented there and make a determination for themselves.

I don't think you'll like their conclusions

>Studies conducted using clinical and legal samples of subjects who have experienced "CSA" don't generalize to the population:

A claim with limited scope and not at all in favor of reclassifying CSA, which also is entirely unrelated to the topic at hand. If you point was that clinical and legal samples do not generalize then you should have said that. Of course then you get into the weeds where you learn clinical and legal samples are not where a majority of our CSA research pools comes from anymore. Moreover, this sort of sampling bias has been accounted for for quite a while, almost 30 years actually, yet no one in the field thinks CSA is a theoretical claim and not simply a term. You also seem to not really know what theory means, if CSA was a theory it would be a testable and verified explanation for a phenomena, but as it stands it is merely a definition, difference in scope. Something being a theory also does not mean it is not credible, but I digress.

>>18034538
>CSA in not theoretical
Postulating that exposure to sexual contact in childhood is causative of harm is a theory by definition. Fail.

>The Rind study was critiqued for many valid reasons
An independent replication of the Rind study which takes these critiques into consideration and comes to the same conclusions as the original paper:
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-00021-007

>in the face of the research I linked above
Methodologically flawed garbage, already refuted extensively ITT.

>You can produce no evidence but old Rind studies and screenshots of Newgon
You ignore the evidence posted.

>not at all in favor of reclassifying CSA
Irrelevant to the topic at hand.

>which also is entirely unrelated to the topic at hand
Directly relevant to the topic at hand.

>If you point was that clinical and legal samples do not generalize then you should have said that
Incorporating these samples into your theory that adult-child sex is causally linked with harm is a form of sample bias.

>Of course then you get into the weeds where you learn clinical and legal samples are not where a majority of our CSA research pools comes from anymore
They do, actually. You aren't at all familiar with any of the literature relating to this subject. You don't know what you're talking about.

>You also seem to not really know what theory means
Total lack of self-awareness.

>Something being a theory also does not mean it is not credible
Which I never implied.

>>18034553
>Postulating that exposure to sexual contact in childhood is causative of harm is a theory by definition. Fail.

It is just the term man, I am not sure why you chose this of all hills to die on, that is literally just the name science gives it.

>An independent replication of the Rind study which takes these critiques into consideration and comes to the same conclusions as the original paper:

The reproduction explicitly does not endorse your advocacy nor is it in line with current research, albeit it's authors were not as slimy as the Rind et. al study.

>Methodologically flawed garbage, already refuted extensively ITT.

You have not offered a single, scientifically sound refutation in this entire thread. Newgon does not amount to either a general methodological critique nor does it address the specifics of each study which all had varied methodologies.

>Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
>Directly relevant to the topic at hand.

Anon I don't think this is healthy.

>Incorporating these samples into your theory that adult-child sex is causally linked with harm is a form of sample bias.

Again the term CSA is not a theory, nor does sampling bias account for any issues in modern research of CSA

>They do, actually. You aren't at all familiar with any of the literature relating to this subject. You don't know what you're talking about.

A lot of the studies in the reviews I linked, especially in regards to telomere length and epigenetic consequences were of pregnant mothers and their children, so no sampling bias, just someone having a baby who also filled out a questionnaire and took some tests.

>Total lack of self-awareness.

Anon this is really making you look stupid

>Which I never implied.

You implied exactly that in this post

>>18034574
>The reproduction explicitly does not endorse your advocacy
Which is totally irrelevant to the results of the study.

>nor is it in line with current research
Neither the Rind study nor the replication have been refuted; current research still commits the same fatal methodological flaws identified 20 years ago. This is largely due to sociopolitical bias.

>You have not offered a single, scientifically sound refutation in this entire thread
Delusion.

>Again the term CSA is not a theory
I'm not referring to the term CSA, I'm explicitly referring to the theory that exposure to sexual contact as a child is causally linked with harm.

>A lot of the studies in the reviews I linked
Which in no way proves your ignorant claim regarding sampling in current research.

>You implied exactly that in this post
No I didn't.

>>18034579
>Which is totally irrelevant to the results of the study.

But related to your thesis

>Neither the Rind study nor the replication have been refuted; current research still commits the same fatal methodological flaws identified 20 years ago. This is largely due to sociopolitical bias

A pretty big leap from the Rind study, it also was refuted multiple times by many different authors who questioned Rind's biases and his previous authorship, all of which have contributed to why he hasn't appeared in a reputable publication since 1998.

>Delusion.

Getting angry aren't we lil faggy fag

>I'm not referring to the term CSA, I'm explicitly referring to the theory that exposure to sexual contact as a child is causally linked with harm.

No such theory exists because theories generally need to be specific and isolated to particular causes and effects, if you'd like to see a few theories on the impacts of CSA I'd suggest you read the review I posted.

>Which in no way proves your ignorant claim regarding sampling in current research.

They prove exactly that, research has expanded in the last 30 years quite a bit and modern medicine includes more and more people of increasingly different backgrounds across all fields including the ones pertinent to this question.

File: dallam.png (313 KB, 2336x487)

313 KB PNG

>>18034586
>it also was refuted multiple times by many different authors who questioned Rind's biases and his previous authorship
Most notably, by pic rel.

>all of which have contributed to why he hasn't appeared in a reputable publication since 1998
He has published in reputable publications since, and his ostracization is due to sociopolitical bias, which is examined in the article here: >>18034479

>No such theory exists because theories generally need to be specific and isolated to particular causes and effects
So, like the theory that exposure to sexual contact as a child (cause) is causally linked with harm (effect)?

>They prove exactly that
You can identify a few cases of a lack of sampling bias in the literature, therefore the majority of studies published in the literature lack sampling bias? This is a logically invalid argument.

>>18034600
Tried to sneak in a newgon screenshot I see, it seems even you understand how bad having that name attached to your "evidence" makes it look.

>He has published in reputable publications since, and his ostracization is due to sociopolitical bias, which is examined in the article here

He has published in Paidika and other "publications" but his career in the field is dead and largely due to the ensuing decades of research as opposed any moral hang ups people might have publishing a pedophile advocate, which are totally valid btw.

>So, like the theory that exposure to sexual contact as a child (cause) is causally linked with harm (effect)?

Again theories need to be more specific, what you are describing here isn't a theory. There are plenty examples of theories related to the more broad idea you mention in the review I linked.

>You can identify a few cases of a lack of sampling bias in the literature, therefore the majority of studies published in the literature lack sampling bias?

Yup, it was also a good chunk of the studies in the review I linked, which had a pretty big focus on epigenetic consequences of CSA. Your sampling bias is not a sufficient ground for argument anymore and I think even you realize this, but making you give ground piecemeal has been quite entertaining, especially as you get more and more irritated.

>>18034600
Peer-reviewed and reliable publications generally account for things like sampling when deciding whether or not to publish, pretending like they all have an issue with bias now as was *potentially* identified in a 30 year old article is very silly. If it was a problem, then it was a known quantity, and is very much accounted for in the many examples given to you.

File: RindPaidika.png (3.16 MB, 5244x9500)

3.16 MB PNG

>>18034605
>He has published in Paidika
Which is a good article, published in a reputable journal which was subscribed to by both the British Library and the Library of Congress; a review on a book about false memory syndrome. Pic rel.

>but his career in the field is dead
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bruce-Rind

>Again theories need to be more specific
Harm is a non-specific term that can be applied to a wide range of measurable phenomena; you've been reduced to semantic squabbling.

>Yup, it was also a good chunk of the studies in the review I linked
Can you offer any evidence that the majority of the literature published recently on the supposed effects of "CSA" do not use clinical and legal samples? Your argument in favour of this position thus far has been a non-sequitur.

>especially as you get more and more irritated
Projection?

>>18034619
Can you provide evidence that recent literature published on "CSA" accounts for the errors in sampling identified by Rind years ago?

File: Man-Boy Sexual Relationsh(...).png (3.94 MB, 1803x8000)

3.94 MB PNG

>>18034629
Another excellent article published in Paidika by Robert Bauserman.

>>18034629
>Which is a good article, published in a reputable journal

No it's not and you know that. It's a polemical pro-pedophile research organization that has been defunct for a very long time.

>https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bruce-Rind

He has not published in a reputable journal since the 98 article.

>Harm is a non-specific term that can be applied to a wide range of measurable phenomena; you've been reduced to semantic squabbling.

Specificity is they key to any hypothesis, asking a general question gives impossible parameters to test for.

>Can you offer any evidence that the majority of the literature published recently on the supposed effects of "CSA" do not use clinical and legal samples?

So you move the goalposts now, after I show you a review that contains many studies which do not suffer from the sampling bias you believe to be corrupting several entire fields of science on this particular issue, and instead ask me to produce a study which addresses a concern that has been dead in the water for three decades. I wonder why the publications on it might be so scant, it might not have been as big an issue to research as Rind postulated it and/or where we collect samples from has changed in the time between 1998 and now.

>Can you provide evidence that recent literature published on "CSA" accounts for the errors in sampling identified by Rind years ago?

The studies linked have conclusively shown that CSA and the negative outcomes occur even in samples which do not exhibit the *potential* sampling bias indicated by the Rind study.

>>18034635
>No it's not and you know that.
Yes it is, the articles that were published there are of a high quality and are highly informative.

>Specificity is they key to any hypothesis, asking a general question gives impossible parameters to test for.
Harm is a non-specific term that can be applied to a wide range of (specific) measurable phenomena. Hope that clarifies thing, but it's more likely you're being intentionally obtuse.

>So you move the goalposts now
Asking for evidence of your position is not moving the goalposts.

>after I show you a review that contains many studies which do not suffer from the sampling bias
Which in no way proves your universal claim regarding sampling in the literature; claiming it does is a form of logical fallacy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization

>The studies linked have conclusively shown that
1. The studies included in the review are nowhere near the scope necessary to make conclusive statements regarding the effects of adult-child sex
2. You haven't posted a link to a single study in this thread; only to a single review, so I have no way of verifying your claims

>>18034643
>Yes it is, the articles that were published there are of a high quality and are highly informative.

It is defunct for a reason.

>Harm is a non-specific term that can be applied to a wide range of (specific) measurable phenomena.

You wanna talk about telomere length, if so read the review I posted, they expound upon it in great detail

>Which in no way proves your universal claim regarding sampling in the literature; claiming it does is a form of logical fallacy

It's strange because in addition to the fact that none of these fields consider the sampling bias to be an issue, you have examples whereby the sampling bias is entirely absent yet positive associations with somatic stress remain, what will be enough for you?

>You haven't posted a link to a single study in this thread; only to a single review, so I have no way of verifying your claims

The review contains many studies and I would encourage you to read it.

>You haven't posted a link to a single study in this thread; only to a single review, so I have no way of verifying your claims

The studies are contained in the review

>>18034659
>you have examples whereby the sampling bias is entirely absent yet positive associations with somatic stress remain
>The review contains many studies and I would encourage you to read it.
>The studies are contained in the review
Should be easy for you to link to those studies which accord with your claims, then.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2021.771511/full

I have no delusions that he will ever read this, but if anyone else is curious here is the review that has caused him to blow a gasket and go into a several hour long cope session. It's been a fun break from work to come bully this faggot every 20ish minutes but I will be going to sleep now. Remember to take care of your children and make sure they are not unsupervised in a neglectful fashion, otherwise they will turn out like pedoanon, and I am fairly certain his condition is terminal.

>>18034663
here>>18034383


from the article, which I have linked again

File: 1753118349600125.jpg (200 KB, 1080x1424)

200 KB JPG

>>18034664
>>18034666
Oh so aren't actually going to post any of the specific studies from the review you mentioned so I can actually investigate them. Cool.

>>18034664
>It's been a fun break from work to come bully this faggot every 20ish minutes but I will be going to sleep now
Oh wow, you sound so calmly contemptuous!