Jump to content

Oprah Wimpy.."child abuse makes children feel good"


Recommended Posts

Oprah Winfrey ...  with a net worth of $2.7 billion, according to Forbes, 35 million monthly listeners on Sirius and a Twitter feed with nearly 4.5 million followers, Oprah has a sphere of influence that rivals even that of her pal Barack Obama.

footerpromo_panel2_0_footer-1348188273.j

 

A chat show host worth $2.7 Billion ??? Nobody has that sort of success without being in bed with the cabal ... gently maneuvering public opinion , increasing racial decisiveness , increasing public acceptance of child abuse , and furthering all the other NWO agendas .

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Given To Fly said:

"for it to work"
"and it feels good"

i won't quote the rest of what this fucking heinous fucker said.

 

 

You really should and then think about it.

 

The point she is making is that

1) long term abusers groom the children, build trust - they need to do this to control the victim. 

2) When they touch the victim in a sexual manner - this does feel pleasurable.

 

1 and 2 together make it very difficult for the victim to come fowards both through shame and because they are convinced if ot felt good then they are complicit and agreed to it.

 

If you just say "felt good" is a lie, then all those victims who experienced that find it harder to come forward because of the "theres something wrong with me" angle.

 

It also empowers the abuser - because he (or she)  says  (in grooming speak) well if you didnt like it i wouldn't do it - if you enjoy it it cant be wrong and you want me to.

 

Paedophiles are attracted to young children - this is wrong and they know its wrong - we need to help them seek help and prevent them becoming abusers

 

Child sex  abusers - paedophiles or not** know that what they are doing is both against the law and wrong as such they rely on controlling the victim and confusing the victim do their activities go un noticed and unreported

 

 

**Despite the media conflating the terms not all -and possibly not even most Child sex abusers are paedophiles. Likewise not all paedophiles sexually abuse children. Society needs to stop confusing the terms, paedophiles need help not persecution. Child sex abusers need a long drop with a short rope.

 

 

Edited by Eldnah
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Eldnah said:

 

You really should and then think about it.

 

The point she is making is that

1) long term abusers groom the children, build trust - they need to do this to control the victim. 

2) When they touch the victim in a sexual manner - this does feel pleasurable.

 

1 and 2 together make it very difficult for the victim to come fowards both through shame and because they are convinced if ot felt good then they are complicit and agreed to it.

 

If you just say "felt good" is a lie, then all those victims who experienced that find it harder to come forward because of the "theres something wrong with me" angle.

 

It also empowers the abuser - because he (or she)  says  (in grooming speak) well if you didnt like it i wouldn't do it - if you enjoy it it cant be wrong and you want me to.

 

Paedophiles are attracted to young children - this is wrong and they know its wrong - we need to help them seek help and prevent them becoming abusers

 

Child sex  abusers - paedophiles or not** know that what they are doing is both against the law and wrong as such they rely on controlling the victim and confusing the victim do their activities go un noticed and unreported

 

 

**Despite the media conflating the terms not all -and possibly not even most Child sex abusers are paedophiles. Likewise not all paedophiles sexually abuse children. Society needs to stop confusing the terms, paedophiles need help not persecution. Child sex abusers need a long drop with a short rope.

 

 

 

a rape victim does not get pleasure, and especially in this case where it's a child.

 

i'm reminded of watching the canadian programme 'border security' where a paedophile was fleeing from the USA and finally admitted that he was wanted.

the bastard said that a child allowed him to sexually abuse her 🤬

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:

 

a rape victim does not get pleasure, and especially in this case where it's a child.

 

They can do - sometimes even on forcible rapes rather than grooming where the victim is taken advantage of lured and coerced. 

 

When you are talking grooming - the attacker has manipulated them, gained trust and even love so when touching areas they will have a pleasure response even if its involuntary or they dont really understand.

 

Refusing to acknowledge that is simply making it harder for victims to come forward because you add guilt and doubt to the shame and confusion they already feel. 

 

37 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:

 

i'm reminded of watching the canadian programme 'border security' where a paedophile was fleeing from the USA and finally admitted that he was wanted.

the bastard said that a child allowed him to sexually abuse her 🤬

 

Was he a paedophile or a child sex abuser - They are not always the same thing - some abusers of children arent really interested in children its just an easy target. 

 

As for letting him - The victim probably did - again thats the point of grooming - many of the victims of grooming gangs are never physically forced - its psychological and emotional coercion - the victim then complies, they may even willingly comply especially if they dont really understand whats happening.

 

This is why we have things like statutory rape laws because we recognise that young children can be manipulated into "willingly" doing something  - its also why some victims dont want to accuse abusers - denial or confusion that the relationship wasnt abusive it was special. As such the law says no a child cannot consent - if they do consent it isnt valid.

 

Its an emotive subject - but try to read my posts with a clear head - im not defending Paedophiles or sex abusers or blaming the victim in any way. I add this because language can lack nuance and words can mean different things in context  it would be easy to miss understand my point - so if you think im supporting them - reread it adjust context a bit 

 

Im trying to correct 2 misconceptions -

1 victims are always unwilling and feel bad - manipulation can make them think they agree and it isnt wrong 

2 Paedophile = child sex abuser - it doesn't and the media confusing the 2 is an issue

 

The reason being to protect children because the 1st makes it harder for them you come forward and maybe even believed and the 2nd pushes paedophiles under ground through fear - because people threaten them and they are ostracised. If we can stop demonising paedophilia and treat it as an illness then by treating them we can protect children by stopping them becoming abusers.

 

Child sex abusers - on the other hand dont need help just locking away

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, kj35 said:

@Eldnah I don't know how your posts are still here. I hope you are immediately and permanently banned. 

 

@screamingeagle @Basket Case @Grumpy Owl @ink

 

If these ^^are deemed acceptable please delete my account

 

i'm going to play devils advocate here. people's thoughts can be corrupted via mind control/negative attachments but @Eldnah needs to explain themself more clearly here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kj35 said:

I don't know how your posts are still here. I hope you are immediately and permanently banned. 

 

I actually don't know why the posts have been allowed!

I really don't!

 

First off they are wrong and by law pedophilia is abuse.

You can see the links which are either dictionary or legal or medical ....

 

Noun1.paedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/paedophile

 

pedophilia

n. The deriving of sexual gratification from sexual fantasies or acts involving a child.

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pedophilia

 

par·a·phil·i·a

1. A condition, in either men or women, of compulsive responsivity and obligatory dependence on an unusual or personally or socially unacceptable external stimulus or internal fantasy for sexual arousal or orgasm.

2. In legal parlance, a perversion or deviancy.

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/paraphilia

 

pedophilia

n. an obsession with children as sex objects. Overt acts, including taking sexual explicit photographs, molesting children, and exposing one's genitalia to children are all crimes. The problem with these crimes is that pedophilia is also treated as a mental illness, and the pedophile is often released only to repeat the crimes or escalate the activity to the level of murder. (See: molestation, rape, pornography)

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/paedophile

 

pedophile

n. A person with pedophilia.

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/paedophile

 

abuse

mishandle; misapply; pervert; revile, malign; mistreat:

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/abuse

 

Abuse

Everything that is contrary to good order established by usage. Departure from reasonable use; immoderate or improper use. Physical or mental maltreatment. Misuse. Deception.

To wrong in speech, reproach coarsely, disparage, revile, and malign.

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/abuse

 

Abuse Medical Definition

Sexual abuse

Sexual abuse of a child refers to sexual behavior between an adult and child or between two children, one of whom is forcefully dominant or significantly older. Sexual behaviors can include touching breasts, genitals, and buttocks while the victim is either dressed or undressed. Sexual abuse behavior also includes exhibitionism, cunnilingus, fellatio, or penetration of the vagina or anus with sexual organs or objects. Pornographic photography also is a form of sexual abuse of children. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that one in six victims of a sexual assault are under age 12. Despite publicity surrounding cases where a child is assaulted by a stranger, almost all sexual assaults against children are perpetrated by a family member (e.g. father, stepfather, aunt, uncle, sibling, cousin) or family intimate (e.g., a live-in lover or friend of the parent).
Sexual abuse also can take the form of rape. The legal definition of rape includes only slight penile penetration in the victim's outer vulva area. Complete erection and ejaculation are not necessary. Rape is the perpetration of an act of sexual intercourse when:

  • will is overcome by force or fear (from threats, use of weapons, or use of drugs).
  • mental impairment renders the victim incapable of rational judgment.
  • if the victim is below the legal age established for consent.

 

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/abuse

 

.... so yes, if I was a mod then I would ban him!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact you people are calling for me to be banned proves my point that what the word means and common usage are confused 

 

The fact ive been clear in EVERY post that Not all Paedophiles are or become sex offenders  and that Paedophilia is a mental condition that needs treating whereas  child abusers need hanging proves individuals haven't actually bothered to read and digest any point. 

 

If people are interpreting my posts as support of either paedophillia or sex offenders - they clearly arent really reading them - especially since i make it clear i support neither and my concerns are the use of correct terminology and appropriate actions to protect children from abuse.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ink said:

 

I actually don't know why the posts have been allowed!

I really don't!

 

First off they are wrong and by law pedophilia is abuse.

 

No it is not - Paedophilia is urges thought desires - however gross or wrong they be thoughts are not illegal - I refer you to my link to welsh police (who would probably know the law )

 

Not all paedophiles abuse children also a fact -

Not all child abusers are Paedophiles also a fact

Abusers manipulate victims into thinking its what they want** - its established fact and its why victims have trouble coming forward 

 

Why is this an Issue to state - its the truth -acknowledging it doesnt blame victims - it helps them realise they are victims.

 

The trouble is the media (that we should all ignore) says paedo / abuser are the same thing - its lazy journalism and its endangering children.

 

 

** If you dont believe that victims can think they are consenting then you have failed to understand how grooming and manipulation works. Acknowledging that a victim can be manipulated into agreeing isnt excusing the abuser - what it hopefully achieves is that said victims dont feel shame and guilt and can come forward.

 

 

Edited by Eldnah
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Given To Fly said:

 

you're justifying a slippery slope.

 

I have justified nothing 

Ive repeatedly made it clear that im not justifying it - 

 

If you think im justifying it you are not really reading my posts 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eldnah said:

No it is not

 

Yes it is.

 

If someone is a pedophile .... then they forfeit existence as far as I am concerned.

The same as .... If someone is a psychopath, then they also should have no existence. 

 

All the ills of this realm are due to 'people' like YOU protecting those who cause harm.

 

And you have done this for a long time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eldnah said:

 

I have justified nothing 

Ive repeatedly made it clear that im not justifying it - 

 

If you think im justifying it you are not really reading my posts 

 

excusing it then.

 

basically it's excusing voyeurism. on a child.

Edited by Given To Fly
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eldnah I have read some of your posts over the last days and I thought to reply but really didn't want to.

 

I think you are protecting and promoting the abuse of children and whilst I could ban you, it would be wrong as I am not a moderator .... and I must leave the mods to do as they consider correct.

 

I ask @Grumpy Owl to do as I have asked .... please mate : )

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ink said:

 

Yes it is.

 

If someone is a pedophile .... then they forfeit existence as far as I am concerned.

 

No 

 

Its a mental condition to be treated  - we should treat it as such 

 

If someone abuses a child they as you say forfeit right to existence 

 

Again i think the trouble is people think paedophile automatically equals abuser.

Thats dangerous if paedophiles can be encouraged to seek help then children are safer.

 

I respect your right to disagree with that statement - and to argue it doesnt work but that's not what's being done - whats being done is im being accused of excusing , justifying or accepting the very thing ive said im against in every post

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ink said:

@Eldnah I have read some of your posts over the last days and I thought to reply but really didn't want to.

 

I think you are protecting and promoting the abuse of children and whilst I could ban you, it would be wrong as I am not a moderator .... and I must leave the mods to do as they consider correct.

 

I ask @Grumpy Owl to do as I have asked .... please mate : )

*

So despite my stating in every post I wish to protect children from abuse - you want me banned because you havent understood the argument im making - 

 

Perhaps i havent articulated it well - but theres been no effort to work with me to try to understand what i mean if its not clear.

 

Feel free to provide a single example of me promoting abuse or protecting abusers -  that way i can explain - or at least try to - what i meant and how youve miss understood - ive allready accepted poor language usage on my part may have left some points open to interpretation.

 

Incidently already reported my offending post and requested a PM convo with mods - that way we can establish what i mean from what im writing 

 

 

Edited by Eldnah
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

Now perhaps we could go back to discussing the OP?

 

Thank you grumpy 

 

Back to op Its my opinion that Oprah*  is trying to point out unpleasant facts** - shes talking to a victim who himself echos her statement ( id go so far as to say she said it so he didnt actually have to voice it himself). 

 

 

*Bloody auto correct 

 

**Perhaps i should have stuck with that rather than trying to explain myself and thus derailing the thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2020 at 4:48 PM, Eldnah said:

and the 2nd pushes paedophiles under ground through fear - because people threaten them and they are ostracised. If we can stop demonising paedophilia and treat it as an illness


Who are these innocent 'Pedophiles' being threatened and ostracised ?
And given that 99.99% of any mention or references to Pedophiles involves criminal activity and child abuse, why wouldn't we 'Demon-ise' them.
It is an illness alright - a sickness of the Soul in my mind. 
So what's your suggested method of 'curing' these innocent pedophiles ?
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Basket Case said:

And given that 99.99% of any mention or references to Pedophiles involves criminal activity and child abuse, why wouldn't we 'Demon-ise' them.

 

I agree with you and im saying that the problem is we associate paedophilia exclusively with child sex abuse - to the extent we fail to realise that chld sex abuse may not be related to paedophilia - the 2  terms are conflated. And of course as you point out we dont hear of paedophiles unless they commit a crime . 

 

When i say demonise - child abusers rightfully are - but by conflating the term any one who is attracted to children is afraid to come forward and seek help, Imagine if you had urges you knew were wrong - society villifies you because it treats those with thoughts the same as those who have committed crimes - you arent going to sek help in case you lose your job family etc.

 

In other words lets calling all sex offenders involving children child abusers - thats the crime

 

More so if you get into the ritualistic child abuse - where few if any are paedophilles - its used as a way to exert control and retain power - you want to be part of us you will do this and so now you can never move against us lest it be revealed.

 

Quote

It is an illness alright - a sickness of the Soul in my mind. 
So what's your suggested method of 'curing' these innocent pedophiles ?

Dont know- but if we can encourage them to come forward - we can 1stly monitor them- then perhaps counselling to avoid acting on their urges or even a Samaritans type hotline they can talk to -  

Accepting paedophiles** arent simply bad people and that they need help -  and getting them help has got to be better at reducing the risk to children - than the beating up of paediatricians (true event) because joe public is semi literate and caught up in media sensationalist reporting not in facts.

 

 

**not sex offenders - im talking those who've never acted on urges

Edited by Eldnah
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eldnah said:

but by conflating the term any one who is attracted to children is afraid to come forward and seek help


Nonsense.
You're not a Pedophile if you don't molest children, you're not a Pedophile if you don't masturbate to sexual / nude images / videos of children.
lf you don't do either of the above you are not a Pedophile.

If you're having weird and uncomfortable thoughts about ANYTHING then seek help. No labels..
A Pedophile in most right thinking persons mind is someone who acts on these sick thoughts. 
 

 

2 hours ago, Eldnah said:

Dont know- but if we can encourage them to come forward - we can 1stly monitor them- then perhaps counselling to avoid acting on their urges or even a Samaritans type hotline they can talk to -  

Accepting paedophiles** arent simply bad people and that they need help -  and getting them help has got to be better at reducing the risk to children - than the beating up of paediatricians (true event) because joe public is semi literate and caught up in media sensationalist reporting not in facts.


Who and where are all these hypothetical people you want to encourage to come forward ?
Is it a bit like 'coming out' ? Is that what you mean ?
You want to add a 'P' to the LGBT Rainbow ?
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharing not as an endorsement, but food for thought.  (2017 Video)

 

"Jack Dawson was a teenager when he realized he was attracted to young boys. His fantasies led him to seriously self-harm. Dawson, who uses a pseudonym to tell his story, says he has never offended against a child – directly or indirectly through child pornography. Between 1972 and 1975, he underwent intense National Health Service (NHS) psychoanalytic psychotherapy for his pedophilia, which he says resulted in complete cure.·
 
 
Edited by Golden Retriever
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...