you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]OrneryStruggle 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I hate the pedophilia-promoting piece of shit, but I agree about academic freedom and free speech. Up to and including vile opinions like his own of course.

[–]catoboros[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I do not think Andrew Cantor promotes paedophilia. I think he separates paedophilia, the mental disorder, from offending such as child molestation or child pornography. He points to MRI evidence for an organic cause for paedophilia, but this in no way promotes paedophilia nor excuses offending. Cantor condemns offending and urges support for non-offending paedophiles to help them stay that way. Like it or not, paedophiles are members of the community, and we are better off with them remaining non-offending. There are also plenty of non-paedophiles who offend against children.

[–]OrneryStruggle 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He does promote paedophilia. Like I said in another post, he promotes paedophilia as a sexual orientation (and thinks there should be a P in the LGB), he is against jailing pedophiles including offending pedophiles, etc. This normalization of pedophilia and insistence that pedophiles should be free and allowed to perpetually reoffend is indistinguishable from pedophilia promotion.

He was also the consultant on the Twitter decision to allow pedophilia posts on Twitter. What is that if not PROMOTING PEDOPHILIA? They are allowed to openly post pedophilic content because of Cantor.

The "support" that "non offending" (lmao you mean not convicted/caught) pedophiles get through therapy actually increases offending and helps them further evade the law.