(urth) golden Severa etc.

David DiGiacomo david at slack.com
Thu May 18 22:59:37 PDT 2006

(Sorry if no one else is interested in this admittedly off-topic

>From: jwilson at io.com (Jeff Wilson)
>> What external evidence could possibly validate the assertion?
>Interviews of many unassociated pedos over time and space. It's unlikely 
>they would come up with the same fanciful answer enough times to be 
>statistically signifigant for no reason.

That's a valid point if true.

>> If a pedophile described his motivation, even if you believed he was
>> honest, what use would it be?  Introspection can't explain biology.
>Apparently, it's useful for writing stories.

Wait a second, I missed something - are you saying that Wolfe used this
idea of innocence in describing Baldanders's catamite?  How exactly?

Also, I was struck by this "wilson&cox" quote:

>In this study, subjects were asked to describe the characteristics they 
>found attractive in children. They cited personality traits slightly more 
>often than physical traits. Personality traits included openness, 
>curiosity, spontaneity, enthusiasm, lack of inhibition, innocence, honesty, 
>and affection. Physical traits included good looks, smooth skin, 
>attractive eyes, slim stature, and lack of pubic hair.

These traits are just our societal norms of attractiveness.  They are
not unique to children.

More information about the Urth mailing list