Submitted by thissiteislol in lobby (edited )

I saw this site in the sidebar of /r/socialism and decided to look into it.

I found this in the What Is Wrong With Reddit page that ideologically situates Raddle:

Hate-speech on has always been deeply embedded in the culture

A big part of the problem of Reddit aparantly is hate speech. Emma, who wrote the code for this site, reiterates this in her Q&A:

To me, the biggest problem with Reddit is how its administrators ignore the routine harassment and witch-hunts of marginalised people that takes place

So the biggest problem with Reddit, besides all the obvious things, and besides the simple fact that the original sub of this site (leftwithsharpedge) was deleted by Reddit admins, is hate speech, routine harassment, and witch-hunts of marginalised people.

So far so good.

Then I read this, nearly at the very tippy top of the What Is Wrong With Reddit page:

The owners and admins of reddit have always encouraged this dangerous intolerant culture, even going as far as to send a gold-plated award to an infamous pedophile and neo-nazi after he created pedo-hive r/jailbait.

I find it very interesting that the Goldstein of Raddle is that old troll and Reddit mega mod ViolentAcres, now upgraded to "infamous pedophile". To me this is as if Voat had an ideological white paper that begun with situating itself against the "infamous Jew George Soros..."

Now what am I getting at? The very purpose of the site is against hate speech directed at minorities, and yet the ideological orientation of the site practically begins with opposition to a minority, a minority I think everyone here will agree faces the most hatred in Western society today. But Raddle does not begin by rejecting hate speech, but invoking it.

It's interesting, wouldn't you say?

In this era of "microaggressions," where the faintest insult is to be categorized as a form of violence, the systematic silencing of a minority should count rather seriously as a transgression against fundamental justice.

Here again Raddle is at the forefront, from the Terms of Service:

Promotes white supremacy, queerphobia, transphobia, misogyny, classism, ableism, body shaming, antisemitism, Islamophobia, colonialism or age discrimination.

Okay. So far so ideologically pure. Then:

Sexualizes minors or promotes adults having sex with minors.

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, this is to rule out child erotica (pornography is already banned by another rule), and blatant, crude, sexual pronouncements, hook up forums, and the like. I don't believe that's what it's really about. I also believe such a rule rules out rational conversation about child sexuality, *even though the previous rule outlawed "age discrimination." But let's be generous and say this rule is really just about capturing the "really bad stuff."

Okay. Next rule:

Apologizes for violence towards children.

Hmmm. Interesting. Who apologizes for violence towards children? When has that ever been a problem on Reddit? It's like Rule 34. I'm sure you can find some of it, some where. But as a long time Reddit lurker I have never seen systematic "apology for violence toward children." To what, or to whom, is this rule supposed to apply?

The only plausible target of this rule is pedophiles whose very politics will be situated as an "apology for violence against children," right? That's why this rule is there. It's so Raddle can a priori rule out the presence of pedophile voices. Just rule them out. Don't even sign up, pedophiles, you're a "violence towards children" apologist.


It's all part of maintaining the strictest, state-enforced, medicalized identity fully intact, no questions asked. This is what Raddle is all about, right? Promoting state power. Promoting the established categories. Allowing no questions. Ruling out discussion a priori. What minority in America faces more draconian surveillance, policing, shaming, exclusion, silencing, and censorship? None of your favorite victims qualify. And everybody who isn't a liar knows it, even if they're too much of a coward to admit it. And this is all true, even if you think you have a good argument for banning this or restricting that. It's true and you know it's true.

So to me that's what Raddle stands for. Not something different. The same thing: fascism with a happy face, the very thing we are all supposed to be fighting against. But we're not fighting against it. We're embracing it.

And with those voices silenced, the illusion of diversity, the illusion of non-hate, the illusion of justice can prevail over the Happy Land of Raddle.

I'm not going to engage in any conversation. This is it. Why? Because I don't trust the Terms of Service of this website. And I've just explained why. I just wanted to inform you of that opinion while you shout your "inclusion or bust" slogans. I'm not going to invest in a space that will probably just delete my comments, delete my forums, turn me in, that will brigade and witch-hunt me on trumped up charges of "apologizing for violence against children." All these anti-police anarchists running around here want to turn me in. It's like I found your achilles heel. I've found the button that transforms you into your opposite. It's amazing, especially because probably... none of you will admit it. Hating pedophiles and radically exclusing them is a good thing, right?

Now I've said my piece. Thanks to the Raddle team for putting this thing together. It looks pretty good. Good on you Emma. You've done a lot with a little on short notice.

Now you can go back to hating pedophiles and using them in your absurd fight against hate speech and hate against minorities grounded in hatred and exclusion of a minority.

Air kisses...

Waves goodbye forever

Edit: Something went wrong with the post form and the content was doubled.



You must log in or register to comment.

Majrelende wrote

I don’t think you understand what “violence” means.


thissiteislol OP wrote

It's not up to a rando to define what violence means for the Raddle Terms of Service. If the site admin have something very specific in mind with the term "violence" then it is up to them to define it.

I get to define it precisely because they have failed to define it. And they have failed to define it because they expected the censorship regime to rule out any opposition to their open ended and vague rule. That is how lazy thought has become.

So I think I understand a few things... better than you do.

Now feel free to enjoy the privilege of membership in the non-censored world, if you know what that means.


OdiousOutlaw wrote

Waves goodbye forever



come back


TLBM wrote

Seriously though if you are a pedo you are sick (and not normal) and need to find a psychologist and doctor to help you deal with your sickness and give you medication to stop your urges.

You can have a good life being a pedo without being a child rapist but YOU NEED TO GET IT TREATED, it's a positive sum game you'll help everybody around you by doing it.


celebratedrecluse wrote

in my understanding, you cannot "cure" or "treat" a sexual proclivity.

But most sexual interactions between adults and minors aren't the result of a sexual proclivity imo. It's not a disease, either. It's a fetishization of power imbalance, founded and fueled by lack of meaningful agency (and thus, lack of consent, authenticity, autonomy).

The whole point is to exert control and dominance over someone who is perceived as easy to control. Everything else is superstructure built around the fundamental material relationship of power.

Pedophilia isn't a good word for it. It's pedodominance, perhaps we could call it child sadism, and love or attraction doesn't enter into it at all. The first step to challenging and destabilizing this social institution is to name it for what it is, and acknowledge there isn't a medical solution to what is fundamentally a political or otherwise social problem.

The answer is not medicalization, bioessentialism, or any of these convenient explanations. It's a revolutionary strike against the heart of social reproduction, for the extremes of pedosadism highlight the hierarchical neuroses which are immanent throughout dominating society.

Of course, we could recontextualize therapeutics as an inherently political activity, but that would mean contesting the episteme, ontology, and methods of hierarchical medicine, itself embedded in the society of domination.


thissiteislol OP wrote

What do you know about "a good life being a pedo"? Are you a pedophile have a "good life"? Are you a psychologist with a strong track record of putting pedophiles on the "good life"? Are you the moderator of /f/pedophile? Do you routinely engage with pedophiles online and guide them to this "good life" you know so much about?

It's amazing (and sick, and stupid, and not normal) of you to completely avoid the content of my post. Like a deranged dim wit, you jump directly, with two feet, to confirm my presumption, which is that this site is situated upon a foundation of bigotry. Not "Why my good dear fellow, let me tell you why your arguments are invalid..." Not "We accept different voices, even yours, so long as you fit within these parameters.."

No. Only "you are sick."

In my opinion, people like you are sick, are facists. It's people like you who run the concentration camps. All those good intentions, all paved with gold.


ziq wrote

Bigotry towards... pedos?

Hey pedo, end it already.


celebratedrecluse moderator wrote

okay, let's set some basic ground rules for the website. Let's see, well for starters no child abuse--



Raico wrote

Sounds like something an ancap would say.


crapshoot wrote

Funny you're mad about others hating pedophiles yet you define pedophilia as a political belief. Pedophiles who actually promote adults having sex with minors are 100% apologizing for violence against children. (Plus, I've seen plenty of people on the internet argue it's okay to slap children to discipline them; maybe you actually somehow haven't bumped into them, but child violence apologia is 100% a thing.)

Since the admin does seem to be a filthy anti who hates non-offending pedophiles as well, I'm actually pleasantly surprised they didn't use the P-word in the ToS and explicitly bans CSA apologia in particular like a reasonable person.