How Prolific Are Pedophilic Urges?

Just a bunch of muslims who are wife shopping.

I’m wondering if this might be due to some malformed HTML on useek. Usually HTML is ignored by web crawlers, so that search is not good for getting a sample of images on the web.

That said, it’s rather disturbing. There’s probably a lot more of this stuff hidden all over the web, but search engines and social media platforms have done a decent job of hiding it.

Pedophilia requires a unique combination of lack of disgust, lack of love/caring/empathy towards children, sexual attraction towards children, and the willingness to break the law. I would think this combination should be very rare, but with neurosis being so common nowadays I’m not surprised it’s becoming more common. Shield your children well and pray for God’s judgement on these people.

wtf…

Media blackout on this case…

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/almost-20-child-victims-of-alleged-paedophile-ring-identified-1.3416894

Related:
https://www.wcpo.com/news/national/a-caroline-co-man-arrested-for-child-pornography-charges

Secret Service pedo and child pron producer gets arrested.

I checked this out on all the search engines. I don’t know wtf this is about but we have a serious fkn problem on this planet if these are the piks ‘most popular’ and why the hell it is not being blocked if it so easy to do? Now, I can only hope that Q is real.

When we talk about the Deep State and disappearing children I wonder if we are talking only about sex, or even primarily about sex? An even darker underbelly would be organ and blood harvesting. Especially now that science has shown the life extending attributes of young blood in old bodies. I have not the slightest doubt that this is the primary use for children – and not sex – in the upper echelons of the Global Deep State.

>How Prolific Are Pedophilic Urges?

They are typical male sexuality.

Evolutionary roots:
Two strong selectors for our male ancestors leading to extermination were
A) Getting infected with an STD.
B) Rearing/investing in his non-biological offspring (“being cucked”)

A)
Getting a STD meant evolutionary extinction, as it lead to infertility, death and/or becoming sexually
repulsive (smelling and licking genitals of prospective sex partners is a common mammalian sexual instinct to check for STDs, as most of them lead/led to ugly/smelly/bad-testing genitalia – today people “enjoy” cunnilingus and fellatio – but this is exactly how evol. selection in terms of behavior works – by changing/selecting for what causes pleasure/displeasure to so change behavior patterns in organisms) – there were zero effective medial treatments in our evolutionary past.
B)
Being tricked into raising/investing another men’s genes (kids) instead of one’s own genes meant evolutionary extinction.

A+B led to a strong selection pressure for male traits to avoid falling prey to A+B.
The adaption was simple:
Strong preference of very young females for mating, because those were not previously inseminated by other men (ideally virgins) – therefore very unlikely to carry STDs (A) and also unlikely/impossible to already being (invisibly) pregnant from another man (B).

Young women, the younger the better, translated directly into much higher odds of successful male reproduction, making a strong preference (max. sexual arousal by) for young females a common male trait.

Older women, as far as they have political influence, obviously must hate this male trait, for it means less male attention – sex, protection and resources for them – have always and are attempting to create a social taboo of older men having sex with younger women (older men are those who have power and resources, so young men mating with young girls are less of a concern for women). This was and is a core goal of feminism, but female social influence generally.

So this leads of a situation where almost all men prefer young females, and exactly this is mostly a sexual taboo – but this taboo, if anything, is purely a “social construct”. It has no basis, but actually opposes, male sexual biology for political reasons.

True human sexuality in the past was only practically researchable by questionnaires; but those have the flaw that most humans, for many reasons, will answer such questions not truthfully, but by answers that are socially desirable or in other ways conforming to what they think the questioner wants to hear – so lies, and therefore an unrealistic model of human sexuality was the result.
This changed with the advent of the internet: Porn use can be regarded as an exact model of human sexual desires. And here we find that men, generally, prefer young and even very young (“childlike”) females – “teens” is the most popular porn genre; those “teens” that, while being formally of legal age (18 mostly), but look to be much younger (“childlike”) receive large premiums.
[If you are interested in objective research on human sexuality from Internet porn use data, read “A Billion Wicked Thoughts” from Ogi Ogas.]

Evolutionary it is obvious that male sexual instincts must have and did have evolved for a strong preference for the youngest fertile females to maximize male reproductive success (A+B).
This led to a male near-universal: Hebephilia.
But the evolutionary pressures on reproduction success from A+B can also lead to other instincts:
A desire to secure pre-fertile females and then mate-guarding them, that is prevent other men from inseminating them, so that it is guaranteed A+B are overcome by being their only inseminator, before and immediately after they become fertile.
All over the world, men abducted, robbed or otherwise secured females for reproduction in all of history. Young females were obviously preferred; not only for being fertile, but also due to the evol. pressures from A+B.
Abducting pre-fertile girls and then “storing” them a long time for exclusive sexual access by one male is not rare.
A contemporary example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritzl_case
Such actions are also not uncommon in men’s fantasies and are, therefore, content of porn (hentai etc.).

These male instincts exist because they were very successful in our evolutionary past;
men who harbored them out-bred men who did not. We, descendants of only the men who successfully reproduced, harbor their successful instincts.
This is also, for example, the reason why men find violence, murder (destroying other men, that is, sexual rivals) pleasurable (think about the violence content of movies or video games); or why rape is such a frequent crime and male fantasy (porn, regular movies).
Like it or not – all these things were – and often still are – very successful strategies for succeeding in sexual selection for many men.

Humans are susceptible to genetic change due to mutation and recombination of genes;
this can lead to changed behavior from a changed genetic instinct setup. Often enough, this leads to nonadaptive changes: Necrophilia, etc. – but many more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paraphilias
Genetic changes that lead to physical fitness reduction we call cripples;
changes that lead to cognitive fitness reduction we call mentally ill;
changes that lead to sexual fitness reduction we – well, that touches politics, but formally,
from a biological perspective, everything that prevents reproduction is a disease, if a male only
want to mate with trees or cannot mate at all or only wants to mate with other men or whatever else – it leads to extinction, cannot produce offspring, and is therefore, logically, a sexual illness.
Like everything else (physical ability, cognitive ability) sexual ability – and instincts – can become defect.
One of those defects is pedophilia – because desiring to mate with infertile girls that are so young that mating is physically impossible or cause physical harm in the girl is clearly maladaptive (just abducting them and imprisoning them until they are fertile and then mating with them is biologically adaptive – but of course illegal etc.).
But the fact that pedophilia exists is no surprise – it seems to be merely a maladaptive overexpression of the general, adaptive male preference for very young females.
True pedophilia (not hebephilia, which for political reasons are conflated often) seems to be roughly as rare as necrophilia.

Sex research of the past already did establish that knowledge, not accessible for most of the public, however.
Research in human sexuality was always an object of science; and for its obvious political and economic implications. Research on human sexuality is an old science, but for obvious reasons one somewhat removed from public attention.
Human arousal, for example, was measured by phallography, plethysmography etc.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penile_plethysmograph
Devices for and studies on female arousal abound, too (vaginometer).
My post is too long already, so I just mention one single interest group that sponsored related research:
The movie industry. To maximize movie revenue, movies must cause maximal audience pleasure.
Among other things, choosing actors (“Movie stars”) that maximize this is an economic need.
So, much research was done for this reason in sexology.
They found that the male ideal for females was not so much only defined by physical traits of the male actor, but by sth. we today know as “mate copying” in biology: Females show max. arousal not due to male traits, but by female reactions to a male – the more other females desire a male, have or want to mate with him, the higher female sexual arousal for a specific male.
This effect is typically exploited in movies:
For example, “James Bond” is not only introduced as a rather handsome male, but always presented as sexually very successful with females by depicting him being desired by or having sex with many attractive women. Counterintuitively to most men who do not know about the female trait of “mate copying”, observing this greatly stimulates female arousal and attractiveness-ratings for such men. A contemporary example is Star Trek (2009) – Captain Kirk is, crucially, not only handsome and bold, but just in the beginning of the movie depicted as having sex with two females – the male audience misses this, but the female audience is reacting with sexual arousal and perceives the Kirk-actor as very attractive due to this (most women just feel so and cannot tell why, as “mate copying” is not a conscious concept to them). From that sexual arousal general pleasure in the female audience is generated, rising movie revenue (and increasing the market value of the male actor shown this way).
In the past, sexual pleasure activation was measured in test audiences by phallography and vaginometry. This was, obviously, cumbersome, and prevented larger test audiences (the research had also to be confidential, test audiences needed to get paid well and had to sign contracts to keep the research secret). Modern science has changed this: It was found that direct genital measurements can be completely replaced with unintrusive pupillometry – this measures the general arousal level as well as sexual arousal, and can be applied secretly to all audiences (by specialized camera equipment recording the dynamic changes of pupil diameter opposite from the audience) automatically. Pupillometry is also used to maximize movie pleasure/arousal level by optimizing the pacing of action, sex, calm and funny scenes in movies so that maximal pleasure in the average movie consumer is generated (avoidance of boredom, max. effect of surprising events etc.).
Male sexuality was found more difficult to optimize than the female one, because men greatly differed in maximal sexual pleasure generation from female actors – men had very different tastes in bodily and facial structure of female stars – what induced max. arousal for one man could not only cause no arousal at all, but slight disgust in other men! This problem was overcome by two methods: Usually, there are at least two different (that is, very differently looking – brunette+blond, large+small breasts etc.) female actors in a movie for mass-audiences, so that a near-maximum of male viewer pleasure is generated from at least one of the female actors; the other is to find a single female that is an “attractiveness optimum” to the most men – this leads to the effect that most female Movie stars are quite attractive to most men, but almost never maximally attractive to any man. This still is the current optimum in single-female attractiveness, causing maximal pleasure in and therefore max. revenue from male audiences.

Also consider this:
The (or nearly so) most successful music video in the world, ever:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vjPBrBU-TM
Music aside, it shows a young girl in sexually explicit poses and movements that appear
copulative and orgasmic.
This, too, can answer your initial question on how “common” “pedophilic urges” are;
it also demonstrates the great hypocrisy of it, as this is clearly very sexually arousing to almost all men, but instead of evil pedophilia “harmless and proper” “art”.

The great economic (and political) value of making the most common and powerful sexual instinct of men de-facto illegal should be rather clear.

To anyone who thinks it perverted that I want my daughter married and pregnant by 18, I say that if a girl is old enough to get a legal abortion without her parents or the police being notified, she’s old enough to be married and making white babies.