• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Any Foucault fans?

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Woke Philosopher Michel Foucault Raped Children as Young as 8: Claim

French postmodernist philosopher Michel Foucault, whose writings have become central in modern woke ideology, has been accused of sexually abusing children as young as eight-years-old while living in Tunisia during the 1960s. Foucault, a vocal proponent of paedophilia in his writings, signed a petition to legalise sex with 13-year-old children in 1977. A contemporary intellectual, Guy Sorman, told Britain’s The Sunday Times that he witnessed Foucault courting young boys during his time in Tunisia when the French philosopher took a philosophy professorship at the University of Tunis. “Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,” Sorman said. “They were eight, nine, ten years old, he was throwing money at them and would say ‘let’s meet at 10 p.m. at the usual place’,” he said, adding: “He would make love there on the gravestones with young boys. The question of consent wasn’t even raised.” Sorman said that while he regrets not coming forward with the accusations earlier, the French media was covering up for the philosopher, saying: “There were journalists present on that trip, there were many witnesses, but nobody did stories like that in those days. Foucault was the philosopher-king. He’s like our god in France.” Despite Foucault’s self-professed Marxist leanings, Sorman said that his behaviour in real life was indicative of French elitism, noting that Foucalt “believed there were two morals, one for the elite, which was immoral, and one for the people, which should be restrictive.” “He thought his arguments gave him permission to do whatever he wanted.”

I have read some of his work - not finding it that easy, or interesting - and did know something of his sexual nature, but not this (if true), but presume it could be so given the attitudes around in the 1970s.

Any comments?
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Any comments?

Advocacy and defence of Paedophilia is not a mainstream position in the far-left and, assuming the accusations are true, Foucault's self-professed "radical" politics does not excuse or justify his behaviour. If anything, it underlines the dangers and potential abuses that come from taking ideological propositions to their supposedly logical, but obscene, conclusions.

Having never especially wanted to take an interest in the subject, one of the less-discussed side effects of the sexual revolution were efforts to question the boundaries over childhood sexuality, the age of consent and, ultimately, over whether to normalise paedophilia and child-adult sexual relations.

Childhood sexuality was brought up as an area of inquiry in Freudian psychoanalysis. Freud's theories were popular with Marxists and Anarchists in the 1920's and 1930's in presenting a challenge to traditional conceptions of family and sexuality. There was a "sexual revolution" in Bolshevik Russia in the 1920's that led to experimentation at new ways of forming and practising relationships and briefly legalised abortion, homosexuality and no-fault divorce at the request of a single partner. The concerns on sexuality were particularly important amongst young people in Russia, to the point that party higher officials were concerned they didn't talk about anything else. There were also efforts at communal living and "free unions" (being in a relationship without getting married). One of the advocates for sexual liberation at the time was the German psychologist Wilhelm Reich, who I've heard referred to as the "grandfather" of the sexual revolution because of his work's later influence.

These experiments came crashing to an end by the mid-1930's when Stalin came to power and enforced much more conservative moral standards, including the re-criminalisation of homosexuality in 1934. Consequently, "Freudian" theories were excluded from Marxism-Leninism and treated as "bourgeois" influences. Homosexuals were therefore persecuted in the Soviet Union and other communist countries. East Germany legalised homosexuality, but it didn't gain widespread acceptance. Fidel Castro went so far as to make an apology for the treatment of homosexuals in Cuba, where they were put in to concentration camps, as attitudes have changed on LGBT rights in the country.

As a result, the relationship between Freudian theories of sexuality and Marxism was essentially dormant in the West and only re-emerged in the 1960's. Issues relating to Paedophilia have always been on the outer most fringes of the far left movement. Sadly, I am led to believe that in one of the "free love" communes in West Germany in the 1960's these "radical" theories about childhood sexuality were tested with the consequence that there were instances of child sexual abuse. Foucault's behaviour would therefore "fit" in this historical and political context, but still at the extreme end of it nonetheless.

However, for all the very bad things communists and the far-left have done in the twentieth century, this is most definitely an outlier and efforts to portray a deeper, more sustained relationship between the left and paedophilia are essentially false.
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
“.../a vocal proponent of paedophilia in his writings/...” Which one’s for example?

Where did you get hold of this nonsense article? I’ve read lots of Foucault and have literally never come across anything paedophilic in them.


Humbly
Hermit
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
There are fans of obtuse, mostly unintelligible, wildly long-winded writing? :)

He isn't as obtuse in french than his translation in english in my opinion and as produced excellent work. Though you do need some experience with french philosophy to make him comprehensible. He also had several terrible ideas.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
“.../a vocal proponent of paedophilia in his writings/...” Which one’s for example?

Where did you get hold of this nonsense article? I’ve read lots of Foucault and have literally never come across anything paedophilic in them.


Humbly
Hermit
I am no fan of Breitbart either. But one small part appears to be true. He did sign a letter urging an end to age of consent laws:

French petition against age of consent laws - Wikipedia


Of course a small nugget of truth can be at the bottom of very foul lies. It makes them more believable.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Woke Philosopher Michel Foucault Raped Children as Young as 8: Claim

French postmodernist philosopher Michel Foucault, whose writings have become central in modern woke ideology, has been accused of sexually abusing children as young as eight-years-old while living in Tunisia during the 1960s. Foucault, a vocal proponent of paedophilia in his writings, signed a petition to legalise sex with 13-year-old children in 1977. A contemporary intellectual, Guy Sorman, told Britain’s The Sunday Times that he witnessed Foucault courting young boys during his time in Tunisia when the French philosopher took a philosophy professorship at the University of Tunis. “Young children were running after Foucault saying ‘what about me? take me, take me’,” Sorman said. “They were eight, nine, ten years old, he was throwing money at them and would say ‘let’s meet at 10 p.m. at the usual place’,” he said, adding: “He would make love there on the gravestones with young boys. The question of consent wasn’t even raised.” Sorman said that while he regrets not coming forward with the accusations earlier, the French media was covering up for the philosopher, saying: “There were journalists present on that trip, there were many witnesses, but nobody did stories like that in those days. Foucault was the philosopher-king. He’s like our god in France.” Despite Foucault’s self-professed Marxist leanings, Sorman said that his behaviour in real life was indicative of French elitism, noting that Foucalt “believed there were two morals, one for the elite, which was immoral, and one for the people, which should be restrictive.” “He thought his arguments gave him permission to do whatever he wanted.”

I have read some of his work - not finding it that easy, or interesting - and did know something of his sexual nature, but not this (if true), but presume it could be so given the attitudes around in the 1970s.

Any comments?
No, I never could stand him. This disgusting crap is no surprise. He wasn't the only one promoting pederasty during that time. Alan Ginsburg and Harry Hays were both big supporters of NAMBLA and defended pederasty for their whole lives.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
“.../a vocal proponent of paedophilia in his writings/...” Which one’s for example?

Where did you get hold of this nonsense article? I’ve read lots of Foucault and have literally never come across anything paedophilic in them.


Humbly
Hermit
Just have to Google it - the original came from The Sunday Times apparently (I didn't have access to that article). I came across some stuff long ago about what Foucault had to say concerning sexuality but failed to come up with any of his writing on the subject, perhaps because it was a bit too sensitive and would not be seen as PC now.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Thomas Jefferson owned slaves and Marx beat his wife. Fortunately that is not reflected in their writing. Their writing should stand on its own merit.
So banging kids gets a pass from you (yes, I'm being intentionally provocative; I don't think you find that stuff actually acceptable)? Mind you, that wasn't a few thousand years ago when this was the norm. That was not acceptable in the '70s. We've got to be able to draw a line in the sand somewhere. Sure, we can separate the art from the artist in some more minor cases but having it off with kids is certainly a deal breaker for me; I can't care what you have to say after that. (Luckily I never cared for him in the first place.)
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Thomas Jefferson owned slaves and Marx beat his wife. Fortunately that is not reflected in their writing. Their writing should stand on its own merit.
I tend to agree. Unfortunately, if the article is true (apart from his behaviour being vile), and if he had a stance that his morality was only his concern, then any of his writing which might have been 'lost' concerning his views on adult/child sexual relationships might have influenced so many. For example, this might be where many paedophiles get the notion that it is perfectly natural to have such relationships, even if most of us know this is just rubbish.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I am no fan of Breitbart either. But one small part appears to be true. He did sign a letter urging an end to age of consent laws:

French petition against age of consent laws - Wikipedia


Of course a small nugget of truth can be at the bottom of very foul lies. It makes them more believable.
Perhaps many of the signees then might have changed their minds if they had known more, given that we know a lot more about child development and what children are capable of at various ages now, and also what we expect concerning their rights.

In a radio interview in 1978, Michel Foucault said of sex with minors that assuming “that a child is incapable of explaining what happened and was incapable of giving his consent are two abuses that are intolerable, quite unacceptable.”

Seems a bit simplistic, for a philosopher. :oops:
 

PureX

Veteran Member
When I was a youngster in art school back in the late 70s early 80s, Foucault was a big deal. And "post-modernism" was the very hot topic of the day in the art world. It was the new next "ism" and therefor the big ticket to fame and fortune if you could get yourself designated a 'post-modern wunderkind' within the ultra-hip and absurdly myopic 'art-whisperers' of the day. I personally knew a few folks who managed it.

To me, though, it seemed like a lot of noise about nothing. Which is why even though he'd employed as many words as humanity had ever invented, and then some, Foucault still couldn't manage to do much more than muddy up what was already obvious to those in the know, especially those in the arts; that the era of modernism had run it's course. And that we were now entering the wasteland of a fully disassembled, disemboweled, and value-relative reality thanks to modernism's 200 year long obsession with the pursuit of novelty through 'de-construction'. There was literally no other option, now, but to pick up the pieces and begin putting them back together again using whatever criteria or pattern or 'truth' one happened to possess. "Post-modernism" is nothing more than the inevitable relativism that results after an apocalyptic socio-philosophical meltdown. And that's basically what 'Modernism' was.

For people in the art world (that were paying attention) Marcel Duchamp had very loudly and blatantly predicted the end of Modernism way back in the teens of the last century, and had then developed a whole body of fully post-modern artworks since then. But the rest of the art world was just at that moment making maximum hay (money and fame) out of the novelty gold that Modernism had finally managed to drill into, and so were not interested in Duchamp's admonishments or solutions. They were determine to mine that novelty and exploit it until the very last crumb. Which took them all the way into the late 60s and made some people and institutions very rich and famous.

But I digress.

Foucault was a bit like Donald Trump in that he was the mascot for a cultural shift that was way bigger than he was. And like all mascots, the circumstances created him more than he created the circumstances. He was just there to make as much hay from it as he could (money and fame). Which he did. A small man riding a big wave that happened to come along and catch him up.
 
Top