>Want to have sex with a man's bum? Perfectly normal.
>Attracted to girls on the verge of reproductive age when their reproductive potential is highest? Diseased and maladaptive.
Why is modern psychology so retarded or has it always been politically biased?
well if they're on the VERGE of reproductive age they're not AT reproductive age so yeah it is probably a mental illness that you'd want to mate with something that can't produce offspring. A girl that IS at reproductive age, so most 12+ year olds, sure it's not that weird to find them attractive but society discourages sexual relations with them for the same reason 12 year olds are disallowed from driving motor vehicles and also drinking, they typically cannot give meaningful consent.
Obviously modern psychology is retarded AND politically biased, but that doesn't mean some rules/opinions aren't based in some kind of sensible rationale. These rules and opinions are by nature not immutable but are obviously picked because they GENERALLY work decently at keeping order and a society that isn't full of pregnant 12 year olds.
That being said the girl in your pic was only ever impressive for her eyes and isn't all that attractive in EITHER pic.
>Why is modern psychology so retarded or has it always been politically biased?
There's nothing inherently wrong with the definition, it's how you label it.
Also, not all 12yo are hot. That's just a fallacy
Impregnate a woman, have a female child, raise them to puberty, let a male that is 30+ years older than them fuck them while you watch, report back on your experience and your thoughts on having sex with children
See you in 13+ years op
Actually... around 80% of psychological research (everything we structure our society around) has been proven unrepeatable. That is, 100% bullshit.
Psychology is nothing but mind control. It's a way to bend a societies' will in the direction you want.
Blame human morals you shitbag, psychology did not create human morals, it's used to reinforce the morals that are "right" and "wrong" that have been created to uphold the "peace".
Again, not the fault of psychology, it has to work with the ruleset it's been given.
Condoms don't block 100%, and aren't effective at all against some STD's.. like herpes. Even if they were, are you going to slap a condom around your head when kissing your girl?
Lets compare having children in a thurd world cuntry vs. the US, basket weaving in your village vs university and career. Knocking up a child before they have an opportunity to make a life if definitely the shitskin way of thinking.
I have daughters. I've caught guys looking at them more times than I can count. It's no big deal. I consider it natural, and chuckle it off.
They're not abducting them, anon.
You moron are missing the point of that pic, showcase that the girl looks almost 50 when she's not even 30, after a shitty life in Afghanistan.
You shouldn't be attracted by a kid and you shouldn't be attracted by an ugly woman, this pic has a context that you decided to deliberately ignore.
If she lived a good life in the west, she would have had way higher chances of being smoking hot at 29.
Most people already have oral herpes, (50 to 80% in the US), odds are you have it too, thats what cold sores are, most of the time herpes is just a few white bumps that go away after a while. Also most STDs are transmissible through saliva
If I saw someone jerking it to anyone, I'd be freaked out. What's your point?
Maybe try a better "omg-they're-evil-and-deserve-death-because-they-think-young-is-beautful" example?
Yes, everyone knows this information. It doesn't make any point whatsoever. I think you're trying to present yourself as informed, even though if you were, it would already be evident.
Condoms aren't 100% effective, and 100% of people don't have herpes.. or any STD for that matter. Condoms are not the magical protect-against-anything-always raincoat you think they are.
Yes, jerking it is natural, and socially acceptable.
Jerking it in public is not a socially acceptable action.
The only time anon would see someone jerking it to his daughter would be:
a. in public
b. outside their house
Both of these are not acceptable actions.
This does answer your question.
Is NYC really that bad? Jesus.
You depersonalize your response by saying it's not socially acceptable in public
So, to rephrase the question:
You are sitting on a park bench watching your daughter's play at the park. There is an oddly dressed man sitting nearby who seems to be watching your children and other children at the park. He is making odd motions, possibly indicative that he is masturbating. What are your initial emotions? What do you do?
The discussion is related to a "sexual revolution" where everyone fucks everyone else.
I do have sex, just not with everyone. It's like discussions on the internet. Before I inject my thoughts, I spend 10 seconds to see if I even know what the fuck I'm talking about. That's why I'm not an AIDS-infested faggot like you.
I go over to mr. public masturbator and tell him to fuck off jerking it in a public park.
>What are your initial emotions
I don't give a shit if he's jerking it to my kid, or someone else's kid. The act of masturbating does no harm to anyone, but doing that shit in public is not an acceptable action.
God-damnit your questions are stupid.
Give me ANYTHING, and I can form stupid fucking questions like this in a pathetic attempt to convince people to have the same dislike for something.
You're fucking tarded.
could just be that sandnigger females are ugly
>when their reproductive potential is highest
It's highest around age 22. But they have the most years of fertility remaining then. So it's a rape vs monogamy thing.
Calling someone a retard isn't an answer to the question.
You see, you avoided an answer to this question because you know it would invalidate your own defense, see:
> it's natural
> it's socially acceptable, but not in public
admitting you'd act on the fact that the creeper has photos of your child is indicative that you think it's wrong when it's your child under the lense
But go ahead and throw another insult, it won't help your position anyway
> nothing wrong here, just letting peds take pics of my.kids
But it's the purity of her eyes contrasted with the grit and grime of her outfit that make it a memorable photo, not her sex-babomb attractiveness that pedofag OP seems to see
No, I wouldn't act. I'm sure he won't share them with anyone.. he'd be risking his freedom. Jacking off to the pics in his room hurts no-one. IDGAF.
And I'm sure as shit not going to notify the police, who will then see my fucking kids naked. And probably save copies themselves, and jack off to them. Eventually, the CIA will probably use them to bait poor bastards into saving/sharing them and end up being raped and beaten in prison because idiotic fuckwit faggot motherfuckers like you somehow think a picture or thought deserves anything even remotely as bad as prison.
You're a painfully-stupid moron. Fuck off.
No, he didn't do anything wrong apart from jacking off in public.
Unless he somehow got naked pics, but if he's just taking pics of kids playing in the park who gives a shit? No harm no foul.
both acts are revolting. the girl on the left does not look like a 12 year old, that's why normal non-perverts may be attracted to her a little. i'm sure she was less "sexy" in person when they took that pic.
Psst, hey guess what? A pedophile can also be a child molester, they may not always be but there's a good possibility it can. Does that change your thought process any? If not, I kinda feel bad for your kids and you should probably call cps on yourself for all the pedos you let take pictures of your kids at the park
That's just stupid. We're not talking about molestation, dumbass. You're adding a layer so you can feel "correct". That's fucking pathetic.
A black can also be a nigger and rape wimmenz and kill peeplz.. do you support all niggers being shipped back to Africa?
> that's the fucking idiotic jump you just took
I never said I'd just sit there, and I never said jacking off to anyone of any age at a park was natural.
You're a fucking idiot. If you were any dumber you'd turn into a rock.
> A rock a pedophile cummed all over while jacking off to its still human children, while it weeps.
I honestly think you're a 12 year old girl. Your logic and reasoning is that fucked.
Get bleach. Drink. Drink more. Drink until you can't drink more.
how did she go from gotdamn to crone in 17 years?
also to respond to >>702445577
her eyes were impressive for that soul burning focus and spectacular green yes
but the shape of her face was nice, her nose was a lovely shape, her chin was uncleft, her skin and complexion wasn't savaged, and she was overall a very pretty girl. You'd see her and think "Yeah she'll grow into a beauty" and then you see what she actually grew into and it's fucking crazy how not attractive she became.
Also, you can't know if the guy taking pics of your children is a pedophile or a child molester or both unless you stroll up to him and ask? So do you sit by and let a random take pics of your kid or not?
> he's not doing anything wrong
> just taking pics of my children that's all
> it's just natural
> never said I'd sit there
If you're not the same person, then jesus at least post an identifier or something like PoorParentingSkills or ItsJustNatural or something like that
Hebephilia is normal. Pedophilia is not.
people need to realize the difference.
Wanting to have sex with teenagers is perfectly normal. Wanting to have sex with pre-teens is not.
The moderators of this forum don't like anyone to say they find teenagers attractive, but fuck them because it's perfectly normal and healthy and not pedophilia.
You really think I should walk up to someone and say "Are you a pedo, or a chomo?"
What fucking world do you live in?
If I thought someone was taking pics, I'd just leave. If he followed, he'd have a problem. Again, it could be pics of anyone. Of any age. It's fucking weird because it's weird. I'm not going to hate the guy more, or be angrier because it's my 15 year old daughter, and not my 23 year old daughter.
I never said I'd just sit there. Show me where I typed this sentence, with this sentiment:
> I'D JUST SIT THERE
Fuck is wrong with you?
Actually pedophilia is normal. You could take a thousand men into a room, show them pictures of nakedness without revealing the age.. and they'd all want teh nakedness. They've done plenty of studies, anon.
There's a huge difference between fantasy and reality. Thinking and doing are not the same.
Put reality doesn't care about what you think is "okay", or "normal". Neither do I, or anyone with even a snippet of self and independence.
It's "I think, therefore I am..." not "I think like everyone else, therefore I am..."
The pedos on this site are unbelievable.
Hundreds of threads made every day.
Every one of those about fucking little girls.
Girls that are barely done playing with dolls.
All they want to do is have a decent childhood.
Maybe you should just leave them the fuck alone.
Enough is enough. i'm reporting this.
Thank you for clarifying what you would do, 17 FUCKING POSTS LATER,
And you're calling me the idiot, least it didn't take me that long to utter
> I'd get up and walk away if some rando was taking pics of my kids
That's a pretty simple answer that requires basic fucking reading comprehension and could have been finished over 20 posts ago
> it's weird because it's weird
We're done here, argue that it's not wrong for a person to take pics of others in public (see: >>702452710) but say you'd walk away because it's weird? Why's it weird again?
Maybe because you don't know their intentions? Funny stuff
You're mixing me up with other posters.
This site needs ID's again.
I miss ID's.
I wouldn't do anything means I wouldn't call the police, I wouldn't attack him, I wouldn't ask him weird-as-fuck questions like you propose, etc. You take things too literal, but just literal enough to where you're "right".
For instance, I don't see you interpreting "I wouldn't do anything..." as meaning I wouldn't fucking breath, or interpret images with my eyes, or hear sounds, etc.
Jesus fuck: I wouldn't do anything.
tbqh, if on the right she actually had taken care of herself over the years, was wearing some sort of makeup, was clean, had taken care of her skin, and wasn't in a full fucking bodysuit etc she'd probably be pretty fucking hot
I asked for clarification on who was posting here: >>702457588
Not muh fault you didn't identify yourself
Also, clarification is better than leaving a blanket statement that is subject to interpretation, but you didn't make the statement, so who gives a shit now
> I don't see you interpreting I wouldn't do anything as...
Because those items mentioned are not relevant to the situation so why wouldn't "I wouldn't do anything" be interpreted as "I wouldn't breathe"? Because it's not relevant.
What makes it wrong is not the fact that you are attracted to her, it's the fact that she's not attracted TO YOU, but you still want to force her into having sex with you, regardless.
They certainly are cute as hell, but that doesn't mean that they find you cute as well. Do you see the problem here?
If you are trying to convince a child to have sex with you, but you are not a child yourself, then you are doing something objectively wrong, simply because you are not taking into consideration what the other person would want, or decide, if they actually had the ability to do so.
You can twist it, you can dismiss it, or you can even imply it's not true because they went along with it anyway, but you can't deny that this isn't a reciprocal experience.
If pedophiles and child molesters are not the same, it's something that's up to debate, the problem is how the individuals rarely take into account the kid's free will, since they really don't know any better.
If you think the same tactics used to lure a 12 years old into bed would work with someone 6 or 7 years older just the same, you are either not taking everything into account, or you are being purposely deceptive.
>if they actually had the ability to do so
But what if they do? What if they know what sex is (and what 12yo doesn't today) and know what the possible outcomes of sex are (ie. STD, preggo, etc.), lets just say, what if the 12yo is as informed as any 18yo, why is it still wrong?
Child molesters sexually abuse children
Pedophiles are sexually attracted to children
Being sexually attracted to something doesn't mean you'll have sex with it
A pedophile isn't always a child molester, a dude who wanks it in his basement to kiddie pics may never go near a kid or get close to any sexual act with a physical child
generally, children and young teens HAVE the ability to decide, but they have a very lacking image of how the world works (and sex in it). So what they basically lack is context when talking about sex. sex is a huge deal (it shouldn't be imho but that's another topic entirely) in society and has a lot of implications, many of them can not be simply explained in an educational video. yes, the basic concept is not rocket science, but sex doesn't exist in a vacuum.
If you are not allowing the person to decide what kind of activities they would want to partake in regards to sex, be it their partner, or the time dedicated to perform it, where the activity is supposed to happen, etc, then you are automatically forcing them to comply with you.
Robbing them of this kind of freedom to decide whether or not you are a suitable partner for them, automatically makes it forced, especially if you consider how little these people actually know about sex.
I agree, but it can't be denied that some can understand the "implications" and handle the emotional rollercoaster after the experience.
I get it, having sex with with someone under the consent age is something that can never be allowable or tolerable because you have truly evil people out there that would abuse it. Sex crimes would more than double.
But I hate anyone who whiteknights against the fact that there's nothing wrong with a real bond between two people that feel real love. Love knows no age, gender, religion or ethnicity.
All I can say is emma watson is still hot as fuck to me but she is an outlier
It's not a matter of what they know, or what they decide to do, the problem lies with the adult in question.
The kid could be completely aware of the situation, and the risks involved, it doesn't matter, what makes it objectively wrong is not allowing them to CHOOSE who their partner is. That's something pedophiles never take into account whenever they try to bring up this retarded "muh natural attraction".
yes, but say they're the one who lusts for the older partner. They're the one who initiates contact, sure you can come back saying "it's the adults responsibility to etc etc etc." but really, what would be the big deal if a 12yo understood and decided, "Im having sex with that 30yo guy from the coffee shop"
you don't understand, nobody said anything about having sex with children. someone can be a pedophile an literally not have any contact with children whatsoever. I like those weird desert foxes with the huge ears, but never seen one in person my entire life.
>Love knows no age, gender, religion or ethnicity.
people need to stop with that bullshit, it's an over simplification and arbitrary as fuck.
I'm not the guy you are talking to , but you are stupid as fuck.
You tried making the point that if it were -his- kids he would have an emotional response to it.
You then nit picked it down to where he agreed he would probably walk away - BeCAUsE it's weird.
It's weird because he is jacking off in public - remove the responders daughters from the equation and he would likely do the same thing.
He ain't mad about it - which is relevant - he just thinks it's "odd" and would remove himself and his children.
The same goes for the picture taking.
He is saying he wouldn't approach the guy - or have an emotional response to it like you implied - he would just leave the situation - because it's ODD.
Are you fucking stupid ? He has disproven your "point"
>say they're the one who lusts for the older partner
This doesn't happen. You may think it does, but it's not something that occurs naturally, at all.
Assuming you are not completely corrupt, and still listens to logic, you'll know that even boys who lust for older partners, would never go higher than someone who's age almost double that of their own, and that's a thing to be kept in mind whenever this argument, about who's initiating what, comes to question.
>sure you can come back saying "it's the adults responsibility to etc etc etc."
It's not necessarily their responsibility to respond accordingly, but again, that's not something that naturally happens among children and adults.
>what would be the big deal if a 12yo understood and decided, "Im having sex with that 30yo guy from the coffee shop"
You are confusing a 12 year old initiating sexual contact with a 30 years old, which never happens naturally, and a 30 years old explicitly trying to corner a kid into complying with HIS initiative.
Those are two very distinct scenarios that MUST be VERY clear if you want to bring up an argument from that standpoint, those are NOT interchangeable.
>Only HIS initiative.
Yeah I guess women can't be pedophiles eh?
>someone can be a pedophile an literally not have any contact with children whatsoever
You are trying to imply that the persecution comes from what those people are, and not from what they do, and although I agree, to some very limited extent, that sometimes all the paranoia surrounding this subject goes way over the top, and it gets used as weapon against people more often than a defensive measure for those who are vulnerable, there is no cost effective way for it to be dealt with if it's not this kind of zero tolerance attitude towards it.
That's anecdotal, but it's unfair to say that just because in your case it would be okay, that the same idea would apply to every single one of your classmates, regardless of gender. Would you feel the same if, instead of Mrs. Anderson, it was Mr. Anderson, touching your shoulders a little bit too much whenever you got closer to him? That's the point I'm trying to make here. I don't have a problem with what the kid wants, as long as they have the chance to deny all initiatives.
Pedophiles are overwhelmingly males, and it's almost exclusively a male problem.
>that's plain bullshit. the most basic instinct of any sexually mature animal is to fuck anything in sight. humans are no exception just because we wear pants.
You are right, rape is a natural instinct, so is murder, so is theft.
>I don't have a problem with what the kid wants, as long as they have the chance to deny all initiatives.
And that's what I can agree with. Let them have their choice. I know I'm shooting for a perfect scenario but it's true that there can be a real "love" relationship between <16 + >30 or more. We just don't like seeing it because it's abnormal and the sheeple must follow the bandwagon so not to appear abnormal themselves.
Exclusively a male problem?
Yes sir women absolutely never sleep with underage men and women.
Pedophellia is a human problem and a herd mentality around what arbitrary age a person is ready to learn about sex.
2/10 you tried
>plenty of young boys and girls want to fuck older people
It doesn't happen as often as you are trying to make it seem, but for that to be the case you must define very specifically what you mean when you say "young".
You could imply that since a 15 year old boy wanting to fuck a 19 year old girl is something natural, that a 7 year old girl wanting to have sex with a 35 year old guy is also natural, using the exact same logic, which you know isn't true, if you are actually being serious, and having a logical discussion.
Having a clear definition, of who is initiating what and with who, is crucial when it comes to what is "natural" to occur and what is sketchy.
yep. you, sir, want to do those thing every single day. the only reason you don't do that is because your parents (and everyone else around you) taught you not to. and for good reason, murder is bad, so is forced sex. but what we're talking about here is sexually mature children wanting to have sex, and parents teaching them not to have sex at all because... reasons? the guy I responded to claimed that children (again, we're talking about 13+ year old people here) never want to have sex, which is still bullshit, it's people not wanting children to have sex.
>there can be a real "love" relationship between <16 + >30 or more
What no one seems to get into their heads is that any <16 would always prefer to be in a relationship with another <16, not with a >30+.
That's my main point. The >30+ isn't normally interesting to the kid the same way the kid is interesting to the old fuck.
Here's your (You).
>VERGE of reproductive age
>a society that isn't full of pregnant 12 year olds
Pick one or the other, bro. Either "it's wrong cause they're not sexually mature" or "it's wrong cause we don't like people getting pregnant that young". Don't go mixing and matching premises.
>the guy I responded to claimed that children
>never want to have sex
Did you miss the part where I specifically mentioned that kids are NOT naturally inclined to prioritize partners who are far older than they are themselves?
>it's people not wanting children to have sex.
With OTHER CHILDREN.
Why are you intentionally failing to mention their partners every single time? Kids fuck kids all the time, everywhere, everyday, be it against or behind their parent's backs, it just happens and it will never stop. What you are trying to argue here, though, is that those same children would be also having sex with adults, if it wasn't for them explicitly forbidding their kids from having any sexual encounters whatsoever. This is YOUR bullshit.
Actually, I have direct experience contrary to this. Best friends with a gay guy who once had a huge crush on me. I'm straight, so it was a no go. Also, the fact that he was 13 while I was 19 kinda made things super fuckin' awkward.
Long story short, he'd tell me about all his sexual exploits with 30, 40, and 50 year old men, and I was pretty much "WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU"
Now he talks about how much of an asshat I was in reacting to his sexuality, and I kind of agree with him. He was consenting, they were both getting enjoyment out of it, and no one got hurt. Still weirds me the fuck out, but hey: people will do what they want, regardless of how loudly you scream, "THIS ISN'T NORMAL AND YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THIS" at them.
as soon as someone reaches sexual maturity, the traits they find attractive in others is NOT dependent on age. they go for the healthy, the strong, the one with the best proportions, the one that wold have the best children with them. it's that simple. if a 30 yo woman has great tits, there will be a looooot of 14 yo guys wanting to bang her.
Correction: pedophelia USED to be an "overwhelmingly male" problem. Now women are catching up.
Also, seriously? Your "that's just one errant case" bullshit flies in the face of dozens of news stories in which male and female students get the hots for their teachers and want to fuck them senseless, then subsequently get caught and make it all over my 5pm television newscast. Please, are you even a part of human society?
This is a 13 years old and a 19 years old. That's why I mentioned it's VERY important to put a context on what is happening.
I know about this 11 years old (now 13) who used to go on omegle and get naked for older men all the time. Does that make it ok for a 30, 40, or 50 year old men, to approach to him and start making moves on him?
There are lots of nuances, and this is far from being a black and white issue.
Finding a teenaged girl sexy and wanting to have sex with them isn't abnormal. Actually following through and doing that is IMMORAL though, because many of them aren't capable of consent. That's the distinction most idiots can't comprehend.
>What no one seems to get into their heads is that any <16 would always prefer to be in a relationship with another <16, not with a >30+.
Oh boy, how sheltered were you? I knew multiple girls who would have hooked up or even slept with some male teachers, and likewise for guys with female teachers.
Well duh. That's because the 14 year old boy is giving consent for the WOMAN to fuck him, not the man. Now, if the boy wanted to fuck the 30 year old man, THEN how do you rationalize it?
I have trouble understanding that post, could you please rephrase why is that wrong? if consent is given of course. I'm ready to accept that you're right, I just don't understand the reasoning (I'm not a native english speaker).
12 year olds dont always look like that retard
Also, 12 year olds arent at "highest reproductive potential", you act like youre attracted to children for the betterment of the world
Youre just a faggot
If you don't want to stay on point, then there won't be many reasons to answer to what you are saying.
A 15 year old girl who wants to hook up with a 27 year old teacher, doesn't make it okay for a 23 year old guy to fuck a 6 year old girl.
How do you protect one without affecting the other? This is far from being an easy issue to tackle without any sort of outrageous or absurd regulation.
>if the boy wanted to fuck the 30 year old man,
You are bringing up this argument again.
Even if it was true, that somehow a 14 years old, find a 30 year old man more attractive than another boy of his age, it does not mean he'll be okay with every single 30 year old man approaching him.
That's the real danger. How do you stop a 30 year old from abusing a 14 year old who decided things were going a little too fast, and he didn't expect he would change his mind? How do you protect him in this case? That's the problem that MUST be kept always in mind.
>verge of reproductive age when their reproductive potential is highest? Diseased and maladaptive.
that's bullshit unless you have some retarded little microbenis
the chances of the girl dying during childbirth is far larger than those who have matured
also the vagina needs time to heal after fucking for the first time
also unless you have a microbenis little girls can't handle dicks without serious damage
tl;dr kill your fucking self you sick weak disgusting life ruining sack of shit.
The adult's initiative can't always be deflected by an unwilling teenager.
There is no way a child can defend himself, in case someone decides to take advantage of them.
What most people would call "love", can easily be deconstruct as coercion, and abuse of power.
She could have been a supermodel in America.. instead her culture has aged her into trash
>How do you stop a 30 year old from abusing a 14 year old who decided things were going a little too fast, and he didn't expect he would change his mind?
That's not exclusive to 14 year olds, happens to adults all the time, that's what rape prevention is for. Again you are assuming every single 30 yo is a rapist.
That's a great question: how do you stop a 30 year old from abusing another 30 year old who decided things were going a little two fast, and didn't expect that they would change their mind? How do you protect them in this case?
What makes THIS problem any less significant than the problem you just outlined?
>too hard to solve without retarded solutions hurr durr
Perhaps a formal, objective, and measurable definition of "consent" could solve the issue, rather than simply saying, "black people can't consent" for instance.
I'm not assuming every single 30 year old is a rapist, I'm assuming not every single 14 year old is equipped with the tools that allow him to defend himself in case he isn't willing to accept the demands a 30 year old makes them, or that said 30 years old will respect the his will at all.
The same way you are implying that I "assume" every single 30 year old is a rapist, you are assuming no 30 year old can possibly ever take advantage of his power over a child, so they should all be free to have sex with underage kids as much as they want since it will certainly be consensual in every single case.
>how do you stop a 30 year old from abusing another 30 year old who decided things were going a little two fast, and didn't expect that they would change their mind? How do you protect them in this case?
Two adults. That's a complete different scenario, because you can assume they put themselves into that situation, and they knew on every step what was supposed to happen next. This does not happen the same way with children.
If you've read into any case law on what defines consent, you'd see it's been discussed extensively. A lot of it is more related to consent from minors for medical procedures, but in most cases it can be used for other circumstances such as consent for sex.
>... or that said 30 years old will respect his will at all
You're clearly assuming that the 30 year old will be a rapist.
Alternatively: you're saying that, "Because there's a chance that those under 18 will be raped, we must criminalize sexual relations between underage and of-age individuals."
That makes as much sense as saying, "Because there's a chance that females will be raped by males, we must criminalize sexual relations between males and females."
These are the facts, shit heads.
1) Thinking hebephilia is abhorrent or even aberrant is inarguably incorrect as well as borderline dishonest.
2) Thinking it's okay to *actually* fuck 12 year olds is equally wrong.
The attraction is normal. Fucking a kid isn't.
In that case, we've already established that minors can consent, and statutory rape laws are bullshit because they pay no heed as to whether or not consent has been given. In other words, they treat someone who received consent from an underage person the exact same way as someone who did not receive consent from an underage person.
again, that happens to adults too. I had a coworker, she was like 150cm tall, she was sexually harassed by our boss all the time. I quit so idk what happened to her since, but she was considering reporting the guy to the authorities. The point is, abusing power is not a children-specific problem, and banning child-adult sex in this context is just spraying deodorant on a pile of shit.
>you can assume they put themselves into that situation
nope. NOPE that's not at ALL the assumption in most rape/sexual harassment cases. a girl's drink being roofied is not exactly her "putting herself into that situation".
>You're clearly assuming that the 30 year old will be a rapist.
You must be trolling at this point.
>"Because there's a chance that those under 18 will be raped, we must criminalize sexual relations between underage and of-age individuals."
No, but this could be re-phased to:
"Because those under 18 are not equipped with the tools to effectively dismantle, or avoid, a situation which they may find themselves entrapped to, we must criminalize sexual relations between underage and of-age individuals."
>"Because there's a chance that females will be raped by males, we must criminalize sexual relations between males and females."
Adults know well what they are getting into, every single time, and every single step of it.
Being attracted to pubescent girls is natural... it's a biological/chemical function.
The reason it's illegal to have sex with young girls is because we aren't fucking retarded savages. We are highly intelligent animals, we understand that sex no longer serves as an exclusively biological function and that it can have far reaching psychological and emotional repercussions on young people ultimately negatively impacting their psychosocial development.
I already know in advance that this is bullshit, but I'll give you the chance to prove it.
>know well what they're getting into
Again, this is bullshit, but of course, I'll give you the chance again here, too: prove it.
As a little hint to why you're full of it: where do you think these "tools to effectively dismantle... a situation" come from, exactly?
"Because women are not equipped with the tools to effectively dismantle, or avoid, a situation which they may find themselves entrapped to, we must criminalize sexual relations between women and non-women individuals."
In other news, random women knocked out and brutally raped by her stalker neighbor. She knew what she was getting into, every single step of it.
Correction: we are AWARE that sex serves a biological function. Believe it or not, the vast majority of animals do NOT have sex "because they know they need to reproduce." They do it because it feels good. Just read any article on orgasms in animals and the massive amount of pleasure they receive from it.
To the vast majority of animals, sex just feels good. They may or may not later realize that pregnancy and birth result after, but they do know early on that sexual stimulation rocks. And that's why they do it. In studies where animals have had the nerves severed to their genitals, guess what happens?
They don't fuck.
>a girl's drink being roofied is not exactly her "putting herself into that situation".
Yes, it is. Contrary to what feminist literature tells you, you must be responsible for your actions, and if those actions lead you into harm, you must be held accountable for it. It's your responsibility to prevent harm from being done to you, like watching what your own drink, or paying close attention to who is around you and what they are doing.
You are trying to compare a drunken whore in a club being roofied, with a 13 year old boy being forced to suck his coach's dick under treat. Those are completely different scenarios, and if you don't think they are, then there's just nothing anybody can realistically tell you to convince you otherwise.
Sure, women can defend themselves perfectly fine. I thought this thread was about adults who believe having sex with children is normal, and should be legalized for some twisted reason.
Females can defend themselves and avoid harm.
Are you seriously asking me to prove to you why a 14 years old can't defend himself from a 30 year old?
Maybe this woman simply wouldn't age well. I wouldn't say 12 is when the reproduction potential is at highest, some 12 year old girls don't even have a period. Also having children that early leads to low birth weight and possible premature birth. Mother is also at higher risk for hypertension. A woman in her late teens and early 20s is what would be considered peak.
Psychology is a theoretical science which is based mostly on speculative research and human behaviour, yet society takes it like it's an actual science like chemistry or physics.
Are you seriously insisting that the average woman--110 pounds, 30% skeletal muscle mass--can defend herself against the average man--160 pounds, 45% skeletal muscle mass--any better than a 14 year old from a 30 year old?
Please. Enlighten us.
>Maybe this woman simply wouldn't age well.
Pretty much this. Some people simply just don't age well. She probably didn't take care of herself very well either, probably too busy sucking Abdullah's cock and taking care of his 12 children.
You are the one trying to bring up women to this discussion.
The only claim I made here is that a 14 year old simply DO NOT possess the capability to defend himself effectively from, and avoid harm from being done to him by, a 30 year old.
I women can do it or not, I couldn't care less.
Dogs can't defend themselves against 30 years old either, should sex between them be outlawed? Your reasoning is just unsustainable.
I get so depressed when I see how retarded the average person is who can't understand simple facts like this. People mixing up attraction to young teenaged girls as being wrong vs. the actual act of having sex with them, because they're too stupid to separate the two.
It's like people who think all pedophiles are rapists. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing the majority of pedophiles would never touch a child because they know that would fuck the kid's entire life up.
Politics fuck everything, and the general public isn't ready to hear that its normal in some cases to want to fuck a younger girl. I remember when I was between 16 and 18 years old I was seeing the best pussies and bodies of my life. I don't like pre pubescent girls, and I do believe that its fucked up to have sex with one and that's pretty much all there is to say from my point of view. But in regard to everything else, its just going to take a lot of time, not enough people are intellectually or emotionally developed enough to be okay with the concept of just a hypothetical sixteen your old (sexually and emotionally developed) girl to fuck lets say a 20 year old male (me)
>if women can do it or not, I couldn't care less
But it has everything to do with the matter at hand. If you're insisting that sex with anyone under 18 should be criminalized on the grounds that underagers can't defend themselves, you must similarly show that people OF AGE can do it. If they can't, then your reasoning is contradictory: you're outlawing an act based on cosmetics alone (i.e. "If he's white, you can have sex with him. If he's black, you can't. Blacks can't defend themselves."). And that's pure bullshit.
For the record, I'm not advocating FOR criminalizing anything. Rather, I'm calling into question existing criminalizations based on the merits of their substance.
This. Like I said before: I was not fucking ready when I found out my (then) 14-year-old buddy was hooking up with 37 and 44 year old guys in hotel rooms because they had "amazing dick". I won't lie, it blew my fucking mind. In a bad way. And I reacted poorly as a result because of how conditioned I was to thinking "all underage sex is bad, wrong, and harmful".
He's in his 20's now and doing just fine. He still jabs me a bit for "being a hypersensitive douche" back then, and I get it now. We need to be SMART about our laws, not STRICT. And unfortunately, the existing law is way more strict than it is smart.
>14-year-old buddy was hooking up with 37 and 44 year old guys in hotel rooms because they had "amazing dick". I won't lie, it blew my fucking mind.
Your friend is a fucking faggot.
You are basing your argument on the fact that 30 year olds can overpower 14 year olds, so therefore they can't have sex with them. What I'm trying to say is, 30 year old men can overpower lots of other people, including women, so by your logic 30 yo men should not be allowed the have sex with women. Which is ridiculous.
>sex with anyone under 18 should be criminalized on the grounds that underagers can't defend themselves
>you must similarly show that people OF AGE can do it.
If A implies B, does that mean not A implies not B?
This isn't a topic about what adults can, or cannot do with other adults. It's a topic about what adults SHOULD NOT do with kids, plain and simple.
If it's perfectly fine, and it explains perfectly well one situation, it doesn't mean it has to apply and explain every other similar situation, that's the way an idiot would see the world.
That's just it: you're not explaining ON WHAT GROUNDS you make that argument. Maybe I've not been making this clear enough:
"If an adult gets taken advantage of, that's okay. If a child gets taken advantage of, though, that's horrific." <--- Explain that line of thinking. Justify it.
He's trying to imply that since something happens to someone, then it must apply to everybody else equally, or else it's invalid for said someone, as well as to everybody else.
He's trying hard to bend his mind just to be right, but he knows very well that he's wrong, but he's using feminist logic because it's trendy.
she is though
this was a cover of a national geographic
they loved her eyes and set out to find her years later
she was 12 at the time of the first picture which they were surprised to find out and 29 in the next
The only reason why society has a problem with pedos is because the media puts it in there heads that people are actually raping them. There are people out there that do, and that's fucked up. But just having sex with an attractive 14 year old, I don't see how that's wrong.
Sad part is she was probably forced into this marriage with no other choice, does nothing except sit at home all day and take care of her kids and she has to be obedient to her husband or else she gets beat up and trashed. Seriously, places like this actually still exist in 2016 it's embarrassing.
>don't have the same rights as adults.
against a dude assaulting them they fucking do.
that's an american thing, I wasn't considering that, fair point. does everybody just walk around with guns there all the time? in the workplace and such?
What argument are you trying to say it's baseless? That a 30 year old should not be allowed to pursue a 14 year old kid sexually because said kid may not want this interaction to take place in any way?
It sounds pretty fair to me.
>"If an adult gets taken advantage of, that's okay. If a child gets taken advantage of, though, that's horrific."
Adults can defend themselves, and possess the reasoning necessary to avoid harm from being done to them by another ADULT.
Kids, on the other hand, do not possess fully developed reasoning skills, nor body mass, necessary to either attempt to defend themselves, or to avoid coercion from a fully grown ADULT.
I don't know how I can be any clearer, but I guess you are just meme-ing at this point.
>A implies B, therefore !A implies !B
wow, someone flunked logic. It actually means Not B implies Not A. Thus,
if I got a cookie, I get the shits
if I don't get the shits, I didn't get a cookie
>against a dude assaulting them they fucking do.
No they don't. Read up on law, children and adult rights are worlds different apart from each other. Children also get scared more easily, they don't want to complain against other people nor do they really understand how law works. You're talking about children as if they're fully grown adults, just fucking stop.
>that's an american thing
My point was that children are generally not allowed to carry weapons designed for self defense, and if they do try to defend themselves, it'll generally go into the adult's favour.
So we come back full circle to what I said the FIRST time:
>adults have the means to defend themselves, and kids don't
Prove that adults have the means to defend themselves. Prove that kids don't. When I proffered proof to you that adults don't necessarily have the means to defend themselves, you spouted some bullshit about "I don't care if they can". Which, clearly, is nonsense. You gonna stop prancing about the point or what?
>if they do try to defend themselves, it'll generally go into the adult's favour.
Jesus, what fucked up laws you have there? I'm sorry, I had no idea, I take everything back. It's like you want children to be attacked just so you can say they're defenseless.
Why am I still taking this bait?
If you think children don't know if they want something, or are incapable of making decisions, you have drunk so much koolaid that you are incapable of rational, independent thought, and can only parrot what you're told.
I'm not 'for' anything. I'm just against you, and the lies you spew.
>children don't have the same rights as adults
No, actually, they have better rights. This renders your earlier point moot.
>Licensed to carry
Bitch how many people in America do you think have stopped an attempted sexual assault with a firearm? Protip: the number's too small to be meaningful to this discussion. Unless you like haggling over the 0.5%.
>fully developed reasoning skills
How do you measure "fully developed reasoning skills"? Most studies on adults' ability to conduct logic ranges from college-level to kindergarten. Averages leave them at low-end high-school level (read: well below 18 years of age).
Let me make this very easy for your 4chan/b/ mind to understand:
Just because you want to have sex with a 14 year old, it doesn't mean that the same 14 year old wants to have sex with you.
Any non-familial adult who is the target of a juvenile's violence when said adult is accused of sexually assaulting said juvenile tends to get the shit-end of the Law & Order stick. In fact, ANYONE in America accused of child sexual assault tends to get the shit-end of the Law & Order stick. I'd say the child's rights are very, VERY well-protected, thank you very much.
You're wrong. You're denying the fact that children do initiate sex, amongst themselved, with adults, and family pets.
The truth is that you are descended from a long line of people you would call pedos, chomos, and rapists. Children having sex, and babies, is why you exist.
Everything you're saying applies to your family tree.
Don't like it?
Easy solution: kys
>and family pets.
Just stumbled into town this morning, but pic related.
or did you mean Chuck Finley?
>well if they're on the VERGE of reproductive age they're not AT reproductive age so yeah it is probably a mental illness that you'd want to mate with something that can't produce offspring.
Does that mean its a mental illness to be gay if another mans bum wont produce offspring
Did I ever tell you the story of how my little sister kept sitting on my best friend's lap, asking him to take his shirt off, and inviting him into her sleeping bag so that they could "sleep tight"? She also asked my girlfriend to kiss me while she watched, and would beg my best friend to play with her in her room when he and I were watching anime.
She was fucking 10.
I think there's something seriously wrong with my sister, though, so she's probably far from the norm.
I mean, safe space and all, but wtf mate.
A 6 year old girl my gf babysits for once asked me to kiss her. I was super uncomfortable when it happened because my girlfriend was there... and a part of me really wanted to do it.
>dont worry, i consider suicide bi-weekly
Wait seriously? You're not bullshitting me? Do you send her to therapy or something? I mean, all my friends just laugh it off, but I gotta tell you it freaks me the fuck out. I don't know if she's gonna be a porn star when she grows up or start stripping at 15 on omegle and I'm gonna see it by accident or go home with a stranger and get murder-raped or what, man. It seriously stresses me out sometimes. Cause like, I've NEVER heard of that happening any other time with any other kids. Ever.
Well, she's your sister, that's not what this thread is about.
If she presented this same sort of behavior with an adult - stranger - male, then there's probably something wrong with her. This behavior may be common among kids themselves, but towards adults it simply doesn't happen.
I didn't try that hard, to be honest, so at least I don't feel any guilt for hurting her. Just touched junk to junk, chickened out, and let the Protestant guilt trips do the rest.
no that's pretty normal actually
girls are just curious, and if her parents didn't tell her that "sex is bad" or "touching yourself down there is bad" they want to satisfy their curiousity about sex and male genetalia
because living in a world that makes you feel the way she did on the left would be stressful as fuck and she doesn't have time or will to pretty herself up like other 29 year olds in denial about their age.
Me and my friends had all just turned 21 and 22 and shit when she started doing this. She was literally not even half our age. I'd hardly describe this as "among kids". But yeah, no shit. I'd literally never heard of that happening until she started doing it while we were gaming and watching tv and all that.
The willingness to enter a homosexual relationship if there are no other alternatives is an advantage to a pair bonding animal whose offspring requires at least a pair of parents to develop optimally. If the female bird dies, and there are only males in the area, which male bird gets the advantage, the one who bonds with another male or the one who struggles to raise the hatchlings alone?
I hear you. I consider myself lucky that I never did anything like that as a kid. Ive done some dumb shit that I regret, but luckily nothing sexual. I think it would ruin sex for me.
... oh god... ewwwww. There is not enough brain bleach to undo what you just inadvertently revealed to me oh god. But thanks, at least now I can say to myself "she not demented or being molested by someone in the family, just curious". Glad to know I'm not the only one who has to deal with this.
She knows you, and feels comfortable, safe, or whatever else, around those people.
It's an entirely different situation than, for example, she deciding to just do the exact same thing to a stranger on the street, or to the guy from the UPS.
little kids try to learn by repeating what they saw/heard about, from their parents or other kids it doesn't matter to them. When I was 7 I was watching a nature documentary because I liked animals, but when it ended another documentary about Hitler came on next. By the time my mother noticed I've already drawn multiple sheets of paper full of swastikas.
I dunno. Preeeeetty sure she'd make friends with a serial killer, so long as she didn't find out he was actually a serial killer. Kid's too nice for her own good. But yeah, it makes sense she'd be more willing to be that way around my... oh god fuck you, now I just realized even more things I wish I didn't!!! Ughhhhhhh fuck fuck fuck
oh lawd dis da truf
>watched Nutty Professor two nights ago
>sitting in gym
>think back to Nutty Professor
>begin flailing about shouting, "I GOT NO TITTIES! I GOT NO TITTES!" at the top of my lungs
>Teacher's reaction: wtf.jpg
who cares about modern(american) psychology?
those faggots are the same people that pump 6 yo kids full with drugs and hormones because they THINK you can change your fucking gender like your underwear which isn't even possible, but a 16 yo isn't old enough to consent?
freud is turning in his grave right now
america was a mistake
>not waiting 5 years for the caramel point
there you go bud
also it does a shit ton of damage to the Childs mental health growing up, i think you have to be missing a basic human function where you would rather fuck than help/protect a child and thus i find pedophilia to be a mental disorder rather than a "sexual preference" like some like to call it.
its not about being informed its about ability to make correct choices, kids do dumb things often with little thought about the matter. The mentality of a 12yo is very different from that of a 18yo. if i look back at my 12yo self he was a fucking idiot, for me its the equivalent of trying to fuck a very wasted girl, you can defend it but you still lack morals and only think with your dick.
this dude is also right, my friends sister ran around the house naked and stared wrestling one of my other friends while we laughed, she wouldn't dream of doing that now, just shows the limitations of a Childs mentality, its very in the moment with little thought of the future.
they can't change a dick to a fully functioning vagina.
they're just men without a dick and have a open wound instead.
but you didn't get my point like at all you fucking kike
you can't tell me that fucking niggers are the same species as me.
they are NOT fucking human, faglord
However you put it they still have something resembling a pussy which can be fucked like any pussy
And although I kinda agree that niggers don't rank with crackers and although you can't receive organs from other races as far as I know I still think that due to very similiar genome us crackers and them niggers are by standards same species
I'm a non offending pedophile and this attraction I have to children/young teens is not based on love. It never is for pedophiles. For us it's about simple sexual attraction. Sure I'd love to have my own cute little child who I can care for and cuddle, show the world to and love. But i also want to have sex with them. Pedophilia and all the subcategories of it are all just sexual attractions. I wish some of us would stop pretending like it's about love or the ability to reproduce. It's not.
they shouldn't even be called primates
they're the lowest of all lifeforms on the planet
you can fuck a fleshlight like a pussy too
But it's still not a vagina
do you now how high the suicide rate is with trannie's?
they all regret it at a point in their life, a kid shouldn't be allowed to ruin his life in such an early age
niggers belong in the oven with their jewish friends
The reason trannies have such ahigh suicide rate is because of preasure, bullying and the fact that society sets them as outsiders
I'm not defending trannies, I'm defending facts
And as a respone to your lowest lifeforms you can atleast teach a nigger to make a hut or pick cotton, you can't teach monkey do that
I wish my country had standards like spain so I could love 13 year olds and not be seen as a creep
The youngest I can legaly love is 15 (not to mention 2 of neighbouring contries have age of consent of 14)
I can't argue with that logic. There's some shit out there I'd go to jail for
Well for starters, this is a bad pic for your argument. The girl in question is an Afghani woman that has suffered greatly at the hands of her husband, who married her a year after (or close to it) the picture was taken. She has been beaten and repeatedly raped (by our standards) as she was being used as a baby factory, and forced to do back breaking work daily. So while technically she is 29 in the pic (34ish now I think), she has aged horribly thanks to her hard life. In the west we aren't going to see this usually.
Now as far as OPs argument: Its a simple fact that a woan doesnt reach her "sexual peak" till she is in her 30's. This is when the eggs are flowing and her reproductive system is primed. In the past females were considered adult as soon as they were fertile, perhaps due to the fatality rate during birth being 50%, in otherwords, bangout your young wife as soon as you can so you findout if she is going to be able to give you more kids. The age of consent laws revolve around this fertility age, as young as 13 in some states, but usually 16, because it is also the age at which you can marry.
In modern times, the age of consent persists because it allows for the female to mature, mentally catching up with her body. Women are not exactly rational creatures and as tweens less so. The male is viewed as taking advantage of the female for this reason and rightly so, because whike the male can distinguish lust from love at a young age, a female cant till her 20's and becomes emmotionally destroyed if exposed to sex at a young age.
tldr: bitches turn into crazy whores if you bang them out too young.
because if you don't show the entire body they can't tell the age. This includes the face. Theres physical indicators to biologically indicate whether they're of age for mating
The problem is when they DONT look underage or prepubescent and its somehow not normal anymore.
12 year old girl has massive tits and looks old enough to bang? Fuck you, you're a pedophile because she's actually underage.
problem is society doesn't know the difference between wanting to bang underage girls because they look mature, and wanting to bang children because they're children.
no look at pic related
a monkey eats his ants with a stick while niggers
in africa still eat their fufu with hands
By acquiring a girl just on the verge of reproductive age you can potentially have all her fertile years to yourself and get the maximal number of offspring from her. This is what I mean by highest reproductive potential.
I'm all for pedos not being monsters, but "love" as a bullshit excuse just is just that, bullshit. because without a clear definition, people can label any goddamn thing "love" and get offended when other say yeah, that's not actually how love works. here, I'll give you a definition and you're not gonna like it: love is when your body tells you "that person right there, I want to settle down and raise children with hem". And yes, this is still applicable to a same sex person (raising a child != making one) and even teens around 14-15, but not actual children. If you are feeling "love" towards undeveloped children/animals/inanimate objects/ideas then I'm sorry but you are malfunctioning.