Whats so wrong about pedophilia anyways? If gays can't change who they love, neither can pedophiles...

Whats so wrong about pedophilia anyways? If gays can't change who they love, neither can pedophiles. Who says an adult can't have a loving relationship with a child?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=BH4FW0d9jyQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

hello mohammed

Singapore were right about jailing this nigga

it's called discipline and not fucking up children's lives forever to satisfy your own depravity

>it's called discipline and not fucking up children's lives

Sex fucks up the life of anyone younger than (insert legal age dependent on part of world you live in and what year it is)

>fucking up children's lives forever
Pederasy made the ancient world work, you probably wouldn't even be here if some rich pervert didn't like diddling kids, kids lives are only ruined because they are stigmatized otherwise they would probably just forget about it by the time they mature.

Not pedo, but is there actually any proof of that

There litterally is no proof

And legal sex fucks up people's lives anyway.

It's not about age.

It was stated sarcastically.

Golden Rule
Not to be confused with Golden Law, Golden ratio, or Golden Act.
For other uses, see Golden Rule (disambiguation).
The Golden Rule (which can be considered a law of reciprocity in some religions) is the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated. It is a maxim of altruism that is found in many religions and cultures.[1][2] The maxim may appear as either a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:

One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive or directive form).[1]
One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form).[1]
What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself (empathic or responsive form).[1]
The Golden Rule differs from the maxim of reciprocity captured in do ut des—"I give so that you will give in return"—and is rather a unilateral moral commitment to the well-being of the other without the expectation of anything in return.[3]

The concept occurs in some form in nearly every religion[4][5] and ethical tradition.[6] It can also be explained from the perspectives of psychology, philosophy, sociology, human evolution, and economics. Psychologically, it involves a person empathizing with others. Philosophically, it involves a person perceiving their neighbor also as "I" or "self".[7] Sociologically, "love your neighbor as yourself" is applicable between individuals, between groups, and also between individuals and groups. In evolution, "reciprocal altruism" is seen as a distinctive advance in the capacity of human groups to survive and reproduce, as their exceptional brains demanded exceptionally long childhoods and ongoing provision and protection even beyond that of the immediate family.[8] In economics, Richard Swift, referring to ideas from David Graeber, suggests that "without some kind of reciprocity society would no longer be able to exist."[9]

m.youtube.com/watch?v=BH4FW0d9jyQ

i thought i was the only one following Amos Yee.

Only feminist (((facts))), and we all know feminists only hate "paedophilia" (in realty ephebophilia) because they know that it would lead to women over 30 being completely ignored by men.

Paedophiles should just go get help and take pills to neutralise their sexual urges. It really isn't that hard.

there is nothing wrong with the attraction in-itself. people can be attracted to whatever they want

there's nothing inherently even wrong with sex with children

the issue is we live in a society that treats children who have had sex as victims who have had something horribly traumatic happen to them

also parents are very protective of their children and wont let you fuck them

also adult cocks are too big for little girls

also children are stupid and don't really grasp the adult understanding of sex. so having sex with them is wrong in the sense that it's wrong to get a child to sign a bank contract, they don't understand

basically (acting on) pedophilia is wrong for multiple reasons, some purely social constructs but others based on biology, intelligence, the inherent disparate power relations between an adult and a child, the exploitation inherent in an adult using a child to get off

it would be different if little girls were going around asking for sex from adults, yet society was preventing it. but that's not the case. little girls don't even really grasp what sex is, you do. there is a power disparity here, and in order to act on this you must exploit the girls lack of knowledge of sex

>Only feminist (((facts))), and we all know feminists only hate "paedophilia" (in realty ephebophilia) because they know that it would lead to women over 30 being completely ignored by men.

It all stems from this.

...

sage

>Whats so wrong about pedophilia anyways
Diddling children. Don't do that and I see it as no different than being a homo.

I agree, gays and pedophiles are the same. Both should be killed because they're disgusting sexual deviants.

Add the this flag

flag checks out

Most of that is fair enough, but I reject your inherent implication that a power disparity between two individuals necessarily means they can't interact with one another. Cuz that's literally everyone and we're all fucking each other.

>also children are stupid and don't really grasp the adult understanding of sex. so having sex with them is wrong in the sense that it's wrong to get a child to sign a bank contract, they don't understand

They don't understand books but we still teach them to read.

I hope you get arrested, before you harm somebody.

A convincing argument would suffice.

What cuck father hands his under-age daughter off to some mouth-breathing, fish eyed faggot?

Albino basement dwellers dream of removing the legal age of consent because they think that little girls will be totes impressed with their pokemon trainer level.

All pedos will burn alongside Podesta and co.

>because they think that little girls will be totes impressed with their pokemon trainer level.

They would be.

What is wrong with killing pedophiles then? You tried to harm my children and I can't change my hate for you. Who says a loving parent shouldn't kill and destroy any harm for their children?

No you tried to harm your children by shaming and traumatizing them for getting diddled, so maybe you should kill yourself.

Also, would you be justified killing a neighbor hood kid two years younger with an unusually large penis if your daughter fell in love and tried sex.

Nah our age of consents is 16 and when both parties are under 16 there is a exception that allows it. Pedophilia is everything below puberty and it is fucking sick.

Why did you bait and switch from causing harm to violating age discrimination legalities?

>and it is fucking sick.

To you.

And why? Because you're not attracted to them? Are all your principles based on sexual attraction?

Consent and the rational capacity to consent are not present in children.

Their bodies have not gone through puberty and thus intercourse with them is physically harmful.


All pedophiles are mentally ill at best, horrifically criminal at worst. I am not in favor of horrible tortures as punishments so I think summary execution is an appropriate punishment for pedophiles.

> killing a neighborhood kid two years younger
see green text
I answered your question.
No I would not kill a 15 year old having sex with a 13 year old.

See I love the slippery slope you give the fags a mile and now want the other degenerates the same.

>Consent and the rational capacity to consent are not present in children.
*Unless they want to modify their genitals since that must occur before puberty to get passable results.

How does puberty make intercourse physically nonharmful?
Isn't it more a size thing, wouldn't that mean it should be a crime to have sex with a midget women?

Exactly. All of these arguments are the same easily refuted crap. It's like I'm reading huffpo.

Ok I will stop talking to you. Here is your last (you).

>don't ever talk to me or my wife's daughter again

No, and frankly anyone who does this to a child is guilty of gross negligence up to manslaughter.


Children fundamentally do not have the capacity to consent. Their brains are immature, they do not understand the nature of the requests, and the requests for sex are physically harmful. Even as late as 15 people are literally just too fucking stupid and under developed to make good rational decisions about sexuality.

However pedophilia is anything before puberty and that SPECIFICALLY is a heinous crime which must be punished by no less than death.

Fucking some 13 year old after puberty is statutory rape for good reason if you are above say 18. But I'd slap a prison sentence on that and call it a day. Its wrong because they don't have the brain required to operate. Its not criminally harmful.

God damn right we were. This ungrateful libshit deserves to be gassed. Hopefully Don deports his "Youtuber" ass to Colombia.

Please unironically KYS.

Its not just a size thing. I mean it is in a sense, and in that sense if you forcibly fuck someone with an oversized cock and harm them you are likely guilty either of negligence or assault.

However a woman's vagina is different from a prepubescent girls. A woman's vagina is capable of lubrication and actually toughens significantly. Vaginas in girls have much weaker flesh which means that fucking them can result in internal tears, lesions, bleeding and death.

>Children fundamentally do not have the capacity to consent. Their brains are immature, they do not understand the nature of the requests

Is there objective proof for literally any of this?

I think 15 is fine. 14 is pushing it. Claiming mid to late teenagers don't understand what fucking is is naive.

Naturally fucking literal children should be punished but anything past 15 or 16 should be fair game.

Even then, they can still put kids on hormone blockers and block their puberty until they reach the age of consent, so you could have prepubescent 18 year olds that may never develop properly at all.

>Asking for proof
Oy Vey, that's not okay!

I am in a loving, caring relationship with a male toddler. No insertions but mutual masturbation and French kissing. His parents are waiting until he reaches late toddlerhood then we are getting married. Say what you like, he thrusts into me with lust in his eyes he loves it, so glad Australia legalised gay marriages

Yes. The prefrontal cortex (reasoning, self control) is not fully developed until something like 25. But is at a solid operational state around 18 or so.

>Their brains are immature
Brains aren't fully mature and can retain a lot of neuroplasticity until some people reach their 30s.

Ah, so it seems all I have to do is find an

Sounds like gross negligence to me. Fast trial, lots of jail time.

Its not that 15 year olds don't understand, its that prefrontal cortex development hasn't reached a sufficient point such that they have good impulse control.

>The prefrontal cortex (reasoning, self control) is not fully developed until something like 25

Ah-ha!

>But is at a solid operational state around 18 or so.

Ooh, good ass-cover. I like the mealy-mouthing terms like "solid" and "around x... or so."

Give it the fuck up, agecucks. It's fine by me if you don't want your daughters fucked but at least admit it's mere protective instinct a magical number isn't helping.

>A woman's vagina is capable of lubrication
At what age can the vagina lubricate itself?

As I have said you brain damaged faggot, anyone 16+ is fine in my book.

Anyone below 16 down to puberty is statutory rape by virtue of their cognitive impairment. They are unable to reason, and thus unable to consent. So while fucking them won't hurt them inherently, they are not emotionally or mentally in a position acceptable for an ADULT to fuck.

If two 15 year olds fuck I don't give a shit. But when some predatory 30 year old comes around and bangs a 15 year old we have a problem. The 30 year old has abdicated their responsibility as an adult to make good decisions and is therefor guilty of statutory rape and negligence.

I'm 22 and have poor impulse control, yet fucking me isn't a crime. 15+ is fine. The whole thing is a gradient. 18 is mostly arbitrary. If we legislated purely based on brain development then no one under 25 would be allowed to do anything.

>anyone 16+ is fine in my book

How about 15.99?

>Sounds like gross negligence to me.
Some kids beg for it and harm themselves if they don't get it, isn't it gross negligence to let a child harm themselves?

After puberty. Which is highly variable but generally complete at around 13 in most women.

Fucking hang yourself. Do everyone a favor and neck yourself so that we can have one less pedo in the world.

Furthermore I am basing my statement on neuroscience. I've spent more than a bit of time on the subject but I don't have any more time for literal fucking internet pedophiles.

>Whats so wrong about pedophilia anyways?
The part where you use children to satisfy your own perversion instead of letting them grow and develop with their own coetaneous.

>inb4 how is that different from adults?
adults are given rights, children should be their own parents' property until they don't commit abusive actions towards them.

Ooh, not me, 16.05 is my cutoff. Looks like you're a dirty pedophile.

>Furthermore I am basing my statement on neuroscience.

Like the part where you literally said teenagers can't reason.

cunny is delicious you can't even argue against this

Source? Isn't it a similar process to how the vagina cleans itself?
Do prepubescent girls just always have extremely dirty vaginas which would indicate you practically have to diddle them to help clean them?

I thought this faggot was on suicide watch?