Shadman

>Shadman

Well the meme is dead, he's using it now.

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/Refhmhub
youtu.be/vbF1Yol_D7Q
nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/rate-of-child-sexual-abuse-on-the-decline.html?mcubz=0
salon.com/2010/01/19/trauma_myth_interview/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Did he make an egs comic yet?

now he is ruining my memes? I cant wait for trump to deport him

...

Is that how to ruin memes, because I'd hire Shadman to do that.

I donate $1 to Shad a month. What now?

It's not over till he draws his own version of it.
Then who knows what will happen.

my God this faggot is such an edgelord look at that page design.

As long as he doesn't touch this one, we're fine.

Trash bait or trash money management.

Good.

>I'm a fag who wastes his money

You sure showed us.

There's literally nothing wrong with being a pedophile

Except for the pedophilia.

whoa holy shit a friend of zack did something with his meme? never woulda guessed

What's wrong with that? It's just the way they are. It doesn't mean they're going to go out and rape a child.

>That tattoo

>Enabling the fetish until it turns into a desire for real life
Happened hundreds of times, idiot. Keep talking out of your ass though.

My nigga.

Why does Sup Forums get triggered by shadman? Makes me want to donate to him

Proof?

>Porn artist
>Didn't even draw porn of Margie
I don't know whether to be furious or relieved.

He gives a bad name to people who want to jerk off to cartoon characters by also drawing porn of underage cartoon characters and actors.

>Doesn't provide proof himself
>Expects it from me

Oh fuck off, my degree speaks for itself.

Why is it that every time this guy gets mentioned Sup Forums's collective asshole turns to plasma? He's not even that special, so why do all of you negatively gravitate TOWARDS him?
>Oh he's just doing it for attention
He's just doing his odd thing, of course he gets attention. And if he does so what? Many artists wish people knew they existed
>He's just edgy for the edgyness sake
He likes to push boundaries. That's his self-appointed niche.
No let's imagine he is just being edgy.... so what?
Literally nothing is forcing you to like the guy's work.
>He's drawing CP
Fiction. Not real. No one is hurt, no one will BE hurt. End of it there.

tl;dr Stop being a cunt because a guy on the internet makes stuff you don't like.

Bleached assholes, tatoos and piercings.

go home shadman no one wants you here

...

Shad was one of the first people to do a Gremblo thing

I didn't provide a statement that required statistics. You did.

>It doesn't mean they're going to go out and rape a child.
>Speaking for an entire generalization as if they have some sort of statistic

Fuck. Off.

Different user btw. Its basic logic. All reasoning points towards simply enabling it until it slowly shifts into the person's real life. No one just wakes up and rapes a child one day, its something that builds up over years or even a lifetime. Lolis just enable the possibility of raping a kid

I don't get what your point is here.
Slippery slope

because it's a hot menme to hate on him

This, learn basic psychology before you talk about it like you're some expert. Thank God there are people patient enough such as that user to spoon feed you the information. God forbid you figure it out yourself.

I thought he got arrested.

>doesn't refute my point

His only crime is not doing edgemaster comics because he needs porn money

Nor does it refute mine, you don't give statistics for the shit you say yet you want me to prove my own statements? Get over yourself.

>He gives a bad name to people who want to jerk off to cartoon characters
Wow, such a distinguished cabal of exemplar citizens.

Because my statements are not those that need statistics. I don't need statistics to say that not all pedophiles rape children or that that is just they way they are. They're stand-alone statements.

Okay, so you're just talking out of your ass in that case. You pretty much said that anyone who jerks off to underage pornography isn't correlated with people who molest children and you don't think that doesn't need any kind of statistic to back it up? Are you stupid?

I'm not even going to bother at this point, if you didn't realize it 2 minutes ago you won't now.

pastebin.com/Refhmhub

Just have 'em read through this, user. I mean, they won't, of course, but it's worth a shot.

Just more evidence that shad is truly /ourguy/

>Slippery slope
Not particularly. As I said its something that happens over a long time. Yeah you can fap to lolis once and nothing would happen. But I would put money on the fact that a large percentage of pedophiles have masturbated to lolis a significant amount of times, and definitely didnt start after they touched a real child. Its like, 100% of apples are fruit but not all fruit are apples. You only enable a terrible, sick, and twisted fetish when you fap to lolis user. Stop it

>Why is it that every time this guy gets mentioned Sup Forums's collective asshole turns to plasma?
>implying only Sup Forums hates him
Your ego is showing, it rivals that of Shadman
>He's just doing his odd thing, of course he gets attention. And if he does so what? Many artists wish people knew they existed
And what makes it ok to be an attention whore? Because others do it? I'll be Hitler today, that will be the choice of reason because I know I'll trigger the normies.
>He likes to push boundaries. That's his self-appointed niche. Literally nothing is forcing you to like the guy's work.
Your assumption level rivals your ego. Why should I "like" the bastard? Why should anyone? What has he done to grace this world with content worth existing for? Is it only ok because one man does "this thing"? Again, then I demand an answer to why Hitler was killed over what he did, if "his thing" isn't something that people should think negatively towards.
>Fiction. Not real. No one is hurt, no one will BE hurt. End of it there.
Depiction of people that exist in real life doesn't allude to the actions of said real life people, no matter how you cross the line. Did you NOT just hear about the story of that fan of Danny Phantom that shot up a mall? He was "inspired" by a character (fictional) to do evil. So what makes "fictional" depictions of people that actually exist safe from rape and torture using said "fictional" depections of said people actually ok to any degree? You are the one assume it would be "just fine" just like President Trump would be "just fine" avoiding the likes of a WW3 from happening. You're not physic, you don't know jack shit what would, nay, COULD happen.

tl;dr How about YOU stop being a cunt for defending a person doing "his thing" for the sake of being a cock sucking defender and let this man do "his thing" as long as he can get away with it. I don't know how long he'll keep this up but mark my words, it WON'T last.

>pretty much said
Straw man alert

>from zero to Godwin in 44 posts

Read the first link, it tries to justify it by saying the children don't know what sex is and are confused by it so it's okay to rape them. Fuck off

I still don't see how one can't just control themselves and differentiate fantasy and reality. I mean, I, myself have an incest fetish, yet the thought of me having sex with my family members is disgusting.

You haven't read any of them, and you conflate sex with rape based on "number of years lived" and a legal definition, rather than a logical definition.

It's okay, user. I don't really expect you to think logically. This is your religion.

The argument is 100% bullshit. You might as well say GTA causes people to murder people.

Wait hold on, are you referring to his argument or my argument?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

youtu.be/vbF1Yol_D7Q

>Equating a dude's crummy drawings to genocide
amazing
Plus, as I clearly stated, you don't have to like the guy. But you're acting like he's committing crimes against the human race.
>oh wait the Hitler comparison
And you are, aren't you?

>What has he done to grace this world with content worth existing for?
Gave me some good faps.

>shadman is friends with Zach
>implying Zach wasn't expecting the porn

Oh shit his art has changed over the years

Is that supposed to be Ellie?

Thats the exact issue, I was going to mention this but didn't. If you fap to lolis you are probably one of the fags with somewhat of a disconnect from reality. And even if its a small disconnect if you enable it for years it will only worsen, its like a sore you don't let heal. And Ill say incest is very different, when you fap to a sister figure, its far different than your actual one sister, who you've known your entire life and know in that specific way. Whereas with pedos they don't know the kids their entire life, there is no "kid figure", just kids. They could sexualize any child and not care

>He was "inspired" by a character (fictional) to do evil. So what makes "fictional" depictions of people that actually exist safe from rape and torture using said "fictional" depections of said people actually ok to any degree?
Everything you said was ok until you hit this point. You are conflating responsibility of other people's actions with those who aren't responsible at all. In the exact example you gave, butch hartman would be responsible for what tranny phantom did. Anyone MIGHT be inspired by a fictional depiction of SOMETHING to do something wrong. That depiction however isn't what's responsible. See also: Mark David Chapman and John Hinckley. Again, same logic: "Catcher in the rye made them do it!" This is very flimsy logic. What we call, "the devil made me do it." It implies that a person has no control over there actions and is entirely beholden to what you argue causes such things.


>You're not physic, you don't know jack shit what would, nay, COULD happen.
Neither are you. And it clearly shows that you don't understand that because something bad COULD happen after someone is "inspired" by fictional medium, you fail to understand that by that same logic, you aren't psychic. You're fallible. We all are. So there's no way to know if fictional depictions are responsible for criminal action.

...Unless of course someone were to bring up the ACTUAL statistics of child sexual abuse and prove to you that you're a dumbass know-nothing talking out your ass and prove that child sexual abuse has gone DOWN.
nytimes.com/2012/06/29/us/rate-of-child-sexual-abuse-on-the-decline.html?mcubz=0

Why are you projecting that every single one of them is like what you said? What do you mean by disconnect with reality? And how does it worsen?

>If you fap to lolis you are probably one of the fags with somewhat of a disconnect from reality.
This is called begging the question. Where you start with an assumption of your conclusion being correct.

this is bullshit. many people have weird fantasies or murderous thoughts or similar shit at least once through the course of their life and rarely if ever act upon it, sometimes even when provoked.

that's because any regular person with even a hint of rationality can tell the difference between fiction and reality. the people who actually rape children are like mass-murderes and the likes in that they don't perceive things as we do, their sense of morality is different from ours and they most often are also emotionally stunted, on top of the whole being mentally deranged part. they don't get coaxed into it by watching drawings much like serial killers don't just appear because they watched SAW or played GTA.

the ones you need to go after are child molesters, not pedophiles. there'ss a difference and failing to see it is why a ton of manpower and resources are wasted on drawings when there's fucking priests with children being forced to make porn in their basements.

Hey there reddit, enjoying our summer?

Sounds like someone wants to fuck their sister

>Why are you projecting that every single one of them is like what you said?
Because he's a faggot who uses special pleading and begs the goddamned question all the time.

I think you're confusing two anons on opposite ends of the argument.

>heh i want to fuck kids and can make a bullshit reason i label as logic so im smart
They don't know about sex, nor have their body properly developed enough to safely participate in it. You shrug off the BIG reason about why kids should be protected. They are easy to manipulate because they don't know any better, which incase you don't know is a bad thing, and no one but pedophiles or child sex traffickers want to see kids get manipulated into sex

Could be. Just woke up and saw this bullshit here.

There's a lot of people who would definitely rape children, but they don't do it because they know it's wrong, it's because they know they'll be punished by the law if they do it.

Of which this article already addressed salon.com/2010/01/19/trauma_myth_interview/
>Harmfulness is not the same thing as wrongfulness. And why is it wrong? Because children are incapable of consent.
>Children do not understand the meaning or significance of sexual behavior.

...

Think about that statement as it applies to people playing violent video games and enjoying the fictional violence leading to slowly enjoying the real thing.

>There's a lot of people who would definitely commit murder, but they don't do it because they know it's wrong, it's because they know they'll be punished by the law if they do it.

Now read that and realize what a non-statement you made.

>linking salon
While what they say has some truth:

Pastebin or archive that shit. Do not give them clicks.

Next: I want you to define "kids".

>Admits to it being wrongful
>Still supports it
CRAAAAWLING IN MY SKIIIN

Nigga did you just link fucking salon?
Although judging by what I'm reading so far in this thread, I'm not surprised at all

Now you're entering a weird gray zone because every culture views that differently.

Someone below the age of puberty

Not an argument. That article was already in the pastebin referenced.

and that's more than what most people on Sup Forums do for the world.

But many kids develop puberty at an early age

Physical maturity is not the same as emotional or mental maturity.

Your body becomes sexually mature before your brain stops growing.

>weird gray zone
You don't say?

i think you just never thought about sexuality, which is why you are confused.

ever wonder why some people like feet while others find them disgusting? or why some love milfs and grannies? or why some like scat? it's part of each individual's sexuality, their taste and preferences. pedophilia is just one of those. people don't fap to shit because they're disconected from reality, they fap to it because it makes their pee-pee hard. you're more disconected from reality than a pedo just for having something like a waifu.

whether the person has some mental disorder, or lacks restraint is what determines if they're gonna act upon their fantasies or not and that's something that they have from the start, independent of porn.

if you seriously can't understand how having different tastes isn't the same as being a fucking rapist then you legit have a child-like intelect.

>b-b-b-b-but my Sup Forums ""logic"" buzzwords
Fuck yourself

Society has been changing the definition over a long protracted period of time. Including as soon as just a few years ago. In the united states each state can't even agree.

Just listen to his guest appearances on SleepyCast.

Holding people to a standard of logic and explaining the flaws in their argument is not a buzzword. I believe you said this because you do not understand the concepts behind logic and philosophy.

Bonus: You're special pleading right now.

pointing out falacies isn't an argument, but neither is what you're doing.

The thing is when you reflect them into real life encounters, most are harmless. Feet licker? Sure whatever. Gilfs?Yeah whatever. Scat? Well you might get sick but it's your fault. Even torture? Yeah with two people who know what they're getting into. Lolis or child porn? Well it manipulates someone who doesnt know better so you tell me

>pointing out falacies isn't an argument,
It's refutation.

I'm just saying a kiddy fiddler like yourself following salon is unsurprising

We'll getcha don't worry

>someone who doesnt know better
That's a big assumption, considering sex is a relatively simple concept and "no" is almost every child's favorite word.

What is wrong with Salon? Where did you get the idea I'm a pedophile? And I'm not the one concerned with proving the point with those sources, I was correcting that user who assumed those sources didn't address that children couldn't consent.

Well sex education doesn't start when you're 5, infact most don't know a whole lot so I doubt they'd know about sex

>The thing is when you reflect them into real life encounters, most are harmless

I have a petrification fetish user. My fetish is impossible in real life but is explicitly or implicitly required that one party dies. Are you telling me I can't tell fiction from reality because the consequences of my fetish could be dire if they were real?

>whether the person has some mental disorder, or lacks restraint is what determines if they're gonna act upon their fantasies or not and that's something that they have from the start, independent of porn.

I know a lot of anons who became trannies because of what they masturbated. Porn can actually corrupt you if you don't understand that your fetishes must be kept as a fantasy and not something that should be experienced in real life.

You use the buzzwords as an argument. Instead of actually retorting you just say whatever one you can get to fit because you know you can't justify pedophilia

>that fucking gif