Being a pedophile doesn't mean you're a sex offender
I hate pedos but I am specially hateful of the faggot ones.
Because men who molest other men often get away with it because nobody gives a shit about a man being molested/raped
Because men who molest other men often get away with it because nobody gives a shit about a man being molested/raped
Numbers always seem arbitrary in that context. If you had said something like "after puberty it's ok", it wouldn't be so arbitrary.
Let's hope you never get accused of being a pedo then, kek.
>ctrl+f
Magnus Hirschfeld - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
>hebephilia
>0 results
I have nothing to with LGBTQABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ+++ shit, I just feel very attracted to young teenage girls. I wish I could marry one, but nowadays I already accepted it won't be possible tbh.
I have to say that position is very consistent with inceldom. I personally feel bad for girls as well if it was real abuse and they were actually hurt.
No unless the ones they are attracted to are under 12. A 16 yr foid is already mature so there is nothing wrong in being attracted to it
Why? I wish someone would do it for me. Hell, I'd even pay to enjoy the warm embrace of fiber.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO36yJkHmPE
Last edited:
Isn't "sex offender" a category in which the US justice system puts any man who got reported by pretty much any outlandish sexual conduct nowadays? Like, you get reported for pulling your penis out on a bus in the presence of women, now you're a "sex offender" for life.
But yeah, not all pedophiles actually have sex with children, that's something obvious that most people tend to forget.
D
Jfl so many moralfags here 
legit jfl at them. most pedos are trucel tiers. they will fuck over their fellow ugly men for muh "morals"Jfl so many moralfags here
The problem is they have a pretty strange idea of morality imo. Nobody can really explain why they hate someone for a reason which that person has no control over with any sort of coherent reasoning, and I'd venture to say that they hate pedophiles simply because they've been conditioned into doing so. Or they immediately associate the word pedophile with child rapist and abuser.Jfl so many moralfags here
Imagine having a sexual perversion which meant that you could never satisfy your sexual desires, and imagine that when you try to vent about it, you're immediately ostracized as some sort of freak, despite never choosing any of this. On a similar topic, would you keep your sexual desires if you had a choice, would you have even chosen to have them in the first place? I'd easily say no, since they're little more than a torture device, and I can imagine it would be far worse if I were a pedo.
This is also how faggots reproduce. A huge percentage of gays were molested by men as children and it completed fucks their minds as they are sexually/mentally developing.
Pedophiles are potential child abusers. If they can't help it shouldn't they be institutionalized or better yet put down?
Based on this No.
To any normies, if you hate paedophiles who have thoughts towards the "youth" but never act on it, then you have no right to condemn anyone who's against Homosexuality/Transgender illness as they not only have those thoughts but also act on it.
D
Only the ones who kidnap, torture,and brutally rape.
On top of that, they consume child pornography which was produced illegally, by forcing children into performing stressful sex acts with or in front of grown adults.
As this happens during childhood ages 0-8 it mentally, sometimes physically, fucks them up for life. No psychologist can heal them, resulting in a lower standard of living, drugs, alcoholism, prostitution or suicide.
There is nothing redeemable about real paedophillia (ages 0-8).
That said it annoys me the authorities, the court system, police conflate "paedophillia" or "child abuse" between ages 13-17. Even if it were consensual or some truecel possessing some porn where the teens were messing about with exhibitionism.
You are aware that paedophiles can be attracted to little boys too. It's not just girls that get molested.
That reminds of something... something I think I heard from a certain group... I think it was called "feminists" or something... ah yes, "as a male you're a potential rapist". Potentially followed by "therefore you need to be castrated/jailed/isolated/etc".
I fully agree that child pornography is something bad, but people who simply download it for free from the internet should not be criminalized because they didn't contribute in any way for the crime.
Just shift the same logic to other crimes and you'll see that it makes no sense to put people in jail for simple possession. "Hey, did you just download a picture/video for free from the internet depicting someone stealing a car? You're under arrest for possession of media containing car theft!".
It's just emotionality. "That pedo is fapping to CP, get him!" What if a person faps to gore for instance? Will you jail them as well? It's even more disgusting IMO. Doing immoral and disgusting things, but through which no one got victimized (you didn't commit the act, didn't finance the act, didn't make it easier for more acts like that to be committedin the future, etc), shouldn't be a crime.
I'm very skeptic that psychology can heal anyone from anything tbh.
The motivation for producing pornography is either for profit, exhibitionism or perverts sharing their sexually deviant behaviour that harms themselves or people around them. Either direct harm through abuse (torture porn) or disgust (scat and faeces). The latter done so in the hope it will somehow normalise (or God forbid- legalise) their behaviour.
Child pornography (again I'm talking ages 8 or below) is the lowest of the low. There is no justification at all for ruining a childs life by putting them through an ordeal that is rape or physical trauma through an adult penetrating and crushing them during violation.
Not to sound like a feminist but this porn would not be produced if no-one viewed it or downloaded it. Pornographers admit they are attention seekers, sometimes just getting off on the fact they have views. Even if people aren't paying the adulation through viewer feedback is enough. Its supply and demand.
So therefore I am happy if a real paedo gets thrown in the slammer for having possessing this crap.
Modern Psychology is a scam as its been hijacked by Jews, liberals, feminist, post-modernists who are paid to lie to their clients and gaslight them into suicide (or gay lgb+ conversion therapy which results in 40-50% suicide rate). Usually over our favourite topic of inceldom and a key cause of male suicide, loneliness as well as lack of sex itself.
Last edited:
The vast majority of CP is amateur. The guy (or woman, for that matter) is already having sex with the childr(en) and usually produces just to "help" his fellow pedos, exchange it for CP from other pedos, or for exhibitionism like you said. (In the case of hardcore CP, there's even much more softcore CP produced by the minors themselves nowadays).
So in the vast majority of cases, the act would have happened anyway regardless of pornography of it being produced or not. Even if the motivation is exhibitionism, you can't criminilize someone for downloading media for free from the internet because it supposedly "gave attention" to a criminal. If someone is threatening to jump from a bridge and people stop by to watch, are they criminals? This makes no sense whatsoever.
Last edited:
Yeah but regular men have legal consensual ways to release their natural urges, which exist in the first place in nature for the purpose of reproduction.
JUST FUCKING LOL. They downloaded it, which was probably uploaded by someone who paid for it, who knew there are other sickos like him who would download it. And there is a possibility that the producer sperged out and distributed copies for free just to benefit his fellow sickos. The very act of free downloading is indicative that people who enjoy this stuff do exist which ultimately leads to incentivization. I do agree that going after producers and distributers is better use of energy than going after every downloader, but atleast we can try to identify and isolate such people, especially from children they can potentially harm. Of course a legal infrastructure needs to exist to ensure such.
Gore is not even on the same stratosphere of digusting as cp. Also most gore porn is not deliberately produced by harming someone, cp IS. And of course emotionality is involved, if a guy evenly jokingly suggested he watches cp to me, he would find his head in a short collision course with the back of my hand.
Please don't give lecture on ethics here. If you actually had any you wouldn't be making excuses for your disgusting habit. If that were me I would have chemically castrated myself before watching an innocent child get ruined.
Again, I don't think child pornography is something moral in any way, shape or form, but the fact is: pixels cannot be raped. Watching stuff shouldn't be a crime, period. Producing CP, yes. Profiting from CP, yes. Paying for CP, yes. Simply watching, no.
I see no argument to be adressed here.
I'll download some videos of vegetables to incentivize the production of vegetables. Next time I go to the street market, maybe the salesman will give me some vegetables for free because I incentivized him to work, since he saw how many downloads the vegetable videos had on the internet.
I'm 100% against the notion of preventively jailing a person before they harm anyone because they're a "potential" yada yada. I'm baffled that you people don't see how that could be used against people in so many ways to implement tyranny.
You should seriously reconsider your morals if you think someone getting their face ripped off while they scream in agony is less disgusting than some young person naked or even having sex. You sound like a huge whiteknight who selectively feels disgust for rape but not for other much, much worse stuff. Torture and death are objectively worse than rape, even if real rape, let alone statutory rape in which no real violence takes place.
You cannot infer what people were thinking as they produced media and use this as an argument as to why it should be legal or not for other people to just WATCH it. "Hey, I filmed myself gouging some innocent person's eyes out and uploaded on the internet, but I was thinking about how Eric Clapton is a better guitarist than Jimmy Page while doing it, so it's ok for people to download it" versus "I filmed myself having sex with an underage person and uploaded it on the internet, but I was thinking about how great it will be when so many people watch it, therefore it should be illegal for them to watch it". All this shit makes no sense whatsoever.
There are many repulsive behaviors in the world. If someone tells another person "hey, my mother just died horribly", and the person replies "haha sucks to be you", this is disgusting to me. Should that second person be jailed? A: no. If someone faps to actual child abuse, or to gore, or to animals being crushed, or anything of the kind, yes, it IS disgusting, I agree 100%. But the fact is, if they downloaded such media for free from the internet, they shouldn't be criminalized. Period.
What a bunch of cope and excuses. This is laughable.
My point about cp was simple. By watching it you ARE incentivizing its production. Other than the fact that you are getting off to a literal child getting ruined. Don't give that "pixel" this, "pixel" that bullcrap. Those pixels did not come by themselves. If they were animated maybe I would have given a benefit of doubt. But the utter immorality of watching actual cp is unquestionable. And yes by watching videos of vegetables you ARE incentivizing production and distribution of such videos. Don't give that "crime gonna happen anyway so might as well become an accomplice" bullshit. This is classical criminal coping tactic. Take responsibility for your disgusting actions and their consequences.
Second, I do not endorse for preventively jailing. Just remove pedos from regular communities as much as possible. Make them useful in other ways. And I trust that any such detention(whether is home, community or institutional) should not take place before prior evidence proving pedo-tendencies is established. Or better yet just practice chemical castration. Problemo solvo.
Good job completely misunderstanding my point about gore porn so let me make it simpler.
1. In most gore porn the act of violence itself is not orchestrated for the purpose of video production or views or money. Heck many times the act is not even criminal, its an accident or some such shit. (a tree fell on a man crushing him)
2. Even if the violence was deliberate and criminal, most times it is not committed for the purpose of video distribution and its consumption by gore watchers. (ISIS beheads a man)
3. In both the above cases those were violent acts which just happened to be committed, but NOT for the consumption of gore watchers. Gore watchers enjoyed it surely but their watching it does not incentivize those acts of violence.
4. In case of cp, the act of sex with a child is committed, filmed and distributed FOR THE DELIBERATE CONSUMPTION OF CP WATCHERS. That child was violated for your explicit consumption. Every sale, every downloaded incentivizes the producers to make more cp and violate more children. By agreeing to download that shit you pretty much become an accomplice to what happened to that child in that moment. Don't try to shrug off the part you play as a consumer. The gore equivalent would be if I were to gouge someone's eyes(and therefore commit a crime) with the intention to film it and distribute it to fellow sickos. This is the kind of case where gore porn is actually as bad as cp. Since the consumption incentivizes the crime.
5. The cp equivalent of regular gore porn would be if you downloaded some jb photos of a young girl which her own parents or relatives or someone else uploaded with innocent intentions. But cp? Nah that's on another stratosphere of bad. There is moral responsibility on the consumer in that case.
Lastly, I don't think pedos should be jailed JUST for possessing cp. Possessing and watching cp is abhorrently immoral for sure(as proven above) but whether it should be illegal and subject to conviction is an open question. But the thing is illegal or not, someone consuming cp is still a pedo. So he needs to be institutionalized, treated and released back into society with limited freedoms and monitoring. So yeah, look at it one way or another, in an ideal society cp watcher would be nabbed.
Atleast you recognize that watching cp is immoral and disgusting. That's a start.
i don't care either way tbh
D
Moralfags aside, I'm indifferent toward pedophiles TBH.
I couldn't imagine the immense amount of pain and shameful feelings that come about when and if someone is born with the imperative to be sexually attracted to children. Imagine suffering and hating yourself for basically your entire life for having desires you never wanted in the first place.
Life's cruelty knows absolutely no bounds, and it will not spare anyone who happens to roll bad when it comes to the genetic lottery. Pedophilia being one of the worst rolls you could possibly get in life.
Morals are almost entirely defined by early conditioning and the culture you just so happened to grow up in at birth. At best, pedophiles throughout history have merely been ignored to some extent. However, in modern society, they're basically public enemy #1 at a constant rate, and generally seen as worse than murderers oftentimes while not acting on any of their desires or performing any actions actually deserving of disgust or hatred.
If you even so much as say you feel the smallest amount pity for these unfortunate individuals, you're immediately drawn suspect of being an awful human being and will be torn down by anyone in your vicinity.
I don't necessarily condone the violation of children, although I'm 100% for making harmless alternatives such as lolicon and sex dolls socially acceptable.
Life's cruelty knows absolutely no bounds, and it will not spare anyone who happens to roll bad when it comes to the genetic lottery. Pedophilia being one of the worst rolls you could possibly get in life.
Morals are almost entirely defined by early conditioning and the culture you just so happened to grow up in at birth. At best, pedophiles throughout history have merely been ignored to some extent. However, in modern society, they're basically public enemy #1 at a constant rate, and generally seen as worse than murderers oftentimes while not acting on any of their desires or performing any actions actually deserving of disgust or hatred.
If you even so much as say you feel the smallest amount pity for these unfortunate individuals, you're immediately drawn suspect of being an awful human being and will be torn down by anyone in your vicinity.
I don't necessarily condone the violation of children, although I'm 100% for making harmless alternatives such as lolicon and sex dolls socially acceptable.
for being attracted towards post puberty girls no, if they rape them then yes, if it's consensual, voluntary and done without force or fraud then no otherwise yes
Absolutely based post (prior to what's been quoted as well). To clarify this is exactly what the UK Police, Courts and Criminal Prosecution Service do in the rehabilitation of child porn offenders anyway.
For some reason we have a high volume of paedophiles getting caught downloading, viewing and possessing CP on their computers, in the city where I live, its always in the press.
It got so bad the Police had to focus on rehabilitation cause they were running out of jail cells. So imprisonment was saved for the worst offenders (who had 10,000s of images) and had already been cautioned, interviewed and monitored by the police and social services before. If they got caught again then its jail-time, as downloading this stuff you are an accomplice by proxy. You encourage and incentivize wholesale child exploitation and abuse.
My reasoning is CP pornographers are doing this to be like "it's more common than you think, therefore it's normal". Or "no harm being done cause children are sexual" (even though children are children and need psychological guidance to navigate when something is age appropriate and mutual. Or an adult abusing a child into thinking abnormal abuse is ok).
As adults we can read case studies and backwards rationalize that Adult > Child (below the age of 9) is sexual abuse and NOT ok.
How many fucked up pornstars ended up revealing they were sexually abused below age of 9 which sent them into a spiral of depression, drugs, alcoholism, inability to pairbond and suicide?
Our blackpilled .co conversations on consensual teen sex and possibility of a lowered Age of Consent, some say ages 13 plus is justified within established reasoning. Ages13-17 has been proven to be a man's actual preferred age range of female partner.
It makes sense as the female is fertile, she is menstrating. I've seen first hand evidence teenage girls would actually consent to dating older men, if Chad, rich or famous. (Again explains the posters of fully grown men on the walls of every teen girl's bedroom).
The UK law even changes for older men hitting on 13 year old teen girls. As while it is illegal for a grown man above 16 to try and penetrate a girl below 16- the crime is considered less serious and therefore punishment by law, less harsh. Heck there have even been cases of mitigating circumstances where a court case was dropped entirely.
Last edited:
Theoretically incentivizing crimes simply by watching media containing it simply downloaded from the internet shouldn't be a crime. If you apply that logic consistently, pretty much everyone needs to be jailed because I'm sure most people saw media of some crime being committed at some point. It makes no sense whatsoever to criminalize it.
I agree with you. But immorality =/= crime per se.
It's so obvious how full of feelings and depleted of logic you are. You're taking random assumptions and made-up categories out of your ass (hurr, cp is always done with the intention of getting attention to it, gore is not, even when it's deliberately produced by criminals) and using it as an argument. You're a pathetic whiteknight who has two different approaches to two similar things (gore and CP, both are media containing crimes). Hurr you can have 4 terabytes of innocent people being tortured in your HD but if you have a pic of CP THAT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT because I ASSUME the person who produces CP always wants attention and the person who produces gore never wants it, durr. You're arguing from emotionality, I'm done with you.
>innocent intentions
Kek, there are tons of gore sites that people go to just to sadistically laugh at the people being tortured and killed in the videos there. Imagine your mom in one of those videos. Again, you're making random categories out of your ass and trying to differ whether just watching something must be legal or not based on it. And failing even at it, even if it was a valid argument (it's not: the fact enjoying watching torture, murder, death or rape is disgusting doesn't mean it should be a crime to just watch it).
I make a video of me punching someone on the face and explicitly say it's for the amusement of people who like watching people geting punched and upload it on the internet. People who simply download it and watch it should be jailed? Physical assault is a crime.
Last edited:
This statement assumes that pedophilia is somehow genetic and that an, abnormal, attraction to children is because grown adults have a biological imperative to engage in abhorrent sexual abuse of children- when they don't. A pedophile's sexuality serves no purpose or benefit, other than to ruin childrens lives. It is harmful and requires intervention to prevent it.
Unlike older males desiring females ages 13-17 which is argued well below and DOES have some basis in normal and expected sexual behaviour (despite the thread wrongly tagged as "pedophilia" due to feminists and liberals gaslighting natural, and in some cases legal, heterosexual desire).
I Think There Is A Link Between Lack Of Adolescent Sexual Experiences And Hebephilia/Pedophilia (Society Created Its Own Increasing Pedo/Hebe Problem)
I don't think its a coincidence that most hebephiles and pedohpiles are usually unattractive men (low tier males), there's a reason the stereotype of the balding guy in his 30's with glasses became the stereotypical "look" for a pedophile or hebephile, its because that's the kind of guys they...
incels.is
I've watched documentaries on MAPS (minor attracted persons) either through the virtous pedophiles movement who claim to be attracted to children, but make the odd claim they've never watched CP (cough BS).
I've also seen UK documentaries where pedophiles try and justify themselves believing "children can consent" or "children would want prepubescent sex", without providing any basis or argument against what is known in child protection.
You can tell they are letting their uncontrollable corrupted feelings over-ride their logic and lack of remorse and apathy towards a child's right to not be molested.
So what do you do when you have no argument? You campaign, protest and riot until you get your way. Although contrary to incel meme belief MAPS are official excluded from lgb+
They even tried reaching out to the Liberal crowd as this anti-paedophile agenda video and article exposed.
The Paedophile Agenda — The Fuel Project
Academics are trying to soften attitudes towards paedophilia. We can’t let that happen.
thefuelproject.org
Also it pisses me off that the UK AoC was actually historically as low as ages 12, 13, 14 once but got raised to 17 and the lowered to 16. And that ages 13-17 are now seen as "MAPS" too.
In my opinion this is due to economic reasons only. Given that we are expected to work for Jews until ages 30 before we are economically expected to have marriage, kids and mortgages. When our ancestors pairbonded in teenage love and had kids during their youth as nature intended.
"Batchelor lifestyles", pick up artists and feminists are/were all propoganda to perpetuate the lie that 18-30 is normal and natural and anything outside this is somehow "deviant".
Last edited:
If they don't act out on their desires then no i wouldn't really hate someone for something they can't control, but i consider it something that is very akin to mental illness, i can imagine it's tough living like that.
If they choose to act out on their desires then i would hate and despise them.
If they choose to act out on their desires then i would hate and despise them.
Last edited:
It's case by case. They can't help having the desire, but not all of them act on it. I don't think anybody should be institutionalized just for admitting they have a problem. It's like saying that because you admit to having intrusive violent thoughts, that you're a potential threat and should be locked away just for being honest. When if anything, I'd argue that someone in that position would be a hell of a lot less likely to act on any of it, given that they admitted it publicly and all. If someone consumes actual cp, sure maybe then you could say that's where the line should be drawn.
Pretty much my thoughts on it too, people are irrational.
It is just a genetic anomaly/disorder.
show evidence
What evidence? You think they have just a bad personality? And even then just look up determinism. I don't really believe in free choice. So I don't even blame people like hitler.
Currently it is theorized it's due to overarching childcare instincts iirc.
pedophile you are scum child abuser you will be hung
lock em up hang em high either way their gonna die choose a noose choose a cell come on mate give em hell
lock em up hang em high either way their gonna die choose a noose choose a cell come on mate give em hell
i feel sorry for them
much like people who are turned on by other suck stuff like raping animals
but as long as they dont act purposely unto harming a child, then its allright i guess
E
@Caesercel
it’s still super super rare. Even aspies don’t kill. Also AM isn’t high inhib. 99.9999% of parents don’t kill the abusers.
Pedophiles who act on it don’t actually want to act on it. They do it because they are afraid to talk to someone and feel isolated and feel they have nothing to lose, and consequently many try to convince themselves that little kids can be old enough for sex to feel less guilty about molesting them. They aren’t acting on it out of genuine desire to act on it, unlike situational offenders.
E
Love how they completely hide that mainlander was going into detail mentioning NON-offending pedophiles. And IT are the NPCs who think pedophiles and child molesters are the same thing
They say racism is bad but no one chooses to be a pedophile just like no one chooses to be black or any of other race. The only advantage pedophiles have is being able to conceal it better, but for a group full of LGBTQABCD++--== people, they should know how stifling it is to have to live in secret about your sexuality without never even being able to talk about it (this is what they claim being gay is like for some people, though nowadays at the very least you'll have the internet to freely consume porn and talk about it).
Pedophiles are a million times more oppressed than gays nowadays, this is a truth no one is able to deny.
E
The NOMAP movement exists now but it’s mostly obscure and receives a lot of hate
"Let's preventively jail/ostracize pedophiles because they're dangerous and might abuse some kid" is EXACTLY the same logic behind "let's preventively jail/ostracize niggers because they're violent and might commit a crime."
Yes, a pedophile is more likely to touch a child, just as a black person is statistically more likely to commit crimes, but that doesn't mean ALL will do it or that we should preventively jail people because of those unchosen characteristics.
Last edited:
E
Also many pedophiles don’t act on it. And studies show that a large percentage of child molesters aren’t pedophiles and are actually teleiophiles. Many do it for reasons that have little to nothing to do with attraction like curiosity, opportunity, inceldom (I’m serious some are incel and pick some little 8 year old or something as a substitute), stress, enjoying the taboo of child molestation, etc. Also, the idea that pedophiles have a large amount of urge to act on it is a myth. If you’re a teleiophile and you see a grown up you find attractive, you don’t have an unusual urge to sexually assault them, and it’s the same with pedophiles but their attraction is to prepubescent children. Who you’re attracted to has zero effect on how likely you’ll act on it. Saying pedophiles will inevitably act on it is like saying married men will inevitably cheat or heterosexual teleiophilic men will inevitably rape women. And many pedophiles who act on it only do because they’re afraid to talk to someone, they feel isolated, they feel they have nothing to lose, they lose control and act on it. Many will even try to convince themselves that children are old enough for sex to feel less guilty.
High IQ.
The most difficult to swallow pill is that most men ARE pedophiles if you define pedophilia as the possibility of getting attracted to underage women, even if prepubescent, as shown in the data posted ITT. Attraction is mainly about face, if it was mainly about body, adult flat-chested and -butted women with a squarish waist would be incels and we all know that's not the case.
What we usually call "pedophiles" is better definied as people who PREFER children over adult women, which yes, are a minority among men. The average man can feel attraction towards pubescents or even prepubescents in some cases, but is more attracted by females fresh out of puberty, like mid teens to early 20s. There are also the exclusive pedophiles which are a really tiny minority. I'm 100% sure most child abuse is not done by exclusive pedophiles, very likely not even by people who prefer children over pubescents and post-pubescents, like you said.
MEN ARE HORNY AS SHIT. This is what women won't ever understand. Most men can get it up to females far from their actual preferences in terms of age, race, weight, attractiveness, etc.
Last edited:
E
Yep. Even sexologists like Michael seto, James cantor, Fred Berlin, etc. all experts on this topic, have confirmed that sexual attraction to jb teens is normal among men. Studies I’ve read confirmed it’s normal. And we aren’t attracted to age, we are attracted to physical appearance, our biology/sexuality doesn’t respond to laws. When girls get to 15-17 they often look like they’re 22 or something
That's so obvious it baffles me how people don't understand it.
"I do feel attraction towards teenagers but I want to avoid trouble with the law, therefore I choose only to pursue relationships with older women" = perfectly understandable and rational.
"YOUR INKEL 15 YOS ARE JUST CHILDREN HOW CAN YOU FEEL ATTRACTION TO CHILDREN OMG"= retarded and almost certainly a hypocrite liar.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
