P
why don't you show the data on you bodyfat % you low iq fuck
Hypocrisy If pedophilia (the attraction part) is wrong, then you could also say that homosexuality (the attraction part) is wrong, or are choices.
P
how old is she
P
Pedophilia is no different from homosexuality.
Both are not useful for reproduction and that's why they have been seen as taboos throughout history
Both are not useful for reproduction and that's why they have been seen as taboos throughout history
P
you are appealing to social rules
explain how either are morally wrong from an objective standpoint
Why me? I just think it's weird as fuck
P
are you retarded?
she is actually over 17 in that pic, do reaserach idiot
"weird as fuck"
what's "weird" about it?
Teen whores don't get harmed by adult dick, that's a moral fag myth.
P
so why is it wrong?
i could find tons of 17 yos on instagram that look sexually mature you stupid shitskin
P
attraction isn't pregnancy
They can get pregnant by teen chads too. An adult would be way more responsible than a teen with his hormones raging having sex with them.
P
you could make the same argument against incel forums
"such hatred could go unchecked"
why not ban all incel forums because "muh unchecked"
"unchecked" = buzzword you stupid idiot
you are truly negative iq
you are not respecting freedom of thought
I think the attraction isn't a choice. But in all animal societies some behavior is shunned whereas others are encouraged. In human society homosexuality is seen as okay because of the consent argument. I think that it is okay to shun some behavior (pedo) also because of the consent argument.
This is discriminatory to pedos of course but before kid sex robots are a thing this all that can be done
This is discriminatory to pedos of course but before kid sex robots are a thing this all that can be done
P
so you agree with me?
yes my dude
P
thanks
"Pedos" aren't the same as men who fuck pubescent teens. The "AoC" nonsense is just normie moral fagging to suppress non-chad sexuality, the AoC argument goes out the window for normie cucks when a 25 year old foid fucks a 14 year old high school athlete.
Normies are DISGUSTED if you even have thoughts about the grey areas of the AoC. The fucking hypocrisy. You are a total loser if you don't have teen sex, yet if you have teen sex if you are not a teen, you are a PEDOPHILE, the worst scum imaginable, even if you are a 19 year old fucking a 17 year old. They just want morality in a box.
Cucks only think that if the 19 year old is a non-chad, then all the sudden he's a "creep" who "manipulates" poor little girls.
This is 100% true.
P
hold up
you think attractionn is controllable?
how so?
if i go to the mall, i see so many TEENAGE SLUT with their bare asshecheeks hanging arong their booty shorts, so how do we conteract that?
because when i see them BLOOD RUSHES TO MY DICK INVOLUNTARILY, I CAN'T HELP THAT BLOOD RUSHES TO MY COCK, it's not a choice
What do you mean they aren't the same?
Yeah I really hate it when there's that double standard. She's a danger to society lock her up until she's better.
Most of cucked soyciety doesn't agree with you on that.
P
ok, then explain how being attracted is wrong then. that's what this whole topic was about
P
still incorrect, because it is only attraction, not an act, i never endorsed the act of pedophilia.Are you seriously not reading what I've been posting here or are you deliberately making me rephrase or copy paste my previous comments in order to give me a hard time?
LISTEN UP: THIS IS THE LAST TIME I WILL EXPLAIN THIS. READ VERY CAREFULLY:
Sexual attractions to children who are sexually undeveloped or partially developed (pedophilia) is wrong because their underdeveloped body risks not being physically able to sustain the pressures of pregnancy. If you attempt to impregnate a woman too young just because she started ovulating, you're ignoring not just the health of the mother, but also your future child(ren). A doctor explains the physical risks in the following excerpt:
View attachment 292999
Source: https://www.livescience.com/19584-10-year-birth.html
Hence for a man to procreate successfully, its necessary to acquire a female who has reached a minimum age of sexual maturity. Now, many normies say that 20 is the earliest age a woman can safely start attempting to get pregnant, but I think it could be as early as 17 or 18. Such an optimal setting for mating is what I consider valid. 17 years is ok for me. This citation below explains how the female body definitely completes puberty by age 17:
D. C. Phillips (2014). Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy. Sage Publications. pp. 18–19. ISBN 978-1-4833-6475-9. On average, the onset of puberty is about 18 months earlier for girls (usually starting around the age of 10 or 11 and lasting until they are 15 to 17) than for boys (who usually begin puberty at about the age of 11 to 12 and complete it by the age of 16 to 17, on average).
Similarly, homosexuality or bestiality are wrong because there is physiological incompatibility with the mate (a member of the same sex or a member of another species). These types of sex acts risk causing diseases.
Incel's sexual attraction to sexually developed females isn't as wrong on the level as pedophilia, homosexuality or bestiality, but incel men's attraction is undesirable nonetheless because those who are really incel (and not borderline incel like normies due to excessive hypergamy) risk perpetuating their subhuman genes which prevent their offspring from not being able to compete in society. Incels should be provided with escorts or euthanasia if they wish.
P
P
see that's bullshit.
P
fine,
but it's still not wrong to feel attraction from an objective point of view if no action is taken, and that is just a fact
P
it most certainly isn't "normal", but it does happen
P
what are your thoughts on hebephilia (11 to 14) and ephebophilia (15 to 19)
P
i see
so hebephilia is bad to you
although some finish puberty 15-16, but i guess 17 is the "safe" number
E
no you idiot. it says that you finish puberty at 15-17. some finish it at 15, some at 16 and some 17. there are many 15/16 year old girls who are post-pubescent. have you even been to high school? also, stop arguing that makeup makes someone look older. Person A who looks older than person B will still look older than person B with makeup due to looking older than person B without makeup
if a 17 year old girl looks younger than 21 year old girls (which they don't), then when they both put on makeup, they'll still look younger than the 21 year old. they both put on makeup so if they put equal amount of makeup how will the 17 year old look just as old by relying on makeup?
go google 12th grade yearboks. also the pelvis is sufficnetly developed in the late teens which your source says. and most pregnant teens who have adequate prenatal care and avoid smoking give birth to healthy babies. black foids are more likely to suffer complications? why? cuz they lack prenatal care too, not cuz of their race. if you're finished with puberty, you're sexually mature full stop.
puberty lasts about 5 years and the most common age for girls to start puberty 11
11+5=16
Yes. They see 14yo sluts as juxtapose to 5yo girls that play with my little pony and have colouring books and comics.
"A 15yo girl can't consent you idiot".
6 months later on her 16th birthday she magically has the maturity to consent.
These clowns think girls go through massive cognitive changes in a few months.
ackshually playing with My Little Pony is high-IQ
E
dude many 15/16 year olds look 21 or even 25. if they look that way, they're 99 percent of time post-pubescent. also if puberty lasts USUALLY 5 years, and girls usually begin it at 11, then it usually ends at 16. full stop.
also fake up does that to 25 year olds and 20 years olds too, not just teens. the girls who finish at 17 usually began at 12. some girls even finish at 14 if they began puberty at 9. most evidence shows that the most common age is 16 for girls, not 17.
also, go look at any 12th grade yearbook and the girls will look usually 21 or even 25
E
i googled 11th grade yearbook and found this http://www.cromwellalumni.com/2009/2009in08.htm
also, many 15/16 year old girls DO look 21+.
also, again, if trhey look physically mature, they're prolly post-pubescent
Pedophile threads allowed yet I got warning for saying I cross dressed when I was 12
E
again, if they look physically mature, there is a 90% chance they're post-pubescent. i mean this is blatantly obvious. you can tell if someone is pubescent or post-pubescent based on their appearance. just look at how they look and if it fits the signs of finishing puberty, they're prolly post-pubescent. so pregnancy will prolly be ok
they're 11th grade. i'm sure they're 16
I hope this doesn't come off as sarcastic but this is a very good thread you've made that raises a valid point.
There's currently 66 Bluepillers in this thread, may one of you please explain/answer the following below.
As the OP has stated:
In the 1800s-1900s, if you were caught performing Homosexual acts you would face Capital Punishment/Conversion therapy or various other consequences right?
As a result, any man/woman that was Gay/Lesbian kept that behind closed doors or only entertained the thoughts in their heads.
Now may I only ask: Do you realise you're doing the EXACT same thing to Paedophiles?
I KNOW RIGHT NOW YOU'RE PROBABLY SHAKING AND SPERGING OUT SCREAMING "A BABY CAN'T CONSENT" and I AGREE. A child that can not speak can't consent. A child that has no understanding on anything sexual can not consent.
My question is, Why is it that a 17 year old can't consent (In the USA) but the moment they turn 18, their consent is now valid?
In that 1 year. What has fundamentally changed? There's no substantial mental development between 17 and 18; if that was the case, the Global age of consent would be 18.
I believe the age of consent is merely an arbitrary number when a foid has comfortably entered puberty and is knowledgeable about what they're getting into.
It doesn't make sense to me. If a 17 year old foid feels attracted to a 19 year old guy and the guy was to do anything, HE'S A PAEDOPHILE according to American law, but if she waits 12 months it's all good now? Nothing much changes....
There's currently 66 Bluepillers in this thread, may one of you please explain/answer the following below.
As the OP has stated:
In the 1800s-1900s, if you were caught performing Homosexual acts you would face Capital Punishment/Conversion therapy or various other consequences right?
As a result, any man/woman that was Gay/Lesbian kept that behind closed doors or only entertained the thoughts in their heads.
Now may I only ask: Do you realise you're doing the EXACT same thing to Paedophiles?
I KNOW RIGHT NOW YOU'RE PROBABLY SHAKING AND SPERGING OUT SCREAMING "A BABY CAN'T CONSENT" and I AGREE. A child that can not speak can't consent. A child that has no understanding on anything sexual can not consent.
My question is, Why is it that a 17 year old can't consent (In the USA) but the moment they turn 18, their consent is now valid?
In that 1 year. What has fundamentally changed? There's no substantial mental development between 17 and 18; if that was the case, the Global age of consent would be 18.
I believe the age of consent is merely an arbitrary number when a foid has comfortably entered puberty and is knowledgeable about what they're getting into.
It doesn't make sense to me. If a 17 year old foid feels attracted to a 19 year old guy and the guy was to do anything, HE'S A PAEDOPHILE according to American law, but if she waits 12 months it's all good now? Nothing much changes....
E
JFL all the girls look at least 21, looking 21 instead of 25 is still post-pubescent. many look 23 or 24
Exactly there's nothing wrong with feeling something, just because it's taboo. Actions can be considered right or wrong, but there's no objective right or wrong since morality is highly relative based on cultural values and social norms, as such the whole concept is meaningless.
P
your argument is pure crap. you use terms like "legitimize" about a feeling of attraction, not an action.
whatever
E
you're dumb. you're the one who is biased. youre a moralfag cuck. but at least you admit 17 year olds are normal to be attracted to
they do look grown up. you know it. i've seen 21 year olds who look younger than that. and the foids from my hs haven't aged and they're all 22 now
i hate moralfags
E
i'm sure if those "undeveloped" women were 20. you'd be attracted to them. i've seen college girls look like that. they aren't underdeveloped and ARE finished with puberty
E
i'm sure you are attracted to them, if they claimed to be 21, you'd admit to thinking they're hot. i'm sure your favorite age group is late teens/early 20s like most men
but at least you admit that you're sexually attracted to the 11th grade girls you labeled as developed
E
men are attracted to neoteny (aka looking extremely young and teenage-ish). studies have shown this to be true.
E
look up 12th grade yearbooks
To literal kids yes,I won’t say no to a jailbait tho
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
