Serious molesting prepubescent girls shouldn't be condoned on this forum at all and you're a faggot if you condone it (fuck off IT i don't want to join you)

[Oldcelloner38]

They are fantasy pedophiles, they think hentais are real life. Innocent loli loli loli bunch of bullshit. If they are really attracted to 8yo girls they are volcels because 8yo girls will never want to be in sexual relationship with an adult, so they might as well kidnap kids and rape them.

Exactly

Jfl, most foids have had chads cock by 9, you're fucking soy if you don't want a 5 years old and under like me. Fucking roastie lovers

Fbi we got one right here

 

[DeepSea]

8 year olds have an underdeveloped vagina they can’t handle penetration

Most 8-year old foids can handle some penetration. It depends on the depth of the vagina vs. penis size. There are cultures where it's considered normal for foids that age to be sexually active with adult men. Among the Lepcha of Nepal and Tibet, for example, old men of eighty copulate with girls of eight, and nobody minds.

"According to Ford and Beach, “Older men occasionally copulate with girls as young as eight years of age. Instead of being regarded as a criminal offense, such behavior is considered amusing by the Lepcha”. The Tontonac of Mexico invite a priest to deflower the infant girl about a month after her birth, followed by the mother's defloration of her six years later. Among the Kubeo, an old man would deflower the eight year old girl by stretching the vagina until three fingers could be inserted. (Gregersen, 1994: 291). In fact, child-adult sexual contact is institutionalized as part of initiation rituals in at least twenty countries (Konker, 1992: 148)." (source)

Because they cannot consent

Then I ask "why not?".

"They are too young to understand all the terrible implications of having sex", is usually the answer.

This begs the question, "what terrible implications and why not?".

Lets explore the terrible implications.

The terrible implications refer to trauma, since as long as you respect the child's boundaries, there are no immediate negative consequences to sexual activity. If no coercion is involved, there will be no problems until the child realizes that what happened is "wrong", which often takes many years. Until then, the child is no different from other children.

The issue here is sociogenic and iatrogenic harm.

People who have sex as kids don't automatically feel trauma! It's up to society and psychologists to being them around to the socially approved way of seeing things, so they can seize the trauma narrative as their own.

Another way to view it is as re-education and brainwashing, particularly for those who didn't initially view themselves abused. The patient is viewed as damaged so long as he or she does not attribute trauma to their experience. Once they understand the trauma, once their understanding rights itself, the patient is on their way to recovery and becomes a "survivor".

Children are allowed to consent to sex and sex play with other children. In fact, most child psychologist view sex play as beneficial, and while the child should be taught that sex should not be forced upon them or anyone else, they think children should be permitted to engage in safe and "age appropriate" sex play.

So the dominant view it is not "children cannot consent to sex", but "children cannot consent to sex (or sexual contact) with someone who is more than X years older than them", even though a sexual relationship between a young child and an adult is unlikely to be harmful if the adult takes steps to ensure safety and to make sure that the child is willing.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Most 8-year old foids can handle some penetration. It depends on the depth of the vagina vs. penis size. There are cultures where it's considered normal for foids that age to be sexually active with adult men. Among the Lepcha of Nepal and Tibet, for example, old men of eighty copulate with girls of eight, and nobody minds.

"According to Ford and Beach, “Older men occasionally copulate with girls as young as eight years of age. Instead of being regarded as a criminal offense, such behavior is considered amusing by the Lepcha”. The Tontonac of Mexico invite a priest to deflower the infant girl about a month after her birth, followed by the mother's defloration of her six years later. Among the Kubeo, an old man would deflower the eight year old girl by stretching the vagina until three fingers could be inserted. (Gregersen, 1994: 291). In fact, child-adult sexual contact is institutionalized as part of initiation rituals in at least twenty countries (Konker, 1992: 148)." (source)


Then I ask "why not?".

"They are too young to understand all the terrible implications of having sex", is usually the answer.

This begs the question, "what terrible implications and why not?".

Lets explore the terrible implications.

The terrible implications refer to trauma, since as long as you respect the child's boundaries, there are no immediate negative consequences to sexual activity. If no coercion is involved, there will be no problems until the child realizes that what happened is "wrong", which often takes many years. Until then, the child is no different from other children.

The issue here is sociogenic and iatrogenic harm.

People who have sex as kids don't automatically feel trauma! It's up to society and psychologists to being them around to the socially approved way of seeing things, so they can seize the trauma narrative as their own.

Another way to view it is as re-education and brainwashing, particularly for those who didn't initially view themselves abused. The patient is viewed as damaged so long as he or she does not attribute trauma to their experience. Once they understand the trauma, once their understanding rights itself, the patient is on their way to recovery and becomes a "survivor".

Children are allowed to consent to sex and sex play with other children. In fact, most child psychologist view sex play as beneficial, and while the child should be taught that sex should not be forced upon them or anyone else, they think children should be permitted to engage in safe and "age appropriate" sex play.

So the dominant view it is not "children cannot consent to sex", but "children cannot consent to sex (or sexual contact) with someone who is more than X years older than them", even though a sexual relationship between a young child and an adult is unlikely to be harmful if the adult takes steps to ensure safety and to make sure that the child is willing.

It’s because children are too young to understand STDs, contraception, etc and the responsibilities. Also sex play doesn’t involve sex. It just involves playing doctor or something

 

[Deta97]

not even 18/19? I would totally date 18/19 year olds they’re no different from 20 year olds

Fraid not. Maybe 19, but I just feel like I’d be pushing it and start falling into slippery slope level territory. It’s not that I’m an agecuck (or maybe I am), it’s just that I suffer from OCD and POCD is one of them. Getting involved with someone even close would send me into a panic attack.

 

[unsettling]

Everything past 9 is old hag.

 

[DeepSea]

It’s because children are too young to understand STDs, contraception, etc and the responsibilities. Also sex play doesn’t involve sex. It just involves playing doctor or something

Penetration is not needed for STDs to be spread. Kissing can transmit herpes, syphilis, and CMV. HPV can easily be transmitted just by touching someone's genitals. So by this logic, children shouldn't be allowed to kiss or engage in sex play with other children either.

There are other ways to mitigate the risk of STDs that don't involve Age of Consent laws. Legally, I would make any adult who had sex with a child liable for any injury (STD) that occurred to the child and require parental/guardian consent for sex.

Concealing parental sexuality from children and prohibiting sexual rehearsal play has only become the norm in the West in the last 200-300 years. Before then, it was common for children to observe their parents having sex and to want to imitate them. In ancient and medieval times whole families slept in the same room.

"Scattered and not widely disseminated evidence from primatology, anthropology, and history of childhood sexuality support the hypothesis that throughout much of human behavioural evolution that human children have learned about sex through observing parental sexuality and then imitating it in sexual rehearsal play with peers." (source)

Young children aren't just interested in exploring sexuality with their peers either. This study involved parents taking nude showers with their young children and observing their behavior. Almost half of the girls tried to touch their fathers' penises'. Had the fathers allowed this natural behavior, they would be considered "child sexual abusers" in the eyes of the law.

"More than half of the girls name the female genitals, name the male genitals, watch the male genitals, and/or are interested in them. Touching of the male genitals by girls also occurs in slightly less than half."

In her book, Margaux Fragoso recounts a childhood memory of her taking a shower with her father:

"The shower grew louder with the silence. I felt like something needed to be said, but I didn’t know what it was. Then I found a way to speak. I didn’t know what my words meant, only that they had to be said. As I spoke them I used that popular girl’s voice. “Poppa, is that a toy? Can I touch it, pretty please? Is that your toy there for me to play with?” I wasn’t sure where I’d learned those words, but it felt like I knew them by heart. Poppa turned away, his skinny legs bent. “No,” he muttered, nearly inaudibly. “No.” I reached over anyway to make him feel good. He shouldn’t say no when that special part of him was mine, too. He was my father. Swatting my hand away, he squeezed the faucets shut."

 

[Caesercel]

Penetration is not needed for STDs to be spread. Kissing can transmit herpes, syphilis, and CMV. HPV can easily be transmitted just by touching someone's genitals. So by this logic, children shouldn't be allowed to kiss or engage in sex play with other children either.

There are other ways to mitigate the risk of STDs that don't involve Age of Consent laws. Legally, I would make any adult who had sex with a child liable for any injury (STD) that occurred to the child and require parental/guardian consent for sex.

Concealing parental sexuality from children and prohibiting sexual rehearsal play has only become the norm in the West in the last 200-300 years. Before then, it was common for children to observe their parents having sex and to want to imitate them. In ancient and medieval times whole families slept in the same room.

"Scattered and not widely disseminated evidence from primatology, anthropology, and history of childhood sexuality support the hypothesis that throughout much of human behavioural evolution that human children have learned about sex through observing parental sexuality and then imitating it in sexual rehearsal play with peers." (source)

Young children aren't just interested in exploring sexuality with their peers either. This study involved parents taking nude showers with their young children and observing their behavior. Almost half of the girls tried to touch their fathers' penises'. Had the fathers allowed this natural behavior, they would be considered "child sexual abusers" in the eyes of the law.

"More than half of the girls name the female genitals, name the male genitals, watch the male genitals, and/or are interested in them. Touching of the male genitals by girls also occurs in slightly less than half."

In her book, Margaux Fragoso recounts a childhood memory of her taking a shower with her father:

"The shower grew louder with the silence. I felt like something needed to be said, but I didn’t know what it was. Then I found a way to speak. I didn’t know what my words meant, only that they had to be said. As I spoke them I used that popular girl’s voice. “Poppa, is that a toy? Can I touch it, pretty please? Is that your toy there for me to play with?” I wasn’t sure where I’d learned those words, but it felt like I knew them by heart. Poppa turned away, his skinny legs bent. “No,” he muttered, nearly inaudibly. “No.” I reached over anyway to make him feel good. He shouldn’t say no when that special part of him was mine, too. He was my father. Swatting my hand away, he squeezed the faucets shut."

So many words to say "I'm pedo dedo"

 

[Zensfy]

So many words to say "I'm pedo dedo"

there’s nothing wrong with being a pedo

 

[Escthectrler]

Exactly

Fbi we got one right here

You are bAnned

 

[Caesercel]

there’s nothing wrong with being a pedo

Literal JB prime age boipussi

 

[Zensfy]

Literal JB prime age boipussi

JB is past prime, they are best when they are preteens (under 13)

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Penetration is not needed for STDs to be spread. Kissing can transmit herpes, syphilis, and CMV. HPV can easily be transmitted just by touching someone's genitals. So by this logic, children shouldn't be allowed to kiss or engage in sex play with other children either.

There are other ways to mitigate the risk of STDs that don't involve Age of Consent laws. Legally, I would make any adult who had sex with a child liable for any injury (STD) that occurred to the child and require parental/guardian consent for sex.

Concealing parental sexuality from children and prohibiting sexual rehearsal play has only become the norm in the West in the last 200-300 years. Before then, it was common for children to observe their parents having sex and to want to imitate them. In ancient and medieval times whole families slept in the same room.

"Scattered and not widely disseminated evidence from primatology, anthropology, and history of childhood sexuality support the hypothesis that throughout much of human behavioural evolution that human children have learned about sex through observing parental sexuality and then imitating it in sexual rehearsal play with peers." (source)

Young children aren't just interested in exploring sexuality with their peers either. This study involved parents taking nude showers with their young children and observing their behavior. Almost half of the girls tried to touch their fathers' penises'. Had the fathers allowed this natural behavior, they would be considered "child sexual abusers" in the eyes of the law.

"More than half of the girls name the female genitals, name the male genitals, watch the male genitals, and/or are interested in them. Touching of the male genitals by girls also occurs in slightly less than half."

In her book, Margaux Fragoso recounts a childhood memory of her taking a shower with her father:

"The shower grew louder with the silence. I felt like something needed to be said, but I didn’t know what it was. Then I found a way to speak. I didn’t know what my words meant, only that they had to be said. As I spoke them I used that popular girl’s voice. “Poppa, is that a toy? Can I touch it, pretty please? Is that your toy there for me to play with?” I wasn’t sure where I’d learned those words, but it felt like I knew them by heart. Poppa turned away, his skinny legs bent. “No,” he muttered, nearly inaudibly. “No.” I reached over anyway to make him feel good. He shouldn’t say no when that special part of him was mine, too. He was my father. Swatting my hand away, he squeezed the faucets shut."

sexual intercourse increases the risk of STDs far more than kissing ever could. Children cannot understand responsibilities to condom use, contraception, and things like that. They're too young to understand how consent works such as making sure another person is fully consenting and are less likely to care about risks of STDs or the responsibility of using condoms. they aren't ready for sex. they're too young to give proper consent.

 

[Lonelycel]

Tommy doesn’t support the tainting of children’s minds. They are beings of pure innocence and don’t deserve to be touched in such a way. It’s vile, it’s cruel, it’s inhumane, and above all it’s despicable and deplorable. Pedophiles and Hebephiles don’t deserve respect or mercy, they are below subhuman.

High IQ

 

[DeepSea]

sexual intercourse increases the risk of STDs far more than kissing ever could.

Research shows that more than 90% of sexual contact between young girls and adults does not involve sexual intercourse.

"Paul Gebhard produced figures for the proportions of various sexual techniques employed in the 'offences'. He found that non-coital sexual activity, mostly manipulation of the genitals, accounted for no less than 94 percent of offences against girls under twelve. Gebhard listed separately those offences in which there had been aggression against girls, a smaller, but significantly different group; in these cases, where a degree of violence or intimidation had been used, coitus was attempted in 23 percent of cases, and was actually completed in a further 23 percent." (source)

It should be illegal to infect children with STDs, but you don't need AoC laws for that.

Children cannot understand responsibilities to condom use

Less than 10% of adults use condoms during oral sex or genital touching; children who have been taught about STDs may actually be more responsible than adults in this regard because they aren't yet pumped full of sex hormones clouding their judgment.

contraception, and things like that.

Prepubescent girls can't get pregnant so contraception is clearly a non-issue.

They're too young to understand how consent works such as making sure another person is fully consenting

How is this an argument against pedophilia? Children can't coerce adults into sexual activity, but they can coerce other children.

they're too young to give proper consent

Consent arguments against pedophilia fall apart in two ways:

1. We do all kinds of things to children (vaccinations, medical decisions, chores, etc.) without their consent and nobody cares
2. In every other situation in existence when it comes to children and consent, the fact that a child can't consent doesn't mean something is evil or can't be done, it simply means the child's parent or guardian has to consent on their behalf.

There are hundreds of thousands of examples per year in just the U.S. where a parent has to make a decision for a minor that is potentially harmful. Consenting for a child to participate in a dangerous sport like martial arts, tackle football, or anything involving firearms comes to mind.

In many states, a child can drink alcohol while under the legal age if their parent is present and gives consent.

• Circumcision.
• Guardianship during a divorce.
• Being exposed to second-hand cigarette smoke.
• Eating unhealthy foods.

It's a long list because a parent decides literally everything for a minor. Think of something, anything potentially harmful that a minor does, and chances are there are parents deciding on their behalf.

You'll say that these aren't harmful things, these are just risky (potentially harmful) things. I'll say that the vast majority of children who have sex with adults are not harmed. You'll say that these things are all to serve the good of the child, and I'll say that a parent could easily argue that allowing their child to experience sexuality could be for the good of the child.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Research shows that more than 90% of sexual contact between young girls and adults does not involve sexual intercourse.

"Paul Gebhard produced figures for the proportions of various sexual techniques employed in the 'offences'. He found that non-coital sexual activity, mostly manipulation of the genitals, accounted for no less than 94 percent of offences against girls under twelve. Gebhard listed separately those offences in which there had been aggression against girls, a smaller, but significantly different group; in these cases, where a degree of violence or intimidation had been used, coitus was attempted in 23 percent of cases, and was actually completed in a further 23 percent." (source)

It should be illegal to infect children with STDs, but you don't need AoC laws for that.



Less than 10% of adults use condoms during oral sex or genital touching; children who have been taught about STDs may actually be more responsible than adults in this regard because they aren't yet pumped full of sex hormones clouding their judgment.



Prepubescent girls can't get pregnant so contraception is clearly a non-issue.



How is this an argument against pedophilia? Children can't coerce adults into sexual activity, but they can coerce other children.



Consent arguments against pedophilia fall apart in two ways:

1. We do all kinds of things to children (vaccinations, medical decisions, chores, etc.) without their consent and nobody cares
2. In every other situation in existence when it comes to children and consent, the fact that a child can't consent doesn't mean something is evil or can't be done, it simply means the child's parent or guardian has to consent on their behalf.

There are hundreds of thousands of examples per year in just the U.S. where a parent has to make a decision for a minor that is potentially harmful. Consenting for a child to participate in a dangerous sport like martial arts, tackle football, or anything involving firearms comes to mind.

In many states, a child can drink alcohol while under the legal age if their parent is present and gives consent.

• Circumcision.
• Guardianship during a divorce.
• Being exposed to second-hand cigarette smoke.
• Eating unhealthy foods.

It's a long list because a parent decides literally everything for a minor. Think of something, anything potentially harmful that a minor does, and chances are there are parents deciding on their behalf.

You'll say that these aren't harmful things, these are just risky (potentially harmful) things. I'll say that the vast majority of children who have sex with adults are not harmed. You'll say that these things are all to serve the good of the child, and I'll say that a parent could easily argue that allowing their child to experience sexuality could be for the good of the child.

A child still cannot give proper consent. Those whataboutism fallacy arguments you used require far less responsibility.

Children still can get STDs and many times don’t know how to know when protection are appropriate and when it’s not. They don’t know how to understand when anyone can consent or not (whether they want to fuck an adult or another child). They might assume that adults in position of authority are non-manipulative and are easily influenced by them for example

 

[Robtical]

sexual intercourse increases the risk of STDs far more than kissing ever could. Children cannot understand responsibilities to condom use, contraception, and things like that. They're too young to understand how consent works such as making sure another person is fully consenting and are less likely to care about risks of STDs or the responsibility of using condoms. they aren't ready for sex. they're too young to give proper consent.

If they can consent with people around their age then they can consent with adults. A young foid can get an std or pregnancy from a young chad the same rate she can get it from an adult non chad.

Tommy doesn’t support the tainting of children’s minds. They are beings of pure innocence and don’t deserve to be touched in such a way. It’s vile, it’s cruel, it’s inhumane, and above all it’s despicable and deplorable. Pedophiles and Hebephiles don’t deserve respect or mercy, they are below subhuman.

Agecuck fags deserve no mercy. They are pussy worshipping sacks of shit who are obsessed with where men want to stick their dicks.

 

[ineedassistance]

high iQ， child molestors are a shame，exposing their subhuman nature

 

[unsettling]

everything that hurts society should be condoned

 

[kanyepilled]

Jfl, most foids have had chads cock by 9, you're fucking soy if you don't want a 5 years old and under like me. Fucking roastie lovers

5?

 

[DeepSea]

Those whataboutism fallacy arguments you used

Pointing out the hypocrisy of your selective moral outrage falls beyond whataboutism.

require far less responsibility.

Over 14 million children and adolescents are obese and metabolically broken because of choices their parents made on their behalf. Bad diets and second-hand cigarette smoke are inherently harmful, yet parents are allowed to expose their children to these things. Sex (like sports) can cause harm and injury in some cases, but isn't inherently harmful. Therefore, consenting to sex should require less responsibility.

Children still can get STDs and many times don’t know how to know when protection are appropriate and when it’s not.

Adults almost never use condoms during oral sex. I doubt children would be any less responsible than adults in this regard. Most sex play between young children does not involve sexual intercourse and most adult-child sex does not involve intercourse. There is no reason for one of these activities to be illegal and the other one not to be if your main concern is the spread of STDs.

They don’t know how to understand when anyone can consent or not (whether they want to fuck an adult or another child). They might assume that adults in position of authority are non-manipulative and are easily influenced by them for example

But adults in positions of authority manipulate them into not expressing their sexuality starting from a very young age by, among other things, concealing parental sexuality from them. Is that okay? Adults manipulate them into feeling shame and guilt when they show a precocious interest in sex. The incels who told Dr. Brian Gilmartin that when they were children, they had wanted to enjoy sex play with girls were harmed by the toxic shame instilled in them by adults.

Some children are easily manipulated by adults, but the big question is why, when it comes to sex, the possibility of manipulation is regarded with such horror. The "harm" in these cases is adults grooming children to... get sex; which is sort of just circular and depends upon the idea that sex is inherently harmful. The sheer vitrol and digust these relationships tend to get seems disproportionate in cases where manipulation is going on, let alone in cases where it's not and the older party isn't manipulating the younger one.

To quote Dr. Stephen Kershnar:

"If manipulation is powerful enough it undermines the degree that the child is really willing to do something or the voluntariness of her consent. In this way, it is similar to coercion. However, this is not a distinct problem for adult-child sex. The same problem arises for attempts to get a child to commit to Bar Mitzvah classes or to not engage in child-child sex. There is a distinct problem here only if there are different or greater worries concerning adult-child sex. If what is different is the risk of harm, then this is likely a harm-based analysis, rather than a right-based one"

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Pointing out the hypocrisy of your selective moral outrage falls beyond whataboutism.



Over 14 million children and adolescents are obese and metabolically broken because of choices their parents made on their behalf. Bad diets and second-hand cigarette smoke are inherently harmful, yet parents are allowed to expose their children to these things. Sex (like sports) can cause harm and injury in some cases, but isn't inherently harmful. Therefore, consenting to sex should require less responsibility.


Adults almost never use condoms during oral sex. I doubt children would be any less responsible than adults in this regard. Most sex play between young children does not involve sexual intercourse and most adult-child sex does not involve intercourse. There is no reason for one of these activities to be illegal and the other one not to be if your main concern is the spread of STDs.


But adults in positions of authority manipulate them into not expressing their sexuality starting from a very young age by, among other things, concealing parental sexuality from them. Is that okay? Adults manipulate them into feeling shame and guilt when they show a precocious interest in sex. The incels who told Dr. Brian Gilmartin that when they were children, they had wanted to enjoy sex play with girls were harmed by the toxic shame instilled in them by adults.

Some children are easily manipulated by adults, but the big question is why, when it comes to sex, the possibility of manipulation is regarded with such horror. The "harm" in these cases is adults grooming children to... get sex; which is sort of just circular and depends upon the idea that sex is inherently harmful. The sheer vitrol and digust these relationships tend to get seems disproportionate in cases where manipulation is going on, let alone in cases where it's not and the older party isn't manipulating the younger one.

To quote Dr. Stephen Kershnar:

"If manipulation is powerful enough it undermines the degree that the child is really willing to do something or the voluntariness of her consent. In this way, it is similar to coercion. However, this is not a distinct problem for adult-child sex. The same problem arises for attempts to get a child to commit to Bar Mitzvah classes or to not engage in child-child sex. There is a distinct problem here only if there are different or greater worries concerning adult-child sex. If what is different is the risk of harm, then this is likely a harm-based analysis, rather than a right-based one"

Children cannot give proper consent because they don’t know when it’s suitable to use protection. Adults have to use condoms especially when they have the first time with a new partner or a hookup. Children often won’t care about condoms they’ll just go for it without it. Many might even not to care about how to avoid breaking the condoms. Some might even try becoming excessively promiscuous or refuse to commit because they’re like 8 and think this is acceptable. Not just that, but their sexuality is still developing and we cannot let adults interfere with it. They don’t know how to understand consent. They’ll think that a person who just had sexual with them is automatically consensual the second time. They might think that because they fucked someone once it’s automatically consensual the next time or that because they can fuck adults they can try it on a infant or something. They’ll think that because they’re sexually active when they hit their period it’s ok to become pregnant and they won’t care about birth control. They won’t care about the responsibilities of sexual activity.

then you’re just using the whataboutism fallacy. Church and circumcision and whatever parents decide on is A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TOPIC so you cannot use whataboutism just because “muh hypocrisy” because it doesn’t DIRECTLY address my points about child molesting and is addressing completely different topics that are beside the point. Whether children can consent to church or some garbage is beside the point. It’s red herring.

If they can consent with people around their age then they can consent with adults. A young foid can get an std or pregnancy from a young chad the same rate she can get it from an adult non chad.

Agecuck fags deserve no mercy. They are pussy worshipping sacks of shit who are obsessed with where men want to stick their dicks.

It’s different when teenagers consent to sex with their own age compared to 5 year olds consenting to sex with other 5 year olds

 

[Robtical]

It’s different when teenagers consent to sex with their own age compared to 5 year olds consenting to sex with other 5 year olds

Teenagers consenting with adults is ok if the foid entered puberty. No one here would care about an adult foid who has sex with a 13-14 year old pubescent boy, a lot would even call the boy lucky. Since foids mature faster than boys it's definitely ok to have sex with a pubescent teen foid, especially if she's a non virgin.

 

[DeepSea]

Children cannot give proper consent because they don’t know when it’s suitable to use protection. Adults have to use condoms especially when they have the first time with a new partner or a hookup. Children often won’t care about condoms they’ll just go for it without it. Many might even not to care about how to avoid breaking the condoms. Some might even try becoming excessively promiscuous or refuse to commit because they’re like 8 and think this is acceptable. Not just that, but their sexuality is still developing and we cannot let adults interfere with it. They don’t know how to understand consent. They’ll think that a person who just had sexual with them is automatically consensual the second time. They might think that because they fucked someone once it’s automatically consensual the next time or that because they can fuck adults they can try it on a infant or something. They’ll think that because they’re sexually active when they hit their period it’s ok to become pregnant and they won’t care about birth control. They won’t care about the responsibilities of sexual activity.

I'll double-down on my proposed parental consent system, and claim that it would be useful in preventing situations where the child is too uninformed or immature to understand these things.

Not just that, but their sexuality is still developing and we cannot let adults interfere with it.

Most would accept there is nothing wrong with two 8 year olds fooling around. Keeping everything the same, what is introduced, what is destroyed, when the ages begin to shift, day by day, month by month, year by year? If nothing is destroyed when the ages are identical, just what is automatically, necessarily, inevitably, and absolutely destroyed when one partner is 5 years older, or 10, or 20?

What power is contained in number itself?

In the frame of the CSA narrative, nobody in the world understands that people are different, and quite capable of a great many things. The trauma narrative constructs an absurd mathematical proof involving addition and subtraction to engineer everyone n years older than the younger partner an insane villain and torturer, and a willful destroyer of childhood.

Trauma is a thing that cannot be questioned by anybody. This is really why trauma is crucial in maintaining the integrity of the narrative, as abstract as it has become. Trauma serves as a protective shield against any criticism or questions, and makes the narrative empirically unavailable, except to the psychology practitioners who make their coin from such priestly activities.

Yet trauma, as a universal marker of sexual relations between children and older people, cannot be found. Anthropologists are unanimous about this.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

I'll double-down on my proposed parental consent system, and claim that it would be useful in preventing situations where the child is too uninformed or immature to understand these things.



Most would accept there is nothing wrong with two 8 year olds fooling around. Keeping everything the same, what is introduced, what is destroyed, when the ages begin to shift, day by day, month by month, year by year? If nothing is destroyed when the ages are identical, just what is automatically, necessarily, inevitably, and absolutely destroyed when one partner is 5 years older, or 10, or 20?

What power is contained in number itself?

In the frame of the CSA narrative, nobody in the world understands that people are different, and quite capable of a great many things. The trauma narrative constructs an absurd mathematical proof involving addition and subtraction to engineer everyone n years older than the younger partner an insane villain and torturer, and a willful destroyer of childhood.

Trauma is a thing that cannot be questioned by anybody. This is really why trauma is crucial in maintaining the integrity of the narrative, as abstract as it has become. Trauma serves as a protective shield against any criticism or questions, and makes the narrative empirically unavailable, except to the psychology practitioners who make their coin from such priestly activities.

Yet trauma, as a universal marker of sexual relations between children and older people, cannot be found. Anthropologists are unanimous about this.

Playing doctor between two kids is different from child molesters typically do. Playing doctor is just innocent curiosity whereas the adult is not innocent curiosity at all

 

[Tommy]

Agecuck fags deserve no mercy. They are pussy worshipping sacks of shit who are obsessed with where men want to stick their dicks.

Yeah, because not wanting to diddle kids regardless of their gender makes me the bad guy you fucking twat. Do you even read the things you say? do you realize how you sound? are you self aware?

 

[Robtical]

Yeah, because not wanting to diddle kids regardless of their gender makes me the bad guy you fucking twat. Do you even read the things you say? do you realize how you sound? are you self aware?

Teens aren't babies or kids. Being obsessed over men who want to fuck them is cucked. If you don't like them then mind your business what we like.

 

[Insanitycel]

high iQ， child molestors are a shame，exposing their subhuman nature

and you’re not a subhuman?

 

[AllanKing]

and you’re not a subhuman?

height of my soul mogs normies'

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Teens aren't babies or kids. Being obsessed over men who want to fuck them is cucked. If you don't like them then mind your business what we like.

I think he’s talking about prepubescent children

 

[Sportbro]

Agecucks are either fakecel cockblocking whiteknights, or bluepilled soyfags. There's no reason to care about young foids fucking adults as an uncucked straight man. Not doing anything about abortion and male genital mutilation, but screaming like a pussy about young rosties getting fucked by adults should show you where their minds are at.

room temp IQ
half this forum is retarted teenagers

 

[Robtical]

Teens are still minors retard, up until 18 and 19. And just because you say it’s “cucked” doesn’t make you correct you’re a piece of shit and deserve your brains splattered on the sidewalk

Shove your "minors" up your ass you soy faggot. Faggot dick sucker agecucks like you should be hanged by your worthless nuts.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Shove your "minors" up your ass you soy faggot. Faggot dick sucker agecucks like you should be hanged by your worthless nuts.

Jfl he thinks 17 year olds are mere minors??? I thought he only felt that way about prepubescent girls

 

[Robtical]

Jfl he thinks 17 year olds are mere minors??? I thought he only felt that way about prepubescent girls

Anything the government considers a minor is still a baby to that agecuck.

 

[Tommy]

Jfl he thinks 17 year olds are mere minors??? I thought he only felt that way about prepubescent girls

I want this mf to stay away from anyone whose age starts with a “1” or a “0” You shouldn’t diddle kids, preteens, or teenagers. It’s not being an “agecuck” it’s having basic human decency. He lacks even that. Like seriously, how can your mind be so warped that you think it’s okay and “if you don’t like it just look away” like what? Are you fucking serious? I hope this guy is baiting because it’s pathetic as fuck if he isn’t.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

I want this mf to stay away from anyone whose age starts with a “1” or a “0” You shouldn’t diddle kids, preteens, or teenagers. It’s not being an “agecuck” it’s having basic human decency. He lacks even that. Like seriously, how can your mind be so warped that you think it’s okay and “if you don’t like it just look away” like what? Are you fucking serious? I hope this guy is baiting because it’s pathetic as fuck if he isn’t.

No 18/19 year olds? I’m disobeying that with pride!!!! Don’t try stopping me because you won’t! >=)

 

[Robtical]

I want this mf to stay away from anyone whose age starts with a “1” or a “0” You shouldn’t diddle kids, preteens, or teenagers. It’s not being an “agecuck” it’s having basic human decency. He lacks even that. Like seriously, how can your mind be so warped that you think it’s okay and “if you don’t like it just look away” like what? Are you fucking serious? I hope this guy is baiting because it’s pathetic as fuck if he isn’t.

Keep crying agecuck. Whores as young as 13 get fucked by adults all around the world, deal with it.

 

[bignose]

100% agreed with this. I'm not one of those agecucks who thinks a 16 year old is a literal child, but pre-pubescent kids? That's absolutely fucking nasty tbh.

No they don’t. I would do anything to fuck a college girl

not even 18/19? I would totally date 18/19 year olds they’re no different from 20 year olds

ed didn’t kill elementary school kids. His victims were older than that

zero attraction

ZRO ATRACTION?!!!! OHH GOD !!! she is incredible beautiful, I like women of any age, I would also do it with her

dude. 10 or 11 year olds are not even remotely attractive. 14 can be attractive occasionally but nearly as often as 18. 18 is where women look best. at 18 you're finished with puberty and fully developed. that's when you are reproductively viable. not at 12 or even 10. many 10 year olds can't even get pregnant, many haven't even begun puberty.

and studies show men find young adults most attractive not middle school girls. you're a hebephile which is atypical. ephebophilia is pretty normal but lacking attraction to 18 year olds is unusual.

these are college girls:

View attachment 465352

circumcision is a whataboutism red herring fallacy that's irrelevant

not to mention boys get molested a lot too probably just as much as girls

i'm 23 and i have strong attraction to women my age. 7 year olds are too young to consent

you're right, women of these ages are the best without a doubt

you're right, women of these ages are the best without a doubt

 

[asdf1234]

Didnt read the whole post but agreed with title. Sick of the edgelords on here. Obvious fakecel give away.

 

[Tommy]

Keep crying agecuck. Whores as young as 13 get fucked by adults all around the world, deal with it.

“I get off to watching young girl’s cry while i rape them because they’re in pain and don’t understand what is happening to them- my inner rage caused by the fact that i’m an insufferable asshole and can’t get laid by consenting women.”
Tommy is done with you

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

“I get off to watching young girl’s cry while i rape them because they’re in pain and don’t understand what is happening to them- my inner rage caused by the fact that i’m an insufferable asshole and can’t get laid by consenting women.”
Tommy is done with you

JFL if you think a 17 year old cannot agree to sex and if you think statutory rape is forcible or against someone’s will

a 17 year old knows EXACTLY what they’re getting into, they’re just either refusing to conform to society’s morals or just simply amoral.

 

[Tommy]

No 18/19 year olds? I’m disobeying that with pride!!!! Don’t try stopping me because you won’t! >=)

18-19 year olds are adults and at that age is when women are at their prime (or close to it) college age girls are beautiful and it makes sense that guys are attracted to them. If you’re like 40 and trying to get with college girls then that’s kinda fucked up but if she says it’s ok then who am i to dictate what they do

 

[FamilyGuy1999]

Tommy is done with you

over for Robtical

 

[Tommy]

JFL if you think a 17 year old cannot agree to sex and if you think statutory rape is forcible or against someone’s will

a 17 year old knows EXACTLY what they’re getting into, they’re just either refusing to conform to society’s morals or just simply amoral.

Being a 17 year old, yeah we can consent to sex but with other similarly aged individuals. I don’t know anyone else my age who wants to fuck someone wayyyy older than them. It’s creepy and gross.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Being a 17 year old, yeah we can consent to sex but with other similarly aged individuals. I don’t know anyone else my age who wants to fuck someone wayyyy older than them. It’s creepy and gross.

Creepy and gross are not valid arguments

at 17 they can give consent easily to anything. Hell they should be allowed to live on their own, and they should be at the age of majority and drinking age at 17

 

[Robtical]

“I get off to watching young girl’s cry while i rape them because they’re in pain and don’t understand what is happening to them- my inner rage caused by the fact that i’m an insufferable asshole and can’t get laid by consenting women.”
Tommy is done with you

If she's a teen and fucked chads in their teens with 7+ inch dicks then she will be able to handle mine without crying, and she'll know what she's getting into. Stop worrying what foids basedcels want to stick their dick in cuck.

It’s creepy

You sound like a soy or a rostie. If you think it's creepy then don't do it, stop obsessing over what other men want to fuck and trying to force your normie moral cuck nonsense on them.

 

[bignose]

Being a 17 year old, yeah we can consent to sex but with other similarly aged individuals. I don’t know anyone else my age who wants to fuck someone wayyyy older than them. It’s creepy and gross.

AGECUCK DETECTED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hikage-best-knaifu]

You're still a newfag. Opinion discarded

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

You're still a newfag. Opinion discarded

No you are. You’re a graycel and i have posted 22000 posts in almost 2 years

 

[Hikage-best-knaifu]

No you are. You’re a graycel and i have posted 22000 posts in almost 2 years

Yes because you're probably.autistic. Imagine spending this much time here instead of coping the suicidal thoughts away. Maybe you still haven't hit that low quite yet.

 

[Deleted member 35476]

There's absolutely no fucking reason to touch a prepubscent girl. Not just they're unattractive, but they're literally incapable of having sex or producing children, so what's the point of touching them unless your attraction is skewed?!


Anyway, that's for prepubescents, but after hitting puberty it's entirely different. I still can't wrap my idea about the "sex is harmful for the young" even though they've already hit puberty and can naturally have sex and give birth to babies. Like why would they hit puberty if they're not ready to have sex?! If puberty isn't corelated with the ability to have sex, then why aren't female babies capable of ovulating while male babies are capable of ejaculating if puberty has no relation with whether one is ready to have sex or not


Also i find it extremely disgusting and hypocritical of society to let kids be exposed to degeneracy from almost everywhere and letting them have gangbang and orgies since 12 years old while allowing them to use giant dildos daily and also having no issues with children "consenting" to cutting their gentiles and injecting hormones and far worse shit than sex, but as soon as a full grown adult man touches a young girl who has hit puberty it's suddenly evil despicable shit?! This society is beyond embarrassingly retarded