Discussion [Serious] As an incel, there is literally no reason to support paedophilia

[PPEcel]

I'll keep this as short as I can because I have a bad habit of being rather circumlocutory.

Obviously, this does not cover those users who express such desires purely in jest.

Pedonormativity

One of the more fascinating aspects of the pedocels on the forum is their -- well, I'll call it "pedonormativity". A very small but loud minority of individuals on this forum are attracted to and desire to have sex with children; which is fucked up, but it's not my place or that of anyone else to police their sexual fantasies, so long as they remain just that.

But the wannabe kiddie-fuckers go as far as to insist that their paedophilia is normatively desirable, suggesting that their deviancy is somehow morally upright for reasons that are best summed up as, well, "hurr durr young prime preteen virgin cunt". In the process, they imply if not outright suggest that if you are a 20-year-old male who is sexually attracted to 20-year-old femoids -- a perfectly natural and healthy train of thought -- you are somehow "less based" than they are because you are "cucked" enough to settle for "washed up loose roast beef flaps". It's hyperbolic to such a degree you'd expect the typical 25-year-old femoid to walk around with canes and hearing aids.

This I don't understand.

On the age of consent

The AOC should not materially affect actual incels in any way, even tangentially. There, I said it. Let's face it, do you idiots really think that you are going to "ascend" with a 13-year-old? That you will somehow be attractive to her? That you will be any less of an incel should the AOC be lowered to 14 or 12 or 9?

There is no reason to get hung up on the AOC unless you in fact want to rape little kids and not face any legal repercussions for it (barring any reasonable discussion on the proportionality and fairness of modern criminal justice systems). I don't understand why some think it's an issue worth talking about.

The politics of creepiness

The AOC brings me to another point; which is the claim advanced by the pedocels that paedophilia is outlawed because and only because normalfags consider it "creepy". It certainly does not help that the amateurs on CuckTears follow that line of argument. I will agree that "X is creepy" is a flawed justification for a state to proscribe X. As disgusting as raping a child is, there is no inherent wisdom in grounding law and jurisprudence in what are essentially visceral, emotional reactions.

What the Redditcucks should've brought up is John Stuart Mill's harm principle. From there you can arrive at the conclusion that 1) the state has a compelling governmental interest in protecting minors, and 2) normatively justifiable for the state to impose a minimum AOC in doing so. Some normies would ask, "At what age can individuals meaningfully consent?", but considering the degree to which the criminal justice system is interwined to this question, I prefer to ask this question instead:

In determining the AOC;

Wrong question: "At what point does an age disparity between sexual partners get creepy, justifying the intervention of the criminal justice system?"

Right question: "At what point does an age disparity between sexual partners become harmful to the degree that the state's compelling governmental interest in protecting minors outweigh any potential individual liberty interest, justifying the intervention of the criminal justice system?"

To be honest, I don't know where exactly the AOC should be -- all I do know is that an AOC should exist, for the same reason that there should be a minimum age for voting, smoking, driving, enlisting in the military, or running for public office.

It is not "agecuckery" to agree to an argument as basic as this one, and if you think that this somehow contradicts the tenets of the blackpill, you need to consider whether you're letting your sexual desires override your philosophical judgments.

 

[Deleted member 29033]

I agree but you should still kill yourself

 

[PPEcel]

I agree but you should still kill yourself

why tossic

 

[Deleted member 27159]

Most low iq thread on the forum. @Zensfy @Draestyn get a load of this lmao

 

[Deleted member 33186]

I agree, but idk what to say besides that lol.

 

[ThoughtfulCel]

There is no reason to get hung up on the AOC unless you in fact want to rape little kids and not face any legal repercussions for it

How exactly would it be rape if consent is given.

Also what is the maximum age you consider a "little kid"

Any woman who's had her first period is not a child anymore.

 

[TheProphetMuscle]

Children are easier to manipulate into getting sex from. Id say it’s immoral to have sex with someone under 15 or 16 but why the fuck would i care what happens to foids or random kids?

 

[Caesercel]

Bruh, you are talking about literal pedocels here. Don't take their arguments seriously enough to make elaborate responses. Most of them are edgefag teenagers anyway. The discourse on this forum will never shift to pedo's favour simply because most normal men are guided by their sexuality which automatically outrightly rejects pedophilia.

 

[xeryes29]

I 100% agree and i wanted to make this thread but i was too scared lol, age of consent laws are important to stop adults from taking advantage of kids, I used to think that the threads about normalizing having sex with minors are just IT bait but there is a weird group of people that think having sexual urges with kids is normal its like trannies trying to justify their own degeneracy and mental illness with retarded arguments and semantics.

fact of the matter is that if you are sexually attracted to kids and you consider your self an incel you're are not an incel you're predator, I'm sure the majority of us want to be with someone our age.

for context a child in books is under the age of consent of your state which is 18 or 16.

Most low iq thread on the forum. @Zensfy @Draestyn get a load of this lmao

children shouldn't be subjected to your filth, shoot ur self with a shotgun immediately.

Bruh, you are talking about literal pedocels here. Don't take their arguments seriously enough to make elaborate responses. Most of them are edgefag teenagers anyway. The discourse on this forum will never shift on pedo's favour simply because most normal men are guided by their sexuality which automatically outrightly rejects pedophilia.

yeah youre correct but the bait is stale I see a post about it everyday now

its obvious its just IT bait lol but errrrrrrrr its making it look like its somehow accepted by the majority.

Draestyn said:
Special needs tier thread, reading this makes me think you have down syndrome. 18yo foid is a roastie and if she is 20-25yo she should be considered a hag. Imagine paying to fuck escorts like a beta, only real sex that would make you feel like a man is fucking tight prime preteen virgin cunt.

Another agecuck faggot detected, fuck off and go enjoy your loose women.

You pedocel moron, why the fuck do you want to subject someone who has a loose grasp on sex or no grasp at all to your lust, if youre not willing to go for a foid whos 18 because you think shes a roastie youre not an incel youre a child predator its that simple.

tranny levels of coping.

 

[Ihatereddit]

I don't care if you're a pedocel or not, but to say it's normal is pure cope.
An 8 year old is not only infertile, she can't even receive an adult's penis, you cannot say that being attracted to infertile kids who can't physically have sex is somehow not degeneracy, it objectively is.
Comparing it to JBs is extremely dishonest, it's like saying people who like tomboys are fags. 100% cope.

 

[Deleted member 3497]

Special needs tier thread, reading this makes me think you have down syndrome. 18yo foid is a roastie and if she is 20-25yo she should be considered a hag. Imagine paying to fuck escorts like a beta, only real sex that would make you feel like a man is fucking tight prime preteen virgin cunt.

fact of the matter is that if you are sexually attracted to kids and you consider your self an incel you're are not an incel you're predator, I'm sure the majority of us want to be with someone our age.

children shouldn't be subjected to your filth, shoot ur self with a shotgun immediately.

Another agecuck faggot detected, fuck off and go enjoy your loose women.

 

[Deleted member 27159]

children shouldn't be subjected to your filth, shoot ur self with a shotgun immediately.

Keep crying cuck. It is you that needs to go hang yourself. Literally nobody would miss your pathetic bitch ass. You are probably some cucktear infiltrator anyways

 

[an0ncel]

But thing is OP, if AOC would be like 13 (prime), then there would be alot of 13 year old escorts, since they are legal age. Obviously they would be street escorts not internet advertising ones.

I'm really not a pedocel, but if AOC would be 13, i rather fuck a 13 year old escort then a 18 year old one.

 

[PPEcel]

Most low iq thread on the forum. @Zensfy @Draestyn get a load of this lmao

oh look why are you tagging the same gang of your pedo buddies

I don't care if you're a pedocel or not, but to say it's normal is pure cope.
An 8 year old is not only infertile, she can't even receive an adult's penis, you cannot say that being attracted to infertile kids who can't physically have sex is somehow not degeneracy, it objectively is.
Comparing it to JBs is extremely dishonest, it's like saying people who like tomboys are fags. 100% cope.

Yea I know not all 9yos are prepubescent, but the majority of them still are since most foids usually start puberty at 10-12yos.

Anyways my question was if an ADULT is attracted to a 9yo foid who is still prepubescent like the 9yo below (which is pedophilia)
View attachment 463177
then are you ok with an adult fantasizing about fucking them/being attracted to them?

I'd fuck her prepubescent cunt so hard it bleeds.

@Ihatereddit I mean you'd agree that being attracted to that foidlet is degenerate, right? It's amazing that the pedocels here not only expect us to agree with their kiddie-fucking fantasies, but also to denigrate everyone else with normal and healthy urges.

 

[Deleted member 3497]

You pedocel moron, why the fuck do you want to subject someone who has a loose grasp on sex or no grasp at all, if youre not willing to go for a foid whos 18 because you think shes a roastie youre not an incel youre a child predator its that simple.

tranny levels of coping.

18 yo foid is an adult roastie, don't want one. They don't want me anyway.

An 8 year old is not only infertile, she can't even receive an adult's penis, you cannot say that being attracted to infertile kids who can't physically have sex is somehow not degeneracy, it objectively is.

How can they not have sex? If it was legal I'd raw dog a 8 yo foid straight away.

the only true way of getting some sort love and affection from the opposite gender in the current world that we live in is by grooming a young mini foid who is not yet corrupted by the degenerate soyciety and manipulate her to fall in love with you. An older teenager or adult woman is never going to truly fall in love with any of us incels so there is really no point of fantasizing about them or trying to get them to fall in love with us because its truly just a waste of time.

Exactly. I couldn't feel any affection for a 18 yo foid (or 16) even though I am 18 myself, they are just worthless to me.

 

[Caesercel]

oh look why are you tagging the same gang of your pedo buddies





@Ihatereddit I mean you'd agree that being attracted to that foidlet is degenerate, right? It's amazing that the pedocels here not only expect us to agree with their kiddie-fucking fantasies, but also to denigrate everyone else with normal and healthy urges.

Dude its a mental deffect. You can't logically argue a disorder away

 

[Justdone]

This thread back fired I wouldn’t date one because it can back fire pretty quickly and they’re low IQ AND have risk that’s why it’s morally wrong now.

I'll keep this as short as I can because I have a bad habit of being rather circumlocutory.

Obviously, this does not cover those users who express such desires purely in jest.

Pedonormativity

One of the more fascinating aspects of the pedocels on the forum is their -- well, I'll call it "pedonormativity". A very small but loud minority of individuals on this forum are attracted to and desire to have sex with children; which is fucked up, but it's not my place or that of anyone else to police their sexual fantasies, so long as they remain just that.

But the wannabe kiddie-fuckers go as far as to insist that their paedophilia is normatively desirable, suggesting that their deviancy is somehow morally upright for reasons that are best summed up as, well, "hurr durr young prime preteen virgin cunt". In the process, they imply if not outright suggest that if you are a 20-year-old male who is sexually attracted to 20-year-old femoids -- a perfectly natural and healthy train of thought -- you are somehow "less based" than they are because you are "cucked" enough to settle for "washed up loose roast beef flaps". It's hyperbolic to such a degree you'd expect the typical 25-year-old femoid to walk around with canes and hearing aids.

it stared out as a joke that’s why ya don’t know where it came from until that deGeso guy started pushing it ngl he wasn’t attracting women anymore that was his age and it broken him that fucking fakecel.

Bruh, you are talking about literal pedocels here. Don't take their arguments seriously enough to make elaborate responses. Most of them are edgefag teenagers anyway. The discourse on this forum will never shift to pedo's favour simply because most normal men are guided by their sexuality which automatically outrightly rejects pedophilia.

yes this

I don't care if you're a pedocel or not, but to say it's normal is pure cope.
An 8 year old is not only infertile, she can't even receive an adult's penis, you cannot say that being attracted to infertile kids who can't physically have sex is somehow not degeneracy, it objectively is.
Comparing it to JBs is extremely dishonest, it's like saying people who like tomboys are fags. 100% cope.

It’s not and people are just born attracted to kids and it’s most likely genetic and unresolved social skills and boundaries that’s why it’s not treated correctly even if you kill that person someone else will have it next… it never began for them and if they’re caught you have no chance in gaining any trust ever again from anyone Its over for them.

52 guests need to understand that they’re family members might have genes to be potential predators like the ones on the predator YouTube channels.

 

[PPEcel]

He was ok for a bit when he kept it to himself but now he is just freely spreading his degenerate agecuckoldry across the forum. It is up to us to stop it.

I got bored of your shit.

Honestly OP is not even worth arguing with tbh, he is just a low iq spic who thinks that raping and sexually harassing foids above 17 is acceptable, but the instant it involves "children" under 18 its "crossing the line and morally off-puting" jfl. Just lol @ "blackpilled incels" who actually give such a huge fuck about pedocels.

The vast majority of jokes about raping foids, especially adult foids, are made in a figurative or hypothetical context in order to juxtapose the lack of agency, status, and power that the incel has in modern society, compared to the Becky or even the Stacy.

I highly doubt the typical .is user is about to sexually assault anyone.

Minifoids have no power, adult foids do. Jokes are funny when you are punching up, not down.

How can they not have sex? If it was legal I'd raw dog a 8 yo foid straight away.

Exactly. I couldn't feel any affection for a 18 yo foid (or 16) even though I am 18 myself, they are just worthless to me.

Seek the assistance of a medical professional.

 

[Deleted member 3497]

Seek the assistance of a medical professional.

Why? For liking 8 yo tight virgin cunt more than 18 yo roastie cunt?

 

[PPEcel]

it stared out as a joke that’s why ya don’t know where it came from until that deGeso guy started pushing it ngl he wasn’t attracting women anymore that was his age and it broken him that fucking fakecel.

These 2021cels are something new.

de Geso was something else, holy shit

 

[Lolimancer]

There is no reason to get hung up on the AOC unless you in fact want to rape little kids and not face any legal repercussions for it

Lower AOC means more guys with a teen girl partner and therefore higher competition for women in their 20's.
Also how does a lack of AOC make rape any less illegal?

At what point does an age disparity between sexual partners become harmful

It depends on the individual girl, AOC shouldn't be the same for everyone. In germany it's legal if she is 14 and judged as mature enough or 16 without restriction. I don't see why it can't be like that in other first world countries.

 

[Sheogorath]

there is literally no reason to support paedophilia​

This should always be prefaced with you defining what you mean by that given the wide divergence between normy usage and APA paraphilia parameters.

Pedonormativity

One of the more fascinating aspects of the pedocels on the forum is their -- well, I'll call it "pedonormativity". A very small but loud minority of individuals on this forum are attracted to and desire to have sex with children; which is fucked up, but it's not my place or that of anyone else to police their sexual fantasies, so long as they remain just that.

But the wannabe kiddie-fuckers go as far as to insist that their paedophilia is normatively desirable

I'll stop you there, I have a problem with dropping the -phile suffix when coming up with a slang term. Pedo by itself just refers to pais/child in which case you're only constructing a word meaning the normalization of children, not the normalization of philos-for-children.

There's a similar problem with people who define "fakecel" as meaning "fake incel" and use "fakecel" to describe a group of people including those they would term "volcel". You can't just drop the "in-" prefix to make slang because that rips out the essential meaning of the root.

suggesting that their deviancy is somehow morally upright for reasons that are best summed up as, well, "hurr durr young prime preteen virgin cunt"

Losing meaning with brevity, as above.
I won't argue on the moral aspects without clarification about context though, like where you fall on the spectrum between "anyone under 20 is pedo" ala IT vs "persistent preference for pre-pubescent" ala APA

In the process, they imply if not outright suggest that if you are a 20-year-old male who is sexually attracted to 20-year-old femoids -- a perfectly natural and healthy train of thought -- you are somehow "less based" than they are because you are "cucked" enough to settle for "washed up loose roast beef flaps".

I think that's sort of a situational argument.
I don't think for example this logic would hold that it's cucked to lust for a 20 year old virgin.
It's just acknowledging their overwhelming rarity...
...and that with society as it is, in all likelihood she has been bathed in other men's cum, for whatever response you get from that.

There is somewhat of an excessively hostile reaction to women having previous partners, I'll admit I think there's a bit of a cope/LARP aspect to that ( and I toy with it myself, half-serious half lulz) because it's probably just rooted in misandry/androphobia where we don't want to get targeted and/or compete with her exes.
We want to feel safe and uncompared. Special: our partner's "only". Something any girl could experience with us.

It's hyperbolic to such a degree you'd expect the typical 25-year-old femoid to walk around with canes and hearing aids.

Not sure I understand this metaphor. There's probably a bell curve to the amount of partners foids regularly have that eventually dwindles as they get older though I'm not sure the exact dimensions.

The AOC should not materially affect actual incels in any way, even tangentially. There, I said it. Let's face it, do you idiots really think that you are going to "ascend" with a 13-year-old? That you will somehow be attractive to her? That you will be any less of an incel should the AOC be lowered to 14 or 12 or 9?

In a perfect world one could hypothetically court them and find out.
Like maybe just maybe you could interact with them where you're only dealing with their built-in biological hypergamous instincts not supplemented by the MTV hypergamy we know to be insurpassable.
99% chance it doesn't work and she breaks your heart, but if I need to get my heart broke at least I want to put myself out there for someone worth getting hurt over.

There is no reason to get hung up on the AOC unless you in fact want to rape little kids and not face any legal repercussions for it

I don't agree with that, we would still have laws against rape.

The AOC brings me to another point; which is the claim advanced by the pedocels

Again this thing about careless dropping of suffix or prefix: you can't just shorten pedophile to pedo because then you're literally just saying "child celibates".

that paedophilia is outlawed because and only because normalfags consider it "creepy". It certainly does not help that the amateurs on CuckTears follow that line of argument. I will agree that "X is creepy" is a flawed justification for a state to proscribe X. As disgusting as raping a child is, there is no inherent wisdom in grounding law and jurisprudence in what are essentially visceral, emotional reactions.

What the Redditcucks should've brought up is John Stuart Mill's harm principle. From there you can arrive at the conclusion that 1) the state has a compelling governmental interest in protecting minors, and 2) normatively justifiable for the state to impose a minimum AOC in doing so. Some normies would ask, "At what age can individuals meaningfully consent?", but considering the degree to which the criminal justice system is interwined to this question, I prefer to ask this question instead:

In determining the AOC;

Wrong question: "At what point does an age disparity between sexual partners get creepy, justifying the intervention of the criminal justice system?"

Right question: "At what point does an age disparity between sexual partners become harmful to the degree that the state's compelling governmental interest in protecting minors outweigh any potential individual liberty interest, justifying the intervention of the criminal justice system?"

Disparity between partners cannot be inherently harmful, I think "risk of harm" or "appearance of impropriety" would be a better line of reasonable discussion tbh.

To be honest, I don't know where exactly the AOC should be -- all I do know is that an AOC should exist, for the same reason that there should be a minimum age for voting, smoking, driving, enlisting in the military, or running for public office.

You don't need a minimum age to enlist in the military you just need a proper test that would naturally weed out the unprepared.

The assumption that elder = prepared I think destracts from the impetus of creating testing that more closely evaluates the criteria which actually matter in terms of outlook and capacity.

 

[fast_curry]

Some of the "youngcels" here actually can legally fuck 14-16yo girls (not sure about the extreme ones that want to fuck grade school kids but those are likely larpers). That might also explain their claim that 18yo foids are too old to be fuck-worthy.

 

[PPEcel]

How exactly would it be rape if consent is given.

When can someone meaningfully give and revoke consent? Can an 8-year-old even comprehend what sex is, on an emotional level?

the only person here who should have a 9mm manually inserted into the base of their skull with a hammer here is you, you fucking retarded faggot. the only thing minifoids SHOULD be subjected to is having their assholes stretched wide open and have a foot long dick rape it until she eventually dies of internal bleeding, and then have her sexy little body set on fire.

Agreed. Minifoids should be strapped down then get violently raped until their tight pussy bleeds uncontrollably. Then they should get their eyeballs scooped out of their skulls and get dissected with a drill. After that she will be continued to be tortured to death and finally she will be lit on fire as her worthless life will be over

very funny

Dude its a mental deffect. You can't logically argue a disorder away

The point is that they're pretending to be morally upright individuals, casting the rest of the forum as inferior because we are attracted to femoids our age.

Why? For liking 8 yo tight virgin cunt more than 18 yo roastie cunt?

Yeah, that sounds unhealthy.

 

[Sheogorath]

How exactly would it be rape if consent is given.

He's probably drawing on these argument:
1) "sex with consent is still rape unless the person giving the consent is INFORMED"
2) "X group is incapable of being INFORMED"

Regarding the first point there is some truth to that.

If for example a girl says "do you want a blowjob?" and I say "yes" and then she smashes my dick into pulp with a blowdrier and whispers "blowjob is my codework for blowdrier-smashing your dick" then obviously I was probably not informed of that detail and was consenting to a idea widely different from what was actually done to me.

So in respect to giving consent to a sexual act, if there are "strings attached" that you don't know about, aren't told about, couldn't reasonably be expected to know, then you aren't consenting to those strings.

IE if you reasonable expect MTF trannies or HIV+ people to declare their status before engaging in sex with men then you could consider those people who do so as being rapists for not disclosing their status to their partners.

OTOH if you expect adult men to be aware of the risk and risk rudeness by asking that question (instead of having it volunteered) then it's not rape.

It's all a matter of subjective details regarding what you think reasonable expectations are.

All groups are capable of being 'informed' to varying degrees, and people grasp progressive concepts at different rates.

I think regarding (2) the question should just directly be "does person A know X" rather than "do members of group B of which person A is a part of know X"

If for example I don't expect most black people to understand the gritty details of pubic lice, does that means it's fair to ban black people from having sex? Even if most don't understand lice, a smart one who does shouldn't be punished for that.

Black/women are physical criteria just as age is, and we shouldn't discriminate on that, we should test knowledge and understanding directly and award rights on that neutral basis.

Any woman who's had her first period is not a child anymore.

TC we can acknowledge that there is a point where ovulation occurs prior to the full-height full-pelvic capacity, and there are brain changes which occur.

At which point in the process we declare 'child' is purely semantics.

A better question is what developmental milestones do you actually need to process the severity of varying erotic acts.

For example: it's not going to take the same level of understanding or maturity to give a handjob to a guy than to let the guy ram his dick up your anal sphincter.

 

[Caesercel]

[UWSL]The point is that they're pretending to be morally upright individuals, casting the rest of the forum as inferior because we are attracted to femoids our age.[/UWSL]

Yeah and nobody takes them seriously for it. The moment they show a picture of the "prime" foids they are attracted to its already over. They've already lost all credibility to any guy with normal sexuality. Only the most insecure of cucks would buy into any of the pedo arguments

 

[Sheogorath]

Children are easier to manipulate into getting sex from.

Elaborate on "manipulate" please.

 

[OwlGod]

why you're so engaged, and invested in countering pedocels?

 

[Caesercel]

Giga fucking based, those worthless fucktoys should only be tortured for our enjoyment

ok so you're just an emotional moralfag, got it. you are fine with making jokes about adult woman, but making jokes about foids under 18 triggers some emotional part about you.

@PPEcel look this one even admits he is joking

 

[PPEcel]

ok so you're just an emotional moralfag, got it. you are fine with making jokes about adult woman, but making jokes about foids under 18 triggers some emotional part about you.

You can't fucking read, can't you?

No, I'm pointing out that the rest of the forum has no obligation to go along with your bullshit, if someone doesn't find pre-pubscent children attractive it doesn't make them cucks.

 

[Sheogorath]

Yeah and nobody takes them seriously for it. The moment they show a picture of the "prime" foids they are attracted to its already over.

What % do you actually think buy into a "prime" view as if we have some capacity to identify some kind of fixed pinnacle?

Also 'prime' for WHAT exactly? Delivering a baby? Holding hands? Relationships are a multifaceted progression of events which have different points at which people are ready to handle them.

if someone doesn't find pre-pubscent children attractive it doesn't make them cucks

It's basically only cucked if you want to fulfill a preference for mid-pubescent or post-pubescent foids so badly that you convince yourself they're more unicorn than they actually are.
Otherwise if there's no deception it's just being a 'biddy', an ape who makes peace with fucking women who share their pussy.
There's nothing objectively wrong with that, I've certainly not ruled it out for prospective GFs.
I think we just highlight it as a way to chide ourselves on the non-ideal clown world where we must resort to it.

The veneration of lolis I think has a sometimes-subtext of "we're only doing this because this is when chad fucked them and compromised their ability to pair-bond with us later in life"

 

[xeryes29]

bottom line:

If youre not willing to fuck a 18 year old foid with average looks youre not a an incel youre a predator IT faggot who likes to larp as incel, being with someone your age is the normal and if you think its cucked then go join other pedo forums im sure theres plenty out there.

Go join your homeboy Dr.pizza in prison degenrate faggits.

 

[Caesercel]

What % do you actually think buy into a "prime" view as if we have some capacity to identify some kind of fixed pinnacle?

Also 'prime' for WHAT exactly? Delivering a baby? Holding hands? Relationships are a multifaceted progression of events which have different points at which people are ready to handle them.

Better ask that question to the people who call those minifoids "prime" foids. I never think of foids in terms of prime or declining. For me the term refers to peak attractiveness in reference to youth.

 

[Deleted member 27159]

Giga fucking based, those worthless fucktoys should only be tortured for our enjoyment

That’s all they are ever good for and all they will be

 

[Deleted member 28148]

agree

 

[Deleted member 33186]

Yeah and nobody takes them seriously for it. The moment they show a picture of the "prime" foids they are attracted to its already over. They've already lost all credibility to any guy with normal sexuality. Only the most insecure of cucks would buy into any of the pedo arguments

 

[ThoughtfulCel]

When can someone meaningfully give and revoke consent? Can an 8-year-old even comprehend what sex is, on an emotional level?

Why did you choose 8 years old? Where did I mention anything about an 8 year old?

The whole idea of consent is if both parties agree. You still haven't defined the maximum age of what you consider a child like I asked you

 

[Deleted member 3497]

why you're so engaged, and invested in countering pedocels?

He's a retarded agecucked faggot simp.

bottom line:

If youre not willing to fuck a 18 year old foid with average looks youre not a an incel youre a predator IT faggot who likes to larp as incel, being with someone your age is the normal and if you think its cucked then go join other pedo forums im sure theres plenty out there.

Go join your homeboy Dr.pizza in prison degenrate faggits.

Did I say I wouldn't? I'm not volcel but I would only fuck roasties, not date them.

Better ask that question to the people who call those minifoids "prime" foids. I never think of foids in terms of prime or declining. For me the term refers to peak attractiveness in reference to youth.

Prime = peak attractiveness.

 

[Sheogorath]

The discourse on this forum will never shift to pedo's favour

If you writing the plural "pedos" from "pedo" in a possessive form I believe you would put the apostrophe after the S : "pedos' "

OTOH if the apostrophe is meant to indicate a contraction (such as the omission of "phile") then you'd probably need two apostrophes.

simply because most normal men are guided by their sexuality which automatically outrightly rejects pedophilia.

I think normal sexual process is sort of like this...

1) find prepubescent girls cute/adorable, want to protect them, hold their hands, play with them, snuggle/hug, and as she approaches the double-digit range you start to get weird tingles like "I know what is coming soon" and wonder "would I have the heart to scold her if she grabbed my dick or would I just let her do whatev to avoid upsetting her and because so long as I'm not in the lead it's probably not going to make her feel bad"​

​

2) find midpubescent girls progressively hot/sexy, feel confused and at war with your pervious sense of their cuteness, "how can they coexist" but ultimately you put it in, but maybe cum on her chest/back because you're worried about a baby hurting her, but she would eventually get pregnant because you get lost in her awesomeness and forget to pull out​

​

3) find postpubescent girls in 20s "those wide hips should deliver my babies with minimal fatality but her eggs haven't degraded to produce mutants" and so you definitely cum inside her no regrets​

​

4) find postpubescent girls 30s "her hips are wide enough and she can technically procreate but her subprime eggs will produce degenerate children. so I should stop reproducing with her and only 69 as a courtesy for her treating my offspring fairly​

​

5) find postpubescent girls in 40s "her eggs have given out and she can't get pregnant so I can creampie inside her after hatefucking her with rage at how her body is giving way, but she knows deep down I am still fond of her for treating me and my offspring well, she's horny and loves the mutual hatefuck, she probably wishes I was a hot teen boy too"​

​

6) re postpubescent girls 50+ "keep the lights off and get drunk and pretend she's 30 or 40 to cope, but more like we become asexual and just live vicariously through our children"​

 

[Deleted member 27159]

bottom line:

If youre not willing to fuck a 18 year old foid with average looks youre not a an incel youre a predator IT faggot who likes to larp as incel, being with someone your age is the normal and if you think its cucked then go join other pedo forums im sure theres plenty out there.

Go join your homeboy Dr.pizza in prison degenrate faggits.

Dumb fuck nobody said they wouldn’t but they are all used up and I definitely wouldn’t date. Foids are at their prime at 12. Kill yourself retard

 

[Sheogorath]

Better ask that question to the people who call those minifoids "prime" foids. I never think of foids in terms of prime or declining. For me the term refers to peak attractiveness in reference to youth.

Attractiveness is too subjective though really. Even for a given guy with trends it'll wobble, and it also depends a lot on context.

It's one of the problems I have in thinking of girls in decile scale because I think their rank is a lot more wobbly and circumstantial than a guy's.

 

[PPEcel]

This should always be prefaced with you defining what you mean by that given the wide divergence between normy usage and APA paraphilia parameters.

I won't argue on the moral aspects without clarification about context though, like where you fall on the spectrum between "anyone under 20 is pedo" ala IT vs "persistent preference for pre-pubescent" ala APA

I'll give everyone the benefit of the doubt and adopt APA definition, though I believe the semantics are not entirely necessary.

I think that's sort of a situational argument.
I don't think for example this logic would hold that it's cucked to lust for a 20 year old virgin.
It's just acknowledging their overwhelming rarity...
...and that with society as it is, in all likelihood she has been bathed in other men's cum, for whatever response you get from that.

There is somewhat of an excessively hostile reaction to women having previous partners, I'll admit I think there's a bit of a cope/LARP aspect to that ( and I toy with it myself, half-serious half lulz) because it's probably just rooted in misandry/androphobia where we don't want to get targeted and/or compete with her exes.
We want to feel safe and uncompared. Special: our partner's "only". Something any girl could experience with us.

You make a good point about why an incel might be concerned with a femoid's virginity but my point was that a fully grown adult male should, biologically speaking, be attracted to someone with the body shape of a fully grown adult femoid, and not a kid.

I don't agree with that, we would still have laws against rape.

I used the term rape because every instance of sex between an adult and an 8-year-old is rape.

Disparity between partners cannot be inherently harmful, I think "risk of harm" or "appearance of impropriety" would be a better line of reasonable discussion tbh.

You don't need a minimum age to enlist in the military you just need a proper test that would naturally weed out the unprepared.

The assumption that elder = prepared I think destracts from the impetus of creating testing that more closely evaluates the criteria which actually matter in terms of outlook and capacity.

It's far more prudent to draw a red line in the sand beforehand as opposed to having defendants take up a post-enforcement challenge in every case.

As for the military: same thing, a minimum age to enlist is perfectly reasonable.

He's probably drawing on these argument:
1) "sex with consent is still rape unless the person giving the consent is INFORMED"
2) "X group is incapable of being INFORMED"

Regarding the first point there is some truth to that.

If for example a girl says "do you want a blowjob?" and I say "yes" and then she smashes my dick into pulp with a blowdrier and whispers "blowjob is my codework for blowdrier-smashing your dick" then obviously I was probably not informed of that detail and was consenting to a idea widely different from what was actually done to me.

So in respect to giving consent to a sexual act, if there are "strings attached" that you don't know about, aren't told about, couldn't reasonably be expected to know, then you aren't consenting to those strings.

I mean I'm wondering how @ThoughtfulCel defines "giving consent".

 

[trying to ascend]

I mean, if you are an incel, you will not have sex anyways, regardless of what age the AOC is, so I also don’t see any point on people here wanting to lower the AOC

 

[Sheogorath]

Foids are at their prime at 12. Kill yourself retard

just so hard to relate to such surety, like why would it always conveniently be a whole number?

It's not just "why not 11 or 13" but also "why not 11.5 or 12.5" and so on.

It just smacks of arbitrariness, anything that's not a 3-digit decimal doesn't seem like we reached that conclusion scientifically.

It also seems too general since if you compare Konata Izumi types to Yoko Littner types it's pretty clear physical development comes at differing rates so you're just averaging things out, and what use is averaging things out?

 

[PPEcel]

Why did you choose 8 years old? Where did I mention anything about an 8 year old?

The whole idea of consent is if both parties agree. You still haven't defined the maximum age of what you consider a child like I asked you

Because 8 is apparently the lower bound of what the pedocels would go for.

12-13.

Dumb fuck nobody said they wouldn’t but they are all used up and I definitely wouldn’t date. Foids are at their prime at 12. Kill yourself retard

volcel spotted

 

[Deleted member 3497]

Because 8 is apparently the lower bound of what the pedocels would go for.

12-13.


volcel spotted

12-13 is a child? Are you retarded? There's 13yo foids with fully developed bodies who look 18.

 

[Sheogorath]

I'll give everyone the benefit of the doubt and adopt APA definition, though I believe the semantics are not entirely necessary.

APA v normy is ENTIRELY necessary so we understand context of debate.

You make a good point about why an incel might be concerned with a femoid's virginity but my point was that a fully grown adult male should, biologically speaking, be attracted to someone with the body shape of a fully grown adult femoid, and not a kid.

Seems like a false dichotomy. I personally take neither stance as my view is actually it's healthiest to have a "inclusive of both" outlook rather than a "one or the other" outlook.

every instance of sex between an adult and an 8-year-old is rape.

There are a lot of different ideas regarding what the term 'rape' requires and involves so it would help if you spelled that out too.

Like for example if I lied to an adult foid and said "I'm a billionaire" and she has sex with me thinking I'm betabuxing for her w/ billions but I'm actually broke, it's TECHNICALLY rape since she gave her consent under false pretenses.

I'm sure a lot wouldn't look kindly on that being lumped together with other kinds of rape though.

I'm thinking perhaps using rape as a standalone term is just too nonspecific to be useful in conversation, we should be defining subtypes and specifying what kinds of rape we mean.

It's far more prudent to draw a red line in the sand beforehand as opposed to having defendants take up a post-enforcement challenge in every case.
As for the military: same thing, a minimum age to enlist is perfectly reasonable.

All you need to do is flunk the preteen military applicants out of boot camp because they can't deadlift a 200 pound bag

I mean I'm wondering how @ThoughtfulCel defines "giving consent".

Perhaps we could use the term "affirmation" to cover the idea of "saying yes, regardless of what level you understand you're agreeing to" if consent is meant to mean "you 100% understand every possible ramification of what you're agreeing to" ?

Of course realistically it's never 0/100 it's a continuum of progressive conception between 1 and 99.

Everyone's going to have some rough idea of what they're agreeing to even if they don't understand MANY details, while even those who understand MOST of the details are probably not going to have omniscient knowledge of at least a couple.

 

[PPEcel]

its not worth the brain power to read your worhtless pile of literal dog shit, i'm not replying to you further. you can waste your time trying to counter pedocels or whatever the fuck you're trying to do, but you will never succeed in it.

typical ad homs and non sequiturs

straight from the IT playbook, yup you're an infiltrator alright

 

[Deleted member 27159]

just so hard to relate to such surety, like why would it always conveniently be a whole number?

It's not just "why not 11 or 13" but also "why not 11.5 or 12.5" and so on.

It just smacks of arbitrariness, anything that's not a 3-digit decimal doesn't seem like we reached that conclusion scientifically.

It also seems too general since if you compare Konata Izumi types to Yoko Littner types it's pretty clear physical development comes at differing rates so you're just averaging things out, and what use is averaging things out?

Idk that number seems to best. Definitely not denying other ages are good

volcel spotted

I am a volcel for not wanting a loose used up hole?

 

[Sheogorath]

Idk that number seems to best. Definitely not denying other ages are good

so basically you're throwing spaghetti at a wall