Discussion The "9000 Year Old Vampire" Excuse in Manga is actually pretty Reasonable

[cvh1991]

I was perusing the ole greentext board on a certain shithole site and came across these comments:

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/greentext/comments/pwltyk/comment/heij9m0/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/greentext/comments/pwltyk/comment/hej9zo7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/greentext/comments/pwltyk/comment/hejg92o/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
Got me thinking, I find these arguments fairly ... reasonable actually. Normally you just see the same ole vitriol without any real engagement with the other side of the debate.

Could be I'm missing something though, but garbo sites like twatter/le reddit where everyone seems to be a walking SJW drone and won't even consider the possibility that an issue could be the teensiest bit more complex than their one-sided view for it will drive you mad. I've started migrating over to other sites with less draconian free speech/censorship practices, there's just only so much lefty retardation I can take in a given day when they don't let even let the other side state their point of view.
=========================================================================================
***edit --> in-case the mods/admins remove those ima back em up here -->

"This is the "FPS players are maniacs and mass shooters" again"

"The reason we have age of consent laws is because below a certain age we assume a person is not sound of mind enough to make such a decision. Or, that they lack power/agency at that age so there’s a high chance any relationship would be coerced. These are of course valid reasons I fully support and agree with. In that example, seems to me these have been addressed, no? If someone is 9000 year old vamp with the intelligence of a standard adult plus super powers then the entire premise for age of consent laws no longer applies (of course this is only possible in fiction). Seems to me people can get it ingrained in their head that “X is bad”, but forget ”why” X is bad. If you remove the “why” then X would then no longer be bad. I think u/Soggy_Cheek_2653 is spot on with their example. Do people who love Grand Theft Auto all secretly harbor the desire to gun down their fellow men in cold blood? Should they be considered criminals of “thought crime”? Most people grasp the difference between fiction and reality."

"Not what I said mate and you’re pulling an Ad Hom instead of addressing my actual points. But let’s roll with what you’re saying anyway. A person does not have to be attracted to children to understand the valid reasons behind age of consent laws or how those can be addressed in the realm of fiction. Of course acting on attraction to minors is unethical — I think people should NOT do it for the reasons I laid out in the first block of my original comment (it seems like you didn’t actually read it). However, attraction is not something people choose to have or not have. One is attracted to what they are attracted to and then one chooses whether or not to act on said attraction. “Having” the attraction is not the unethical part. Let’s say you have a person who’s attracted to children and they recognize that acting on this would be unethical — so they never do. Let’s say they draw themselves doodles and play make believe in a story they create where the premise totally removes the valid reasons behind age of consent laws (9000 year old hyper intelligent super powered vampire, etc). If that’s as far as it goes, they’ve done nothing wrong seems to me. Some people make the “slippery slope” fallacy in response to this, but until that example person acts in reality they’ve done nothing unethical."

 

[FrothySolutions]

Blind Bison doesn't seem to understand, we don't sympathize with nonpracticing pedophiles. We don't say "Oh well he can't help his love of sexy children, just as long as he doesn't act on it."

 

[TINMAN]

Being sexually attracted to anything is a crime if you are an ugly male. That is because you are committing a crime just by existing.

In the eyes of society, your only role is to be an asexual worker drone who generates productivity to support the degenerate social elite.

 

[mNFwTJ3wz9]

Being sexually attracted to anything is a crime if you are an ugly male. That is because you are committing a crime just by existing.

In the eyes of society, your only role is to be an asexual worker drone who generates productivity

A fictional canonically 4 year old drawn character (not a vampire or some random ass bullshit) having sex is 100% fine as fuck.

It's a drawn character.

Fuck all r*dditors, and fuck you.

No excuse required.

 

[cvh1991]

Being sexually attracted to anything is a crime if you are an ugly male. That is because you are committing a crime just by existing.

In the eyes of society, your only role is to be an asexual worker drone who generates productivity to support the degenerate social elite.

This is true, yes

A fictional canonically 4 year old drawn character (not a vampire or some random ass bullshit) having sex is 100% fine as fuck.

It's a drawn character.

Fuck all r*dditors, and fuck you.

No excuse required.

Well said mate

 

[Sheogorath]

Blind Bison doesn't seem to understand, we don't sympathize with nonpracticing pedophiles. We don't say "Oh well he can't help his love of sexy children, just as long as he doesn't act on it."

I don't think we collectively have a universal stance for or against it. Some sympathize, others do not.

A fictional canonically 4 year old drawn character (not a vampire or some random ass bullshit) having sex is 100% fine as fuck.
It's a drawn character.
Fuck all r*dditors, and fuck you.
No excuse required.

why use 4 as example like a little bitch?

Spoiler: we should celebrate NSFW images of unborn fetuses getting bukkaked

 

[mNFwTJ3wz9]

why use 4 as example like a little bitch?

just a random, low number

Spoiler: we should celebrate NSFW images of unborn fetuses getting bukkaked

View attachment 499618

I'd rather have the grinder scene from that one series as a more extreme example.

 

[Sheogorath]

I'd rather have the grinder scene from that one series as a more extreme example.

 

[mNFwTJ3wz9]

View attachment 499626View attachment 499627

yeah that one lol

 

[Sheogorath]

yeah that one lol

 

[FrothySolutions]

I don't think we collectively have a universal stance for or against it. Some sympathize, others do not.

I mean society. In society you're fucked up if you're attracted to kids.

 

[cvh1991]

View attachment 499636

Haven’t read that, outta the loop I suppose.

I don't think we collectively have a universal stance for or against it. Some sympathize, others do not.

Right, I don’t think there’s a collective stance on this, I merely mean that when you consider the underlying reasons they can A) be addressed in fiction and B) merely “having” an attraction is not unethical (as that’s not a “choice” people make — isn’t this what they’re always harping about for gays?). It would be acting on it that would be the “wrong” part (depending on ones stance there) so what are they pissed at guys making doodles for?

I do agree with the earlier statement/comment that ugly low status guys are hated no matter what/for basically no reason and are indeed expected to just be the worker drones of society with no benefit to themselves.

 

[TheNEET]

ye, this kinda subject turns off logical thinking in people and causes knee-jerk reactions, similar to religious fanatics if you question their dogma
what strikes me is the absurd hypocrisy concerning these activities which the society consider pedophilia-lite
loli hentai or even contextless loli erotic art or young-looking sex dolls are evil because they kinda visually resemble children (a contestable claim when we talk about anime), ok, so in this case you consider anything that bears visual similarities to pedophilia as wrong, no matter the context and actual harm done?
then you have to admit that foids are the worst promoters of pedophilia there's an entire genre called "dd/lg" aka "daddy dom / little girl" which is essentially pedophilia roleplay and it's promoted and practiced mostly by foids, Tumblr loved this shit back in the day
fuck, even regular foids often admit to choosing tall partners because they want to feel like little girls besides them, female fashion is often quite infantile, stuff like schoolgirl outfits, pigtails for sexual play is very popular and I guarantee it's not men forcing this stuff on women the entire tallfag obsession is because most foids gets wet when they imagine themselves being little girls molested by an adult
also, foids are very into this "making innocent stuff sexy" shit like putting Hello Kitty, My Little Pony, Barbie or whatever onto like dildos or panties or doing sexualized image macros

if esthetic resemblance is enough to categorize something as evil pedophilia, foids are massive pedophilia enablers and enjoyers

 

[Sheogorath]

Right, I don’t think there’s a collective stance on this, I merely mean that when you consider the underlying reasons they can A) be addressed in fiction and B) merely “having” an attraction is not unethical (as that’s not a “choice” people make — isn’t this what they’re always harping about for gays?). It would be acting on it that would be the “wrong” part (depending on ones stance there) so what are they pissed at guys making doodles for?

usually some BS like it would inspires others to do shit
even though if you actually read loli manga it's not 100% designed to be arousing, a lot of it's designed to be funny / sad / disgusting just like all literature it has variety
and even stuff designed to arouse is prob more like "fap to this in your home, IRL stuff would never measure up, don't even try"

foids are very into this "making innocent stuff sexy" shit like putting Hello Kitty, My Little Pony, Barbie or whatever onto like dildos or panties or doing sexualized image macros

eh I know there are a lot of pegasister artists into MLP (including foal) hentai but I'd still bet at least a slight majority of those artists/fans are male

a galaxy brain idea: since fetuses are "barely human" and it's "morally ok" to kill them then there should be nothing wrong with someone who is sexually attracted to them

Yeah I don't fathom the cognitive dissonance where foids appoint themselves the guardians of babies yet embrace partial-birth abortions and circumcision (metzitzah or otherwise)

source?

Legendary 2003 manga (beyond NSFW guro/gore snuff drawings, you're doubly warned, among the most brutal shit ever drawn/written ... even though it's been a 4chan meme for over a decade you will think I'm some crazy for mentioning it and if parents saw you reading would disinherit+evict you)

| Hitomi.la

hitomi.la

actually got a 2014 live-action movie adaptation but it was apparently pretty tame in comparison (ie no awright/blender)

One thing I hate about foid/cancel thinking is they'd assume those of us who read shit like Mai-chan to test our mental toughness are automatically sadists who fap to it or something.

I think that would apply to less than 1% of it's readers. I doubt even Uziga Waita is necessarily aroused by it (though tbh haven't looked into any of their other creations) but it's probably more like "just how outrageous can I make something to be famous" or maybe "how far can I test the bounds of free artistic expression that society allegedly has"

 

[waluigi_gang]

Normies are smoothbrained

Water is wet

 

[cvh1991]

ye, this kinda subject turns off logical thinking in people and causes knee-jerk reactions, similar to religious fanatics if you question their dogma
what strikes me is the absurd hypocrisy concerning these activities which the society consider pedophilia-lite
loli hentai or even contextless loli erotic art or young-looking sex dolls are evil because they kinda visually resemble children (a contestable claim when we talk about anime), ok, so in this case you consider anything that bears visual similarities to pedophilia as wrong, no matter the context and actual harm done?
then you have to admit that foids are the worst promoters of pedophilia there's an entire genre called "dd/lg" aka "daddy dom / little girl" which is essentially pedophilia roleplay and it's promoted and practiced mostly by foids, Tumblr loved this shit back in the day
fuck, even regular foids often admit to choosing tall partners because they want to feel like little girls besides them, female fashion is often quite infantile, stuff like schoolgirl outfits, pigtails for sexual play is very popular and I guarantee it's not men forcing this stuff on women the entire tallfag obsession is because most foids gets wet when they imagine themselves being little girls molested by an adult
also, foids are very into this "making innocent stuff sexy" shit like putting Hello Kitty, My Little Pony, Barbie or whatever onto like dildos or panties or doing sexualized image macros

if esthetic resemblance is enough to categorize something as evil pedophilia, foids are massive pedophilia enablers and enjoyers

Lotta facts in what you’re sayin

I find it funny how soyciety will not only demonize people who are attracted to children even though most never molest or rape anyone, but also doesn't even want to let them blow off the steam on fictional shit in peace, on top of that they have no problem snuffing the weakest and most vulnerable forms of human life because "wahmen's rites". Now here's a galaxy brain idea: since fetuses are "barely human" and it's "morally ok" to kill them then there should be nothing wrong with someone who is sexually attracted to them in the eyes of modern soyciety

Normies are smoothbrained

Water is wet

Yes indeed

 

[Mainländer]

The draconian persecution of adult male pedo/hebe/ephebophiles beyond what would be reasonable has nothing to do with a genuine care about children/teens (if people were genuinely concerned about it, they'd be focusing on things like single moms and public schools, where the bulk of child abuse happens, and not on people who fap to pixels online or some old incel who wants a date with a 15 yo who statistically isn't even a virgin) or with the fact young people are considered incapable of consenting or any of that (if they're unable to consent, they're unable to consent with a ton of things adults push onto them, not only with sex/relationships).

It has to do with the fact that gynocentrism and lookism are the lower case "g" gods of this fallen world so if you look ugly and/or old people feel disgust when they even imagine you having sex or an intimate relationship with a child or even teen.

Someone on IT even straight up recognized that some people here are genuinely stuck in their teens mentally (and they commonly also lack a job, power or any of that shit used to justify a difference in power or whatever between the adult and the teen). But his conclusion was "well, sucks to be you, you won't be allowed to try and date teens anyway", and he got upvoted to oblivion.

Tons of upvoted IT posts about incels being like children as of late

But somehow, at the same time, incels are mentally-developed adults and thus a relationship between an incel and an underage foid would be inherently abusive and predatory: View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/m3i9ww/i_dont_think_boys_and_men_of_any_age_are_supposed/ One guy...

incels.is

 

[OwlGod]

Isn't it interesting how they always entirely preclude or deflect arguments by exempting ,,x" from responsibility or capability of own decisions by spontaneous liberium-arbitrium? In case of children I'd be fair and say It's reasonable, they're suggestible, malleable, but anything above 9-11 is definitely capable of consent.

 

[Mainländer]

Isn't it interesting how they always entirely preclude or deflect arguments by exempting ,,x" from responsibility or capability of own decisions by spontaneous liberium-arbitrium? In case of children I'd be fair and say It's reasonable, they're suggestible, malleable, but anything above 9-11 is definitely capable of consent.

I've debunked the "consent" argument here in the past, but my thread was reported by agecucks and deleted.

In a nutshel, if someone under age X is considered unable to consent, they're logically unable to consent with way more things than just sex/relationships, and adults still push a ton of those things onto them. So it's obviously not a matter of whether or not they're able to consent, but rather if the things pushed onto them are good for them or not.

And channeling a young sexually developed person's sexuality to a marriage instead of letting it free for fornication and adultery to happen is evidently something good and positive for society.

1 Timothy 5:14

King James Bible
I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

 

[OwlGod]

I've debunked the "consent" argument here in the past, but my thread was reported by agecucks and deleted.

In a nutshel, if someone under age X is considered unable to consent, they're logically unable to consent with way more things than just sex/relationships, and adults still push a ton of those things onto them. So it's obviously not a matter of whether or not they're able to consent, but rather if the things pushed onto them are good for them or not.

King James Bible
I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

perfect. It's rebutting all their points.
btw, I want them to explain this; If teens are so naive, innocent and unaware of their own sexuality then why are they lectured sexual anatomy and preventive measures in school? the only possible conclusion is that they're predicting or anticipating their nature that is already in action at full flourishing. thus earlier teaching what to do or not because they know they're already interested and unveiling their own urges and engaging in intercourse.

 

[Mainländer]

perfect. It's rebutting all their points.

Thanks, but it's sad because I know that gynocentrism and lookism will always win against logic in the end. I can at least make them see that they're hypocritical idiots, though.

btw, I want them to explain this; If teens are so naive, innocent and unaware of their own sexuality then why are they lectured sexual anatomy and preventive measures in school? the only possible conclusion is that they're predicting or anticipating their nature that is already in action at full flourishing. thus earlier teaching what to do or not because they know they're already interested and unveiling their own urges and engaging in intercourse.

When teens have sex with each other, it's "just healthy experimentation ", despite the obvious fact that such sex has ALL the same potential consequences of adult x adult or adult x teen sex.

 

[Tenshi]

Being sexually attracted to anything is a crime if you are an ugly male. That is because you are committing a crime just by existing.

In the eyes of society, your only role is to be an asexual worker drone who generates productivity to support the degenerate social elite.

 

[LOLI BREEDING]

who cares. lolis are prime

 

[Metzelei]

Fiction is as free as the human mind wants to be, anything goes, for redditards to apply morals to themselves on what's "right" is typical.