Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

News USA Today defends pedophilia.

Blackpill Rage

Blackpill Rage

Ethnic sfcel
★★★★★
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Posts
7,782
20220111 145413


Pedophiles are just misunderstood!!!! :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:

Get ready for LGBTQP budy boyos.
 
Fuuuuuuuuck dude, this used to be a joke but it might be Happening. Shit, as early as 4 years ago today's Transformer advocates were staunch sex realists. Maybe. We'll see what happens.
 
Fuuuuuuuuck dude, this used to be a joke but it might be Happening. Shit, as early as 4 years ago today's Transformer advocates were staunch sex realists. Maybe. We'll see what happens.
How is this bad? The researchers simply want to understand this phenomenon better, why do you want to stop them?
 
How is this bad? The researchers simply want to understand this phenomenon better, why do you want to stop them?

This sympathy seems based more in "They're not all sex offenders, a lot of pedophiles are non-practicing pedophiles." Which is reasonable I guess, but if they're using that sympathy to then monkey branch to "And what if pedophiles are BORN pedophiles? Like the gays? What if you're born attracted to children?" Without anything to show for it other than sympathy for non-offending pedophiles? It's gonna take more than "Not every pedophile molests kids" to get me to accept the bizarre standard that pedosexuality is a thing.
 
The only way to stop LGBTP, is by weaponizing aids and giving it to them in their HRT medicine
the tranny gays can't rape if they end up dying from aids :feelsLSD:
 
Sexuality of any kind.

Because there are sexualities that make evolutionary/biological sense, and there are "sexualities" that are, at best, a defect of the mind. And whether or not these defectives are nice and respect the law should not be a factor in how we judge these "sexualities."
 
Because there are sexualities that make evolutionary/biological sense, and there are "sexualities" that are, at best, a defect of the mind. And whether or not these defectives are nice and respect the law should not be a factor in how we judge these "sexualities."
Okay incel
 
The only way to stop LGBTP, is by weaponizing aids and giving it to them in their HRT medicine
the tranny gays can't rape if they end up dying from aids :feelsLSD:
Too bad AIDS is no longer a death sentence due to medical advancements.
 
I may be an incel, but I don't condone pedophilia under the age of sixteen whatsoever for adult men the age of twenty and over. :feelsjuice:
 
@Rhaast

I see what you did there. :feelsjuice:
 
We knew it would come (no pun intended) to this eventually
 
pedophilia under the age of sixteen whatsoever for adult men the age of twenty and over.
And those arbitrary ages were defined by whom? Inceltear feminists?

If she bleeds she breeds, simple as
This is what all pre-feminist civilizations and major religions have always agreed to, but feminists will disagree. "Muh power imbalance".
 
Last edited:
And those arbitrary ages were defined by whom? Inceltear feminists?


This is what all pre-feminist civilizations and major religions have always agreed to, but feminists will disagree. "Muh power imbalance".
Cultural and civic society over time, although I will agree with you that some of those arbitrary numbers are problematic where the age of consent could be lowered as it was in our ancient past. Nonetheless, I do believe there is such a thing as too young despite all that. From my understanding, anything younger than the age of fifteen is way too young where that was even collectively understood in our ancient historical past. :feelsjuice:
 
Let me know when they start running ads for lolisexdolls...
 
Cultural and civic society over time
But if we're going with that, shouldn't we be feminists, gynocentrists, pro-abortion, pro-globohomo, etc? :feelshmm:

I think we should do the opposite, knowing that culture was subverted by marxists and others, we should be reactionaries against it. Also, obviously, what's right and wrong doesn't change with time.

although I will agree with you that some of those arbitrary numbers are problematic where the age of consent could be lowered as it was in our ancient past.
Good.

Nonetheless, I do believe there is such a thing as too young despite all that.
I think that too. To young for sex= didn't have the menarche yet. But if a girl is too young for sex, she's too young for sex with anyone, not only with guys over 20 or any other random age.

From my understanding, anything younger than the age of fifteen is way too young where that was even collectively understood in our ancient historical past.
Even the super puritan US used to have AoCs in the single digits man.

Those 14, 15, 16, 17 and above AoCs only happened anywhere after feminism.
 
@Arescel unironically needs therapy for his attraction to minors. :owo:
 
Last edited:
Fun fact: 99% of people who talk about pedophilia don't know the difference between pedophiles, hebephiles, and ephebophiles.

13 to 19 are usually what the modern system defines as teenagers, whom are not children.

Adults who are primarily or exclusively sexually and romantically attracted to prepubescent people are pedophiles. Those are children with underdeveloped bodies and lacking marks of fertility. This age group is between 0 to 10 years old.

Then there are people starting to develop sexual characteristics as well as marks of fertility and signs of hitting puberty. Adults sexually and romantically attracted to this age group are hebephiles, which according to the scientists who've actually performed research on the subject, are not mentally ill. People this category are between 11 to 14 years old.

Finally, there are ephebophiles, the most common of the three groups. This attraction is very common among adults and is also not linked to any mental disease or disorder. This age group is between 15 to 19. Historically speaking, teenage girls within this category were engaged with adult men en masse, with the approval of their parents, by the way.
It was beneficial to society. It was also a norm.

600px Erectile responses of healthy men


600px Male ratings of female attractiveness and femininity



Men who don't like this idea, have fun dating 30-year-old roasties and giving birth to defective children. I've had it with these agecucks.
 
Adults who are primarily or exclusively sexually and romantically attracted to prepubescent people are pedophiles.
I also prefer that definition, because if we use the feminist one (any adult male attracted to any extent to anyone below 18 is a pedophile) or even the most common one (any adult attracted to any extent to prepubescent children), then most men are pedophiles, and how can something present in most members of a group be an anomaly?
 
I also prefer that definition, because if we use the feminist one (any adult male attracted to any extent to anyone below 18 is a pedophile) or even the most common one (any adult attracted to any extent to prepubescent children), then most men are pedophiles, and how can something present in most members of a group be an anomaly?
That's a fair point, but men-hating dykes, as known as feminists, are going to use it as an excuse to reinforce their toxic narrative that men are potential sexual predators. Most men are indeed attracted to prepubescent children to a certain degree, even though only a minority engage in any type of sexual or romantic relationship with these children.

In an ideal society, we would dig deeper and research as much as we could to try and find some answers to male sexuality and young female attractiveness, maybe draw a line somewhere. But no, normies would rather label men who are attracted to physically and sexually developed 16-year-olds as "pedophiles", which goes against the very definition of the term.

In the end, our ancestors' knowledge and traditions are very important and remained relevant during centuries for a very good reason. If adult men engaging with teenage girls was the norm, you can bet something was working. Today, families are no more. Marriages aren't healthy and don't last longer. The age of consent has increased. Coincidence?

I just want this freak show to end already.
 
View attachment 561616

Pedophiles are just misunderstood!!!! :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:

Get ready for LGBTQP budy boyos.
They are correct that pedos are often born pedos. And some though probably became pedos due to too much lolicon bullshit
and with NoFap they will no longer have pedo fetish
This sympathy seems based more in "They're not all sex offenders, a lot of pedophiles are non-practicing pedophiles." Which is reasonable I guess, but if they're using that sympathy to then monkey branch to "And what if pedophiles are BORN pedophiles? Like the gays? What if you're born attracted to children?" Without anything to show for it other than sympathy for non-offending pedophiles? It's gonna take more than "Not every pedophile molests kids" to get me to accept the bizarre standard that pedosexuality is a thing.
It is a thing. There was some study done and showed like 10-20% men are pedos by default. Off that percent who actually go and offend is probably less than 10%, so 1% of males probably would actually act on it.
We knew it would come (no pun intended) to this eventually
True tbh. They will probably normalize it then normalize dog fucking, fish fucking, horse fucking and so forth.
 
Last edited:
But if we're going with that, shouldn't we be feminists, gynocentrists, pro-abortion, pro-globohomo, etc? :feelshmm:

I think we should do the opposite, knowing that culture was subverted by marxists and others, we should be reactionaries against it. Also, obviously, what's right and wrong doesn't change with time.


Good.


I think that too. To young for sex= didn't have the menarche yet. But if a girl is too young for sex, she's too young for sex with anyone, not only with guys over 20 or any other random age.


Even the super puritan US used to have AoCs in the single digits man.

Those 14, 15, 16, 17 and above AoCs only happened anywhere after feminism.
Even in ancient Rome arranged marriages were with young girls thirteen years old or younger, but actual sexual intercourse upon marriage didn't happen until the age of fourteen or fifteen at the earliest. True story by the way.

Even back then sexual intercourse earlier than the age of fourteen was unthinkable because they had their own version of an underdeveloped adolescent I guess is what I'm trying to say.

I was merely saying it is the cultural or civic society that has brought us our current laws, I'm not taking any particular stance of it being right and wrong as I tend to be neutral on those kinds of assertions, you might even say that I take a relativist sort of position on it. Relative of the kind of cultural civic society one finds themselves living in at the time.

Yes, when I say too young, I mean too young to have sexual intercourse with anybody. I have my own theories as to why these arbitrary ages have been chosen to be the end-all period of lawful sexual consent in modern times and sometime I will have to write a thread about it in a sort of comparative historical eras angle, but I would do such a thread a grave injustice if I rushed such a project right away. It is an idea regarding future thread projects of mine. :feelsjuice:
 
Last edited:
Pedophiles are just misunderstood!!!! :feelskek::feelskek::feelskek:
Are you trying to imply that everyone perfectly understands pedophilia by mocking the idea that misunderstanding exists about it?
 
Pedophilia is an inborn trait in the same way as homosexuality. It would be hypocritical if society doesn't treat pedophiles equally (for better or worse) as members of the LGBTQIA group. Also, people tend to automatically assume a pedophile is a rapist, which is totally absurd. A pedophile who jerks off to lolicon hentai for his entire life without touching a kid is a true saint and certainly doesn't deserve any hostility for crimes he never committed.
Are you trying to imply that everyone perfectly understands pedophilia by mocking the idea that misunderstanding exists about it?
I think he's trying to say that pedophiles don't deserve to be understood instead of implying that everyone understands pedophilia. Understanding here is less about learning the nature of pedophilia but more about the act of showing sympathy toward pedophiles.
 
I think he's trying to say that pedophiles don't deserve to be understood
we should be wanting to understand every condition, it shouldn't be a matter of whether we like people that we strive to understand them

normies also try to understand shit like serial-killing all the time, so why do they 'deserve' that study?

Understanding here is less about learning the nature of pedophilia but more about the act of showing sympathy toward pedophiles.
"Let's avoid studying to understand someone better because that act is sympathy"

You can't actually sympathize people without understanding them, so it actually seems like "let's remain willfully ignorant because we bear a risk of accidentally sympathizing with them if we learn more about them"
 
You can't actually sympathize people without understanding them, so it actually seems like "let's remain willfully ignorant because we bear a risk of accidentally sympathizing with them if we learn more about them"
Yeah, I agree with you. Studies like this are actually useful. Rejecting or mocking it because of the ethical issues its result might entail is certainly not wise.
 
Yeah, I agree with you. Studies like this are actually useful. Rejecting or mocking it because of the ethical issues its result might entail is certainly not wise.
I don't really see an ethical issue with having sympathy towards people with unusual sexual fixations.

I sympathize for people with other weird fetish shit like being into vore / gigantism / so why not being fixated on prepubescent girls?

You have people who have sexual fantasies that society says they can't have, which is basically also the problem of ugly men who want relationships with adult women too.

Ugly men who want to fuck women aren't quite as chastized as the pedophile but the anti-incel reactions are certainly moving in that direction of late

You're looking at "she won't ever consent to you incel" instead of "she can't ever consent to you pedo" but in either case they're othering you and having zero empathy for the interests a person has and their worth as a person struggling to find a place in society..
 
hang pedo troons
 
I don't really see an ethical issue with having sympathy towards people with unusual sexual fixations.

I sympathize for people with other weird fetish shit like being into vore / gigantism / so why not being fixated on prepubescent girls?

You have people who have sexual fantasies that society says they can't have, which is basically also the problem of ugly men who want relationships with adult women too.

Ugly men who want to fuck women aren't quite as chastized as the pedophile but the anti-incel reactions are certainly moving in that direction of late

You're looking at "she won't ever consent to you incel" instead of "she can't ever consent to you pedo" but in either case they're othering you and having zero empathy for the interests a person has and their worth as a person struggling to find a place in society..
I'm only speculating, but if society was being consistent, then it would be forced to categorize P as part of LGBT (as the study shows they are of the same or at least a similar nature). As you said, they all boil down to "people who have sexual fantasies that society says they can't have", but I doubt the prejudice against pedos would go away or anyone would be kind enough to start support groups to help pedos find alternative copes that don't involve real kids. Normies are hypocrites after all.

Either way, I agree with the tweets from the screenshot, but I'm also pessimistic that anyone will bother to understand those poor people.
 
I'm only speculating, but if society was being consistent, then it would be forced to categorize P as part of LGBT (as the study shows they are of the same or at least a similar nature)
As you said, they all boil down to "people who have sexual fantasies that society says they can't have"
It's not quite that broad IMO since I'm not expecting them to embrace "I have a sexual attraction to murdering and eating women, it's the only thing that makes me cum"

Ironically it's actually more about "sexual fantasies that are not the normal majority yet which society has accepted"

Basically it was LGB traditionally when transgenderism wasn't acceptable enough so the LGB rejected them.

Transgenders getting accepted into the LGBT umbrella ironically is because it became acceptable to the LGB crowd so they got included.

I doubt the prejudice against pedos would go away or anyone would be kind enough to start support groups to help pedos find alternative copes that don't involve real kids. Normies are hypocrites after all.

The reason they resist alternative copes is because it lowers SMV of women, that's why they resist sex dolls even for men who want to fuck giant-tiddy dolls
 
Seems like every year joos test the waters a little with this shit, realize that yep, the general public still wants diddlers to be forced into a woodchipper, then sidle back into the bushes like that Homer Simpson gif.
 
That's a fair point, but men-hating dykes, as known as feminists, are going to use it as an excuse to reinforce their toxic narrative that men are potential sexual predators. Most men are indeed attracted to prepubescent children to a certain degree, even though only a minority engage in any type of sexual or romantic relationship with these children.
That's true, but I'd say that the very idea that pushy sexual stuff men might do to foids is worse than violence (that men suffer way more than women, by the way) is already a feminist idea that was planted on the minds of men through the hegemonic feminist culture we have nowadays.

A torturer psychopath gets way more respect than someome who touched the butt of some minifoid does and this is simply insane. Feminism + gynocentrism generated this, we should strive to purge this kind of mindset from ourselves.

In an ideal society, we would dig deeper and research as much as we could to try and find some answers to male sexuality and young female attractiveness, maybe draw a line somewhere. But no, normies would rather label men who are attracted to physically and sexually developed 16-year-olds as "pedophiles", which goes against the very definition of the term.
The line is very well-defined, both by biology and by all major religions: the menarche.

In the end, our ancestors' knowledge and traditions are very important and remained relevant during centuries for a very good reason. If adult men engaging with teenage girls was the norm, you can bet something was working. Today, families are no more. Marriages aren't healthy and don't last longer. The age of consent has increased. Coincidence?

I just want this freak show to end already.
I second every word.

Even in ancient Rome arranged marriages were with young girls thirteen years old or younger, but actual sexual intercourse upon marriage didn't happen until the age of fourteen or fifteen at the earliest. True story by the way.
Keep in mind that back 2000 years ago, the average 14 yo girl probably looked like the average 10 yo girl looks now. Also, Romans were pagans, and paganism is cucked so I wouldn't pick them as an example of anything for that type of shit. But that said, 14 isn't even that bad, if all foids were married for life at 14 society would be in such a better shape it's insane.

Yes, when I say too young, I mean too young to have sexual intercourse with anybody.
Then I agree with you, but then, why did you mention the specific age of 20 for men in your first post?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Sandniggercel
Replies
12
Views
170
downtoearth
downtoearth
kay'
Replies
23
Views
707
based_meme
B
RealSchizo
Replies
9
Views
211
RealSchizo
RealSchizo
IronsideCel
Replies
7
Views
230
kay'
kay'

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top