Blackpill Rage
Ethnic sfcel
★★★★★
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
- Posts
- 7,782
Pedophiles are just misunderstood!!!!
Get ready for LGBTQP budy boyos.
How is this bad? The researchers simply want to understand this phenomenon better, why do you want to stop them?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?
It doesn't require your belief, it's just a fact of life.pedosexuality is a thing
It doesn't require your belief, it's just a fact of life.
You're an incel (?), so I don't think you have the ground to judge.It's a theory. One man's theory.
You're an incel (?), so I don't think you have the ground to judge.
Sexuality of any kind.Judge what?
Sexuality of any kind.
Okay incelBecause 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."
Too bad AIDS is no longer a death sentence due to medical advancements.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
I'm readyGet ready for LGBTQP budy boyos.
Currycels can use this opportunity to grooming gangmaxx. Lifefuel for currycels.I'm ready
I may be an incel, but I don't condone pedophilia under the age of fourteen whatsoever for adult men the age of twenty and over.
@Rhaast
I see what you did there.
Welcome backIf she bleeds she breeds, simple as
the older I get the more I agree with the talibans, usa is the source of evil and its obvious as fuck. most americans are degenerates
And those arbitrary ages were defined by whom? Inceltear feminists?pedophilia under the age of sixteen whatsoever for adult men the age of twenty and over.
This is what all pre-feminist civilizations and major religions have always agreed to, but feminists will disagree. "Muh power imbalance".If she bleeds she breeds, simple as
BasedIf she bleeds she breeds, simple as
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.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".
But if we're going with that, shouldn't we be feminists, gynocentrists, pro-abortion, pro-globohomo, etc?Cultural and civic society over time
Good.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.
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.Nonetheless, I do believe there is such a thing as too young despite all that.
Even the super puritan US used to have AoCs in the single digits man.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.
@Arescel needs therapy for his attraction to minors.
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?Adults who are primarily or exclusively sexually and romantically attracted to prepubescent people are pedophiles.
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.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?
They are correct that pedos are often born pedos. And some though probably became pedos due to too much lolicon bullshit
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.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.
True tbh. They will probably normalize it then normalize dog fucking, fish fucking, horse fucking and so forth.We knew it would come (no pun intended) to this eventually
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.But if we're going with that, shouldn't we be feminists, gynocentrists, pro-abortion, pro-globohomo, etc?
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.
Are you trying to imply that everyone perfectly understands pedophilia by mocking the idea that misunderstanding exists about it?Pedophiles are just misunderstood!!!!
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.Are you trying to imply that everyone perfectly understands pedophilia by mocking the idea that misunderstanding exists about it?
we should be wanting to understand every condition, it shouldn't be a matter of whether we like people that we strive to understand themI think he's trying to say that pedophiles don't deserve to be understood
"Let's avoid studying to understand someone better because that act is sympathy"Understanding here is less about learning the nature of pedophilia but more about the act of showing sympathy toward pedophiles.
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.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"
I don't really see an ethical issue with having sympathy towards people with unusual sexual fixations.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'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.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..
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"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"
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.
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.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.
The line is very well-defined, both by biology and by all major religions: the menarche.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.
I second every word.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.
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.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.
Then I agree with you, but then, why did you mention the specific age of 20 for men in your first post?Yes, when I say too young, I mean too young to have sexual intercourse with anybody.