Forum Settings
Forums

To all lolicons, what about real life loli?

New
This topic has been locked and is no longer available for discussion.
Pages (8) « 1 [2] 3 4 » ... Last »
Oct 9, 2008 10:56 PM

Offline
Aug 2008
633
Plate said:
Razma said:
ok I am done with this shit, I had a lengthy reply typed up, but this arguement is useless. You know I hope you do snap and go out on a murderous rampage, less of you is worth the loss of a couple of lives.


And the winner is~pedophelia


Oct 9, 2008 10:58 PM

Offline
Apr 2008
3747
khorven said:
Can I claim that spot?


Well, the other party consistently argued using fallacies and then gave up...

Razma: Sore loser. You just conceded. :/
Oct 9, 2008 11:02 PM

Offline
Aug 2008
633
Plate said:
khorven said:
Can I claim that spot?


Well, the other party consistently argued using fallacies and then gave up...

Razma: Sore loser. You just conceded. :/


Nah 2 fanatics argueing never solves anything, he wont change his mind, I wont change mine. There is no point to this arguement anymore. So you can chalk him up a win, although I hope he really didnt change anyones mind on the matter.
Oct 9, 2008 11:04 PM

Offline
Apr 2008
3747
Razma said:

Nah 2 fanatics argueing never solves anything, he wont change his mind, I wont change mine. There is no point to this arguement anymore. So you can chalk him up a win, although I hope he really didnt change anyones mind on the matter.


I don't see anyone being fanatical. There were actually a few reasoned arguments and references and whatnot.

A fanatical argument is like "I'm a moral person so I know and don't need proof!!"

I called you a sore loser because of your "winner is pedophilia" comment, it was completely unnecessary and only made you look bad.
Oct 9, 2008 11:04 PM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
Razma said:
Plate said:
khorven said:
Can I claim that spot?


Well, the other party consistently argued using fallacies and then gave up...

Razma: Sore loser. You just conceded. :/


Nah 2 fanatics argueing never solves anything, he wont change his mind, I wont change mine. There is no point to this arguement anymore. So you can chalk him up a win, although I hope he really didnt change anyones mind on the matter.
Except that you don't change your mind because you don't want it to be true, kind of like young earth creationists, and I won't because I have a fancy research with the stamp 'science' on it which tells me to keep this opinion.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 9, 2008 11:11 PM

Offline
Aug 2008
633
khorven said:
Razma said:
Plate said:
khorven said:
Can I claim that spot?


Well, the other party consistently argued using fallacies and then gave up...

Razma: Sore loser. You just conceded. :/


Nah 2 fanatics argueing never solves anything, he wont change his mind, I wont change mine. There is no point to this arguement anymore. So you can chalk him up a win, although I hope he really didnt change anyones mind on the matter.
Except that you don't change your mind because you don't want it to be true, kind of like young earth creationists, and I won't because I have a fancy research with the stamp 'science' on it which tells me to keep this opinion.


You are the one with the fancy research bro, I just have my beliefs, and no one like you will be able to change them. Even if you have all this 'proof' that molesting kids is a positive experience for the kids. Sorry if I have to say, its a bunch of bullshit.

Sore loser, I am I guess to you all. But I have loss nothing with arguing with you other than a few minutes out of my life.

edit: Ok now I really am done, have your last words and lets get on with our lives
Oct 9, 2008 11:19 PM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
Razma said:
khorven said:
Razma said:
Plate said:
khorven said:
Can I claim that spot?


Well, the other party consistently argued using fallacies and then gave up...

Razma: Sore loser. You just conceded. :/


Nah 2 fanatics argueing never solves anything, he wont change his mind, I wont change mine. There is no point to this arguement anymore. So you can chalk him up a win, although I hope he really didnt change anyones mind on the matter.
Except that you don't change your mind because you don't want it to be true, kind of like young earth creationists, and I won't because I have a fancy research with the stamp 'science' on it which tells me to keep this opinion.


You are the one with the fancy research bro, I just have my beliefs, and no one like you will be able to change them. Even if you have all this 'proof' that molesting kids is a positive experience for the kids. Sorry if I have to say, its a bunch of bullshit.

Sore loser, I am I guess to you all. But I have loss nothing with arguing with you other than a few minutes out of my life.

edit: Ok now I really am done, have your last words and lets get on with our lives
Spot on, that's what all the people thought when they shoved them niggers to the back of the bus and didn't let them bloody women vote you know?

Congratulations with being human.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 9, 2008 11:24 PM

Offline
Mar 2005
3807
...the hell just happened? why wasn't arguing for lolis as easy as arguing for pedos? >_> (those of you who haven't been on MAL forums for over a year won't get that)

Well anyway, the thing is that unlike black and women's rights, children aren't exactly clamoring en masse for the right to have sex with adults, so I doubt the societal mores for this will change for a while despite the scientific evidence you put up.
kei-cloneOct 9, 2008 11:30 PM
Oct 9, 2008 11:30 PM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
kei-clone said:
...the hell just happened? why wasn't arguing for lolis as easy as arguing for pedos? >_> (those of you who haven't been on MAL forums for over a year won't get that)

Well anyway, the thing is that unlike black and women's rights, children aren't exactly clamoring en masse for the right to have sex with adults, so I doubt the society mores for this will change for a while despite the scientific evidence you put up.
Where did I talk about adults?

What the hell? My best guess is children more often have sex with each other and damn right they complain when their parents forbid that there girlfriend is sleeping over?

Seriously, where did I talk about adults?
Perelman, martyr
Oct 9, 2008 11:39 PM

Offline
Mar 2005
3807
khorven said:
kei-clone said:
...the hell just happened? why wasn't arguing for lolis as easy as arguing for pedos? >_> (those of you who haven't been on MAL forums for over a year won't get that)

Well anyway, the thing is that unlike black and women's rights, children aren't exactly clamoring en masse for the right to have sex with adults, so I doubt the society mores for this will change for a while despite the scientific evidence you put up.
Where did I talk about adults?

What the hell? My best guess is children more often have sex with each other and damn right they complain when their parents forbid that there girlfriend is sleeping over?

Seriously, where did I talk about adults?


maybe you didn't mention it directly, but you did mention ancient greece in your first post, where it was common practice for grown men to have sexual relations with young boys. but if laws change to legalize sex for minors then i'd have to assume sex with adults would be legal as well unless they specifically say "but they have to be within (age*0.5+7) years of each other!" in which case would be quite lulz.

and yes, i am quite aware that children complain about those kinds of things, but when i say "clamoring" i mean having a movement in all seriousness with a goal to change some societal norms like all the previous civil rights movements you've cited have done. but hey, that may already be happening under my nose and I don't even realize it, so if you tell me it's happening over there where boobs are commonplace on tv commercials, i'll take you for your word.
Oct 9, 2008 11:42 PM

Offline
Apr 2008
3747
kei-clone said:



maybe you didn't mention it directly, but you did mention ancient greece in your first post, where it was common practice for grown men to have sexual relations with young boys. but if laws change to legalize sex for minors then i'd have to assume sex with adults would be legal as well unless they specifically say "but they have to be within (age*0.5+7) years of each other!" in which case would be quite lulz.

and yes, i am quite aware that children complain about those kinds of things, but when i say "clamoring" i mean having a movement in all seriousness with a goal to change some societal norms like all the previous civil rights movements you've cited have done. but hey, that may already be happening under my nose and I don't even realize it, so if you tell me it's happening over there where boobs are commonplace on tv commercials, i'll take you for your word.


Well, 12 year olds don't have any civil rights movements to begin with, since they're 12 year olds.

I'm sure a lot of them aren't even aware that they could change something about the world they don't like. I mean, I remember in school how we were denied many basic rights adults have, and kids just took it. They didn't know they could do anything. As an adult if I were in the same situations now I would throw a fit.

/needs to SLEEP
Oct 9, 2008 11:49 PM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
kei-clone said:
khorven said:
kei-clone said:
...the hell just happened? why wasn't arguing for lolis as easy as arguing for pedos? >_> (those of you who haven't been on MAL forums for over a year won't get that)

Well anyway, the thing is that unlike black and women's rights, children aren't exactly clamoring en masse for the right to have sex with adults, so I doubt the society mores for this will change for a while despite the scientific evidence you put up.
Where did I talk about adults?

What the hell? My best guess is children more often have sex with each other and damn right they complain when their parents forbid that there girlfriend is sleeping over?

Seriously, where did I talk about adults?


maybe you didn't mention it directly, but you did mention ancient greece in your first post, where it was common practice for grown men to have sexual relations with young boys. but if laws change to legalize sex for minors then i'd have to assume sex with adults would be legal as well unless they specifically say "but they have to be within (age*0.5+7) years of each other!" in which case would be quite lulz.

and yes, i am quite aware that children complain about those kinds of things, but when i say "clamoring" i mean having a movement in all seriousness with a goal to change some societal norms like all the previous civil rights movements you've cited have done. but hey, that may already be happening under my nose and I don't even realize it, so if you tell me it's happening over there where boobs are commonplace on tv commercials, i'll take you for your word.
Women didn't have a movement until Lucy Stone ignited, blacks didn't have a movement until Luther-King Jr. Ignited it, Turing had to commit a tragic suicide before the movement of homosexuals was ignited.

What's interesting though is though Stone is now referred as a hero coming up for her rights, as was King, they were in all effect, selfish, I doubt they had fancy scientific research to back their case up, Lucy just wanted to vote and Martin just wanted to get a nice view in he bus. I, myself am not a child, neither sexually active, I have no benefits if this whole bullshit is cleared out. In fact, of all the other controversial opinions I have, like violent videogames, legalizing incest and all forms of drugs, driving from any age on, voting not per age but simply if one attains a certain level of eduction (school dropouts can't vote then, I know, gives them some motivation maybe), alcohol for children but with thorough counselling, legalizing suicide in all forms. I only have the slightest benefit of the last. But when I say this, I often get created into 'You just want to fuck children', to which my usual reply is 'Freudian slip? I have never mentioned sex with adults here, it's only logical they first do it with peers.'

But Lucy Stone, Luther-King Jr. and the lot known for this were just selfish. 'I have a dream' was a cheesy speech giving no scientific data whatsoever, he was right in the end, but how could he know? He just wanted to have a nice view.. I myself, don't drink, don't smoke, don't use drugs,. don't play videogames, don't have intercourse, dress very discretely and really don't want to see it of others, don't go to concerts. But the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the view and I advocate that these things should be accessible to any.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 12:14 AM

Offline
Jul 2007
816
"And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should 'consent' be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?" she said.


I read that, and it sounds like consent isn't necessary for a sexual experience? That almost sounds like condoning rape, the way it's phrased, but I'm not going to jump to conclusions. In fact, reading this has piqued my interest.

khorven said:
the burden of proof is yours

I'M BITING. At least for now... I have midterm essays I should be getting to, that have zero to do with this.

This isn't a subject I've researched, but I have access to my university's e-Resources... I'll cite what I'm using, and try to include quotations, but I don't know that I can find free online versions of the articles/books I'm looking at.

From what I'm reading the ideas you're presenting aren't new to this field of study


The last bit reminds me of this



To put this in a sort of context... After the first quotation, the text went on to describe difficulties in the field, namely, that CSA is viewed as harmful to the child but what is harm? And who decides that it is harmful? The child, with whatever they take away from the experience? The professionals? The abuser? Society? This segues to the second quotation, that definitions are socially constructed, and thus, you get a variety of interpretations and perceptions. And, when reading literature, you have to look athte definition of CSA being used and the sample group being used. Does the group acknowledge the abuse? Are they reluctant to talk about it? It's difficult to gather empirical data...

Anyway, this brought to mind very much the latter quotation. So far, what I've gathered from this reading is that...

- Child sexual abuse is, to an extent, socially constructed or framed
- It's effects can be seen as positive or negative (depending on the researcher you're talking to!)

But...



A glaring failure in the articles that the OP listed to me was that they neglected to include the emotional state of the child with which sexual contact has been initiated. They argued technical difficulties with the DSM and its definition of paraphilia, or how once DSM worthy activities/beliefs/orientations/whatever are now seen as normal, but neither article seems to actually articulate anything about the children (do the children want sexual relations? are they being harmed from not having them? is this worse for them?), just the people who want to have these relations with these children. The quote I started with, coming from the OP's second article,

"And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should 'consent' be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?" she said.


shows disregard for the mental/emotional state of the child. The page 43 quotation above seems to imply an implicit confusion that goes along with sexual contact at such a young age in our specific society and culture. Because of these sociocultural beliefs of sex, it is inevitable that a child, at some point in life, feel confused and subsequently guilty, ashamed, or otherwise harmed by the experience. This seems to be regardless of consent.



But what if the child doesn't perceive that's s/he has been abused? What if, as an adult, they don't count themselves as a survivor of CSA?



My conclusion: even if "consenting" at the time, a child can not truly consent to a sex act (or benefit from) because they are simply biting off more than they can chew with regards to their own emotional responses (confusion, shame, guilt, whatever) - immediate or eventual - from their specific sociocultural situation. That, and the disregard of those wishing to engage in such acts with children for the long term emotional well being of the child lead me to believe that those advocating for the normalization of sexual relations with children are simply in it for themselves.

Edits made for spelling and clarity.

url_elfOct 10, 2008 12:21 AM
Oct 10, 2008 12:14 AM

Offline
Apr 2008
135
"These are the findings of a comprehensive survey by the Community Information, Empowerment and Transparency (CIET Africa) in November and December 2002."

"The study involved 269 905 pupils in Grades 6 to 11 in all language groups, across a range of schools and from all nine provinces."

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20050710123619850C495299

This is an article that reported on the findings of the survey mentioned above. This does not classify with having sex with an adult, but does give evidence that children can become traumatized and also bring about worse causes by having sex at young ages.

"Some of the other disturbing findings included that, at 18, two out of every three children had had sex. Two out of 10 pupils did not believe condoms prevented pregnancy or other sexually transmitted diseases.

One in 10 said they believed sex with a virgin could cure HIV/Aids, and one in 10 had been raped in the past year. Three out of every 100 pupils thought that girls liked sexually violent boys and one out of every 10 thought that girls who got raped, asked for it, according to the study. "

This can only go to show that children are not mature enough to make decisions on whether or not to have sex at young ages. I mean it is pretty amazing the some kids find that you can cure HIV/aids by having sex with a virgin or even believing condoms don't provide safe sex. Kids wouldn't even be using condoms, I mean they don't exactly hand condoms out at school to 10 year old children so they can have safe sex. Should they, no they shouldn't. This study only proves that children can not make decisions with o0ther children, let alone an adult. Of course, an adult is more self-conscious than another child but the effects it can still have on one child can be pretty devastating. Plus, also proving that its all possible to spread sexually transmitted diseases even adds on to the trouble.
Oct 10, 2008 12:32 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
url_elf said:
"And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should 'consent' be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?" she said.


I read that, and it sounds like consent isn't necessary for a sexual experience? That almost sounds like condoning rape, the way it's phrased, but I'm not going to jump to conclusions. In fact, reading this has piqued my interest.
Nope it's a reductio ad absurdum it says 'If going to church needn't be consent, then neither does sex, the latter is false, than also the former.' It is merely there to highlight how partial is it viewed, like 'forcing people into sex is _wrong_ but forcing them to go to church is apparently a_o_k.

khorven said:
the burden of proof is yours

I'M BITING. At least for now... I have midterm essays I should be getting to, that have zero to do with this.

This isn't a subject I've researched, but I have access to my university's e-Resources... I'll cite what I'm using, and try to include quotations, but I don't know that I can find free online versions of the articles/books I'm looking at.

From what I'm reading the ideas you're presenting aren't new to this field of study


The last bit reminds me of this



To put this in a sort of context... After the first quotation, the text went on to describe difficulties in the field, namely, that CSA is viewed as harmful to the child but what is harm? And who decides that it is harmful? The child, with whatever they take away from the experience? The professionals? The abuser? Society? This segues to the second quotation, that definitions are socially constructed, and thus, you get a variety of interpretations and perceptions. And, when reading literature, you have to look athte definition of CSA being used and the sample group being used. Does the group acknowledge the abuse? Are they reluctant to talk about it? It's difficult to gather empirical data...
Yetp, that is what my source also argues, however it takes the simple definition of psychological damage, id est testible conditions as 'harmful' and then shows by research that these do not occur.

Anyway, this brought to mind very much the latter quotation. So far, what I've gathered from this reading is that...

- Child sexual abuse is, to an extent, socially constructed or framed
- It's effects can be seen as positive or negative (depending on the researcher you're talking to!)

But...



A glaring failure in the articles that the OP listed to me was that they neglected to include the emotional state of the child with which sexual contact has been initiated. They argued technical difficulties with the DSM and its definition of paraphilia, or how once DSM worthy activities/beliefs/orientations/whatever are now seen as normal, but neither article seems to actually articulate anything about the children (do the children want sexual relations? are they being harmed from not having them? is this worse for them?), just the people who want to have these relations with these children. The quote I started with, coming from the OP's second article,

"And other psychiatrists have written, again in scientific journals, that if
children can be forced to go to church, why should 'consent' be the defining
moral issue when it comes to sex?" she said.


shows disregard for the mental/emotional state of the child. The page 43 quotation above seems to imply an implicit confusion that goes along with sexual contact at such a young age in our specific society and culture. Because of these sociocultural beliefs of sex, it is inevitable that a child, at some point in life, feel confused and subsequently guilty, ashamed, or otherwise harmed by the experience. This seems to be regardless of consent.
1: That is what I wish to counter of course. 2: Not necessarily, one may take in mind that the children who indeed indulge in this have a more 'fuck the world' mentality and thus receive lesser to non damage from social reactions around them.



But what if the child doesn't perceive that's s/he has been abused? What if, as an adult, they don't count themselves as a survivor of CSA?
Then it's extremely obvious no arm was done.



My conclusion: even if "consenting" at the time, a child can not truly consent to a sex act (or benefit from) because they are simply biting off more than they can chew with regards to their own emotional responses (confusion, shame, guilt, whatever) - immediate or eventual - from their specific sociocultural situation. That, and the disregard of those wishing to engage in such acts with children for the long term emotional well being of the child lead me to believe that those advocating for the normalization of sexual relations with children are simply in it for themselves.

Edits made for spelling and clarity.

I challenge the notion that sex is supposedly a very complicated feat for a human to accomplish, sexual urge still is a primal one, I believe not on the cerebral cortex located, it has also been shown that mentally retarded patients at least know how to masturbate and even issue mating signals and try to provoke sex, these are often rated as having a 'mental age' of around ten, though that concept is pretty flawed.
sucura said:
"These are the findings of a comprehensive survey by the Community Information, Empowerment and Transparency (CIET Africa) in November and December 2002."

"The study involved 269 905 pupils in Grades 6 to 11 in all language groups, across a range of schools and from all nine provinces."

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20050710123619850C495299

This is an article that reported on the findings of the survey mentioned above. This does not classify with having sex with an adult, but does give evidence that children can become traumatized and also bring about worse causes by having sex at young ages.

"Some of the other disturbing findings included that, at 18, two out of every three children had had sex. Two out of 10 pupils did not believe condoms prevented pregnancy or other sexually transmitted diseases.

One in 10 said they believed sex with a virgin could cure HIV/Aids, and one in 10 had been raped in the past year. Three out of every 100 pupils thought that girls liked sexually violent boys and one out of every 10 thought that girls who got raped, asked for it, according to the study. "

This can only go to show that children are not mature enough to make decisions on whether or not to have sex at young ages. I mean it is pretty amazing the some kids find that you can cure HIV/aids by having sex with a virgin or even believing condoms don't provide safe sex. Kids wouldn't even be using condoms, I mean they don't exactly hand condoms out at school to 10 year old children so they can have safe sex. Should they, no they shouldn't. This study only proves that children can not make decisions with o0ther children, let alone an adult. Of course, an adult is more self-conscious than another child but the effects it can still have on one child can be pretty devastating. Plus, also proving that its all possible to spread sexually transmitted diseases even adds on to the trouble.
Lawlwtf, has little to do with children, every-one in that region thinks that.. not only children.... you have to ban sex altogether there then, which is not a completely bad idea...
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 12:39 AM

Offline
Jul 2007
816
I challenge the notion that sex is supposedly a very complicated feat for a human to accomplish, sexual urge still is a primal one, I believe not on the cerebral cortex located, it has also been shown that mentally retarded patients at least know how to masturbate and even issue mating signals and try to provoke sex, these are often rated as having a 'mental age' of around ten, though that concept is pretty flawed.

So you're willfully ignoring/denying the emotional and psychological effects that sexual intercourse has on a person? Just because you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean it isn't there - sex is very loaded in Western culture (most any culture, really), and has been for hundreds, if not thousands of years. There ARE demonstrable emotional/psychological effects that I've sited above, for example. This isn't to say that sex isn't a primal urge, but because of the sociocultural context under which we are raised and under which this act is scrutinized, it becomes more.

Oct 10, 2008 12:47 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
url_elf said:
I challenge the notion that sex is supposedly a very complicated feat for a human to accomplish, sexual urge still is a primal one, I believe not on the cerebral cortex located, it has also been shown that mentally retarded patients at least know how to masturbate and even issue mating signals and try to provoke sex, these are often rated as having a 'mental age' of around ten, though that concept is pretty flawed.

So you're willfully ignoring/denying the emotional and psychological effects that sexual intercourse has on a person? Just because you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean it isn't there - sex is very loaded in Western culture (most any culture, really), and has been for hundreds, if not thousands of years. There ARE demonstrable emotional/psychological effects that I've sited above, for example. This isn't to say that sex isn't a primal urge, but because of the sociocultural context under which we are raised and under which this act is scrutinized, it becomes more.

That indeed is true, however we are not talking about forcing people to have sex, we are talking about granting upon them the choice, the same applies to being a porn star, or controversial spokesman as a whole. We are now drifting from science and more into ethics, scientifically there exists these:

1: Having consent sex at a young age, either with a peer, elder (or younger, ehehe) leaves no inherent damage.
2: There exists a not to be neglected possibility that social feedback leaves some forms of damage.

By allowing people to have sex, we allow them to make there own choices, by banning it, we say that we know better what's best for them.

Personally, I am always of the former option, which is an ethical and not a scientific standpoint, I believe personally that people should have the freedom to make mistakes and learn from them, or either do what is disadvised, and see that it wasn't a mistake after all. The point is also that these laws put a very generalizing sense through, effectively limiting those who are able, because of those who aren't. Also, what strikes me as more horrid is that by these rules of banning drugs, alcohol, sex, suicide, it to me strikes as that the government owns your body, and you ultimately just borrow from them it with some terms of service attached to it. I really believe that a random eleven year old child knows better what is best for that child than some-one who has never met that child and simply makes (biased) laws based on the average.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 1:03 AM

Offline
Jul 2007
816
But all of that presupposes a sociocultural context which doesn't have all sorts of baggage with sex. The reality is, we do have a rich history of sexual-related baggage, and thus, a sociocultural context which inevitably induces confusion/shame/guilt/an effect on the child.

Because of their age, this is something they can't bargain for, or fully consent to. Thus, I can't see how it's ethic to let children walk into those sorts of situations, where they can end up traumatized over things they had no ability to forsee but adults did, and could have guarded them from at such a young age.

Even if a particular child is very, I don't know, beyond their years mentally and perhaps COULD handle sexual relations the same as an adult, society as it exists simply wouldn't have it. Ultimately, there would always be blacklash on the child, I think, that they couldn't bargain for or couldn't imagine at the time. Of course, this too is getting into fuzzier realms.

I also don't buy the idea that an eleven year old child knows what's best for them. Thinking back to when I was younger, and to my thinking/reasoning capabilities, my understanding of the world at large, of other people, of institutions, society, culture, whatever... My ability to reason, to understand things outside of myself, to grasp consequences and to gauge my feelings on a subject to know whether or not it is something I want to do... All these things have vastly improved. I definitely made bad decisions as a child, but because of the guidance of adults, or protection, or whatever you might want to call it, I never made a decision that left me traumatized.

I know I'm not representative of everyone, but I am inclined to think that many people would agree with the gist of what I've said. For whatever that's worth.
Oct 10, 2008 1:14 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
url_elf said:
But all of that presupposes a sociocultural context which doesn't have all sorts of baggage with sex. The reality is, we do have a rich history of sexual-related baggage, and thus, a sociocultural context which inevitably induces confusion/shame/guilt/an effect on the child.

Because of their age, this is something they can't bargain for, or fully consent to. Thus, I can't see how it's ethic to let children walk into those sorts of situations, where they can end up traumatized over things they had no ability to forsee but adults did, and could have guarded them from at such a young age.
I am highly sceptical towards this argument as time and time again it was held of certain social groups with no research done into it and every time it was proven false, I thus opt for 'One is able to make decisions unless proven otherwise.' how it works for aduls, also women and blacks nowadays thank LORD..

Even if a particular child is very, I don't know, beyond their years mentally and perhaps COULD handle sexual relations the same as an adult, society as it exists simply wouldn't have it. Ultimately, there would always be blacklash on the child, I think, that they couldn't bargain for or couldn't imagine at the time. Of course, this too is getting into fuzzier realms.
Even so, the research indicates that overtly, children do not experience it and ratherso look back positively on that time.

I also don't buy the idea that an eleven year old child knows what's best for them. Thinking back to when I was younger, and to my thinking/reasoning capabilities, my understanding of the world at large, of other people, of institutions, society, culture, whatever... My ability to reason, to understand things outside of myself, to grasp consequences and to gauge my feelings on a subject to know whether or not it is something I want to do... All these things have vastly improved. I definitely made bad decisions as a child, but because of the guidance of adults, or protection, or whatever you might want to call it, I never made a decision that left me traumatized.
'Speaking from experience is a sample statistic in a sample space of one 1 executed by a layman and not randomly selected.', I could also give my history of that I was prævented from making certain decisions which ultimately led to my life ending in a disaster which could've been prævented just by that I had the conscious feeling of knowing better than adults at a lot of fields, I know have the unconditional realization that I am countlessly more intelligent than my mother and extrapolate better, would I have that if I was eleven I would have rebelled more and followed my own inside into certain things were her decisions ultimately resulted into a large portion of my life destroyed. Again, speaking from a personal experience does not an argument make.

I know I'm not representative of everyone, but I am inclined to think that many people would agree with the gist of what I've said. For whatever that's worth.
Depends about what issues, finance, educational choice et ceteral, surely as those are artificial elements introduced into human culture whereto evolution can't keep up, however sexual behaviour and social reflexion are things which happen at the more inherent level, like duckling knowing how to swim, a 30 year old man having had no experience which œconomy will not know how to operate it, however a 30 year old man having no experience with sex will most likely on instict know how it works.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 1:37 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
Khorven, your a sick fuck. You think that just because a little underage girl tells you its allright to have sex with her its allright? The only fucking reason she probally even consents is because you bribe her with candy and put chockolate syrup on your genatils. I would ask you if this is true but there is no need as you will alayays have something to back up your immoral, pedaphile, child molesting sick ways just because it was approved of thousands of years ago. I would say what ever you like than go for it but I have younger syblings and If I ever heard of something happing like this to them there wouldent be anything that would stop me. Whoever did it would be in a body bag and I would spend my life in prison with no regrets. I would say that people like you need to be locked up somewhere so someone can do experiments on you to see why you have that fucked up ped mindset along with constant torcher but that is far to nice for the likes of you. All you child molesters and Pedaphiles are just alike and need your limbs cut of and to be piled up in a ditch until you blead to death. I really cant understand the way you think but if you had a little sister lets say she was 7 and you found out she was getting fucked would you approve of it just because she said she wanted it? If your answers yes stop reading this and find the nearst rope or weapon and end your life now. You said in another post that you probally couldent survive in prison but the way your mind seems to be working you will bee in there in a few years anyway. If you reply to this Ill probally be verry supprised that you were able to put down your bottle of lotion and your child porn or that you actually came out of your basement and quit raping the little girls you had down there long enough to post. I would usually not speak to someone this abrupt but you asked for it where you made a thread to condone fucking little girls and now are trying to find ways to back up you Pedaphile ways. The fuck ever, its not like I can get this warning through your thick skull before its to late and your doing 10-15 in the state pen just to get out and fuck another little girl so you can go back for life, or before you fuck someons daughter or little sister and they empty your body in the nearest river or ditch like it should be. Remember only the sickest mother fuckers would take advantage of a childs innocence. Im 18 years old and Ive seen 12-13 year old girls that are fully devoloped and look like there 16-18 themselfs but would I take advantage of that? no i wouldent even go for a 15 year old unless she was highly mature and was about to turn 16 and even then I would hesatate verry much on any sexual relations. Its differnt if the girl is only 2-3 years younger but when you start talking about litte girls who still have there complete innocence and are several years younger the matter changes and you turn into the sick fuck you are only to rot forever in front of your computer or wherevere you tend to seduce or melost little Boys/Girls. Have you ever thought of suciside to end your meaningless existance?
InevitableOct 10, 2008 1:44 AM
Oct 10, 2008 1:41 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
I didn't read that by the way.

Edit: Oh yeah, you know.. just like languages can actually be.. you know.. different from what you're used to.. a forget it, too easy.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 1:46 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
You didnt have to, It was just a warning before you fuck up and it to late.
Oct 10, 2008 1:53 AM
Anime DB Admin
BACK FOR MORE?

Offline
Jan 2007
12700
Rpgwiz99, this is the last time you post an insult on this board. Watch your language.

staff.applications  
guidelines.faq 
 

report.abuse  

thx.skittles  
thx.kina 
 

[H+] ³  
Oct 10, 2008 2:01 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
How can you expect people to not get worked up on a thered that condones Pedaphiles and Child Molestation? Either way Ill keep my opinions to myself wich defys the purpos of this bord.
Oct 10, 2008 2:07 AM

Offline
Aug 2008
633
Ah dont worry rpg, I guess as long as you present fucking a 10year old with scientific 'facts' that its a good thing and prove it beyong a reasonable doubt, than there nothing wrong with it. But curse words in front of minors is just going to emotionally damage the person.

Opinions on the other hand, a definite no no as well^_^

Oct 10, 2008 2:18 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
At least sameone agreas somewhat. But at the same time Some peoples opinions are that its ok to be a pedaphile but my "Opion" is that its not. Point blank I dont belive that opinion was wrong unless whoever read it consents to that (And its only wrong to them because they condone child molestation) It was just the way I presented it and my opinion on how these people should be dealt with. Just because we watch loli in anime dosent meanl its ok to have sex with underage minors who probally dont know what the word consent means but only say they consent becase you tell them to. Either way you look at it there is a name for these people and its is indeed a "Scientific" and proper name called Pedaphiles opions or not.
Oct 10, 2008 2:21 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
Rpgwiz99 said:
At least sameone agreas somewhat. But at the same time Some peoples opinions are that its ok to be a pedaphile but my "Opion" is that its not. Point blank I dont belive that opinion was wrong unless whoever read it consents to that (And its only wrong to them because they condone child molestation) It was just the way I presented it and my opinion on how these people should be dealt with. Just because we watch loli in anime dosent meanl its ok to have sex with underage minors who probally dont know what the word consent means but only say they consent becase you tell them to. Either way you look at it there is a name for these people and its is indeed a "Scientific" and proper name called Pedaphiles opions or not.
Read the thread and appear more intelligent.

Please? oo;
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 2:29 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
Ive read it, ive dwelled over this thread wondering how people become so sick minded and perverted and its truly digusting I wont go any farther because I truly enjoy MAL and your not worth me getting banned, but just be glad you can hide behind the walls of your computer and the net.
Oct 10, 2008 2:32 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
Oh, I'm actually advocating this opinion in real life too ,the point is like eh.. I normally go to a university and academic people, despite realizing that there are other languages than English, (by golly!) also tend to ad least be mild mannered when one voices a controversial opinion with considerable scientific backbone.

If you would have read, and comprehend even too you would know I spoke of peer relationships, not necessarily with adults, that you think the latter, Freudian slip?
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 2:41 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
You either condone it or you dont, a simple yes or a no. You dont need to try to hide your feelings behind long explinations to make yourself feel better or to mask the fact. In the end it dosent come down to a long sicentific answer its a yes or a no. Do you condone it or not...
Oct 10, 2008 2:42 AM

Offline
May 2008
31862
I'm attracted to a whole range of ages. Age has never been any sort of real criteria for who I'm attracted to.

As for looks on the other hand I'm attracted to girls who people often say look underaged while others do not say the same. I like a babyface. And no I do not mean fat and bald by that. I also don't mind a flat chest.

Here, I'll give an example:

Many people consider her a loli, even though she years past the age of consent.
Just as people consider 1000 year old lolis still lolis.

I don't know what I'm attracted to, but many people call some of these girls at least, underaged looking, some of these girls can be as young as fifteen, some of these girls can be as old as 40.

Many people still say this girl looks twelve years old.

And yet when she was twelve she looked much different.
I've been attracted to her for years, and I never stopped being attracted to her same self I was attracted to years ago. And she's been in showbiz since she was twelve years old.

This applies to all the girls I saw attractive while I was underaged. I still find them attractive.

Needless to say I don't want to have sexual relations with anyone it's not legal for me to have sexual relations with. But I do enjoy a good pedobear joke. And I don't necessarily think the age of consent should be as old as 18. I'm not sure when it should be, but I'm sure most research is probably biased.

Old avatar and sig retired for now.
Oct 10, 2008 2:45 AM

Offline
Oct 2007
2141
hey even 18 year old or older asian girls look below their actual age >_>
does that still make most here into "perverted child lovers"?

And even if they are like only 15-17, it's not my damn fault they all look the same, right? =P

Seriously, it's damn hard to tell what age they got, also because they never grow real boobs.


@ the post above, booo!!!! i've seen better
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines.
Oct 10, 2008 2:53 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
15-17 is 1 thing 5-13 is another, its even weird for someone in there 20s to date or engage in sexual relations with a 14-15 year old because they would be 5-8 years younger than them.
Oct 10, 2008 2:57 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
ukonkivi said:
I'm attracted to a whole range of ages. Age has never been any sort of real criteria for who I'm attracted to.
Again, a man to my heart you are.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 4:29 AM

Offline
Dec 2007
9219
As usual this discussion goes nowhere, I won't even read the next 2 pages I'm missing.

I deal with children. Many times. Children are worst than most of you can ever imagine. Because not most of you have caught a 6 y/o girl masturbating or having a group of 8 y/o girls stripping for you to see... Whatever they don't have.

Naturally their bodies are not physiologically prepared. There is no moral behind this, a 5 y/o boy does not have the hormone equipment as a 3 year old girl does not have it as well. They should only have it in puberty moment (I've met 10 year girls that were going through the first period, so i't not teens anymore) but I have read an article on a 5 y/o mother. (note: I don't read newspapers articles or anything online of the sort. I subscribe to a range of scientific magazines that tell me what is happening of important in the world)

However children see sex everytime. We have TV and we have Internet and at a self discovering age they will want to do it. You would be horrified to the quantity of things children know.

Consequentely yes a little child may have sex and want to have sex even not being physically prepared to handle that. If it's right or wrong I don't care and you people shouldn't as well. I guess the objective of the board was achieved.



If you want to be a moralist etc etc if a little boy came to me and said "Miss, have sex with me" I'd laugh at him and redirect him to Looney Toons. Because Loli for me is more like a way of living and appreciating the existance of children than a weird fetish. If you have that fetish sure, go ahead under the risk of being arrested for an eternity. ;)
Waratte Oemashou Sore ha Chiisana Inori
Oct 10, 2008 4:43 AM

Offline
Oct 2007
375
Well I like both kids and loli's for their cuteness I usually have no sexual interest in either one. With an exception here and there xD

Though I don't really have a problem with age groups around 12 or older having sex.. at least i surely had no problem with it... of course only if all those involved consent.
SaitoOct 10, 2008 5:00 AM
Oct 10, 2008 4:44 AM
Offline
Sep 2008
43
Rpgwiz99 said:
Khorven, your a sick fuck. You think that just because a little underage girl tells you its allright to have sex with her its allright? The only fucking reason she probally even consents is because you bribe her with candy and put chockolate syrup on your genatils.


Just what kind of mindset you think we have? And also, I don't think many bothered to read all of that. Thats something like "Here, eat this pig's eyeball, it has whip cream on it." Mind you, I was sure they were discussing peer relationships and not 60 year old man rapes 4 year old >.>.

Just let me say, most 10-13 year olds, are smart enough whether to have sex or not. More so, I always thought as long it was under their consent, it should always be okay, unless s/he suddenly becomes a sex slave and/or have their pictures on the internet. Though, this is saying with no scientific facts to back it up, and no beliefs to back it up. The closest thing I'm using would be if its rape or not.

Also see ladyxzeus's post. Its true, children know a lot more than you think.
Oct 10, 2008 4:52 AM

Offline
Mar 2007
3128
Kuronoa said:




...dont forget the dog

"What happens when we die?" I know that the ones who love us will miss us.
Oct 10, 2008 5:41 AM

Offline
May 2008
31862
khorven said:
Again, a man to my heart you are.

Thanks, we do seem to have a lot in common.

Please, Rpgwiz99, learn to use some spacing. Nothing wrong with huge walls of text because it shows that people are interested in actually discussing something and not just raising their post count. It means it took longer to write and therefor inherintely has a larger quality that shorter posts don't have, however short and sweet and funny they may be. Long posts should never be bashed. However making proper spaces when doing so is more professional and more readable.

Rpgwiz99 said:
Khorven, your a sick fuck. You think that just because a little underage girl tells you its allright to have sex with her its allright? The only fucking reason she probally even consents is because you bribe her with candy and put chockolate syrup on your genatils. I would ask you if this is true but there is no need as you will alayays have something to back up your immoral, pedaphile, child molesting sick ways just because it was approved of thousands of years ago.

You're using ad hominem, that is a logical fallacy and just plain rude. The only ad hominem I approve of is the band. And that's "you're a sick fuck" by the way. Also, paedophile does not have an 'a' there, it's an 'o'.

Basically the words and the way you're using them would be like me saying "Oh you can bash attraction to lolis all you want you're just some idiot who can't spell. And you'll just continue to think the same things you do be your intelligence is just too low to think in any way than but what you're told to think so discussing with you is useless and your opinions are useless." Ad hominem is bad, stop it.

Rpgwiz99 said:
I would say what ever you like than go for it but I have younger syblings and If I ever heard of something happing like this to them there wouldent be anything that would stop me. Whoever did it would be in a body bag and I would spend my life in prison with no regrets. I would say that people like you need to be locked up somewhere so someone can do experiments on you to see why you have that fucked up ped mindset along with constant torcher but that is far to nice for the likes of you. All you child molesters and Pedaphiles are just alike and need your limbs cut of and to be piled up in a ditch until you blead to death.

And you go around calling other people sick fucks? The things you just said are horrifying.
I think you need to take a good hard look at yourself.

If I was your little brother, and someone had sex with me, and you did that to them, I don't think I would care for you as a brother anymore. And plus I wouldn't have any time to spend with you to make up for how scary you became to me anyway, because you'd be rotting in jail, and I'd be forced to get over you.

Rpgwiz99 said:
I really cant understand the way you think...If your answers yes stop reading this and find the nearst rope or weapon and end your life now.

Likewise, I really can't understand the way you think.

And with such random flames, I think a simple NO U is appropriate.

Rpgwiz99 said:
innocence.

Is sex....dirty?

Old avatar and sig retired for now.
Oct 10, 2008 5:48 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
z2000 said:
Rpgwiz99 said:
Khorven, your a sick fuck. You think that just because a little underage girl tells you its allright to have sex with her its allright? The only fucking reason she probally even consents is because you bribe her with candy and put chockolate syrup on your genatils.


Just what kind of mindset you think we have? And also, I don't think many bothered to read all of that. Thats something like "Here, eat this pig's eyeball, it has whip cream on it." Mind you, I was sure they were discussing peer relationships and not 60 year old man rapes 4 year old >.>.

Just let me say, most 10-13 year olds, are smart enough whether to have sex or not. More so, I always thought as long it was under their consent, it should always be okay, unless s/he suddenly becomes a sex slave and/or have their pictures on the internet. Though, this is saying with no scientific facts to back it up, and no beliefs to back it up. The closest thing I'm using would be if its rape or not.

Also see ladyxzeus's post. Its true, children know a lot more than you
think.


so its fine for someone in their mid 20s to have sex with a 10 year old as long as their in a "relationship"...
either way ive grown tierd of this debate as ive found out that my point will never be made because 65% of the people who have posted in this thread condone of what is typically refferd to as being a "Pedaphile" I guess now that your online all of you can express your true feelings witrhout everybody knowing who you really are or you just dont care in general and are proud of your ways. either way i dont care to debate on this anymore as most of you dont care in general. either way do what you want and what ever is comeing to you will come in the end regardless of what I say. Just make sure you stay away from any body who is closly related to me or in my family and im fine, Just make sure you watch out who you are in a "Relationship" with as most people have older syblings who are willing to die not to mention kill for their younger famly, Isnt that why we were put here first, to protect the little ones who come after us?
Oct 10, 2008 5:56 AM
Anime DB Admin
BACK FOR MORE?

Offline
Jan 2007
12700
Rpgwiz99 said:
How can you expect people to not get worked up on a thered that condones Pedaphiles and Child Molestation? Either way Ill keep my opinions to myself wich defys the purpos of this bord.


Don't get me wrong. I actually share your opinion. That doesn't change the fact that you may not insult the other users. That's the only thing I was getting at. No flaming.

I personally think this topic the spawn of modern mental sickness, I'm disgusted seeing that all attention from the Why You Like Lolis topic got shifted to this topic in the minute it was created. I didn't even want to comment on this, no more.

staff.applications  
guidelines.faq 
 

report.abuse  

thx.skittles  
thx.kina 
 

[H+] ³  
Oct 10, 2008 6:04 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
cyruz said:
Rpgwiz99 said:
How can you expect people to not get worked up on a thered that condones Pedaphiles and Child Molestation? Either way Ill keep my opinions to myself wich defys the purpos of this bord.


Don't get me wrong. I actually share your opinion. That doesn't change the fact that you may not insult the other users. That's the only thing I was getting at. No flaming.

I personally think this topic the spawn of modern mental sickness, I'm disgusted seeing that all attention from the Why You Like Lolis topic got shifted to this topic in the minute it was created. I didn't even want to comment on this, no more.


Point made, It just gets me worked up for the main fact that I have younger syblings Ive decided not to post on this topic anymore anyway as I cant control my self well on these topics. To everybody who condones this you can talk of your sick fantasys without my imput anymore. I apolagise for the flame and insults.

-Rpgwiz99
Oct 10, 2008 6:08 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
ukonkivi said:


Rpgwiz99 said:
I would say what ever you like than go for it but I have younger syblings and If I ever heard of something happing like this to them there wouldent be anything that would stop me. Whoever did it would be in a body bag and I would spend my life in prison with no regrets. I would say that people like you need to be locked up somewhere so someone can do experiments on you to see why you have that fucked up ped mindset along with constant torcher but that is far to nice for the likes of you. All you child molesters and Pedaphiles are just alike and need your limbs cut of and to be piled up in a ditch until you blead to death.

And you go around calling other people sick fucks? The things you just said are horrifying.
I think you need to take a good hard look at yourself.

If I was your little brother, and someone had sex with me, and you did that to them, I don't think I would care for you as a brother anymore. And plus I wouldn't have any time to spend with you to make up for how scary you became to me anyway, because you'd be rotting in jail, and I'd be forced to get over you.
Happened in my case, her older brother didn't like me before he ever met me or talked to me or even knew a think about me because he præsumed, correctly, that I was an older guy, she always liked older guys. She really didn't like that and that he always made remarks towards me, the guy had some damn wit though so I felt inclined to prove my manhood back and she really didn't like to pull us apart. The mother was a lot more laidback towards it though, she said to me I was good companion and she noticed how much better things went with her since I came into the picture and she said I was a kind polite guy, she never treated me as a freaky six year older guy, she treated me as the polite best friend of her daughter and afterwards I sent her a letter to thank her for that. Really, little sister's don't like it if their family doesn't like their boyfriend, parent are worse than brothers, but still, you're not doing it to 'project them', you're doing it for yourself there, because you can't stand them growing up. I have that too, I can't say I like it that my sister has a sexual life, but I'm not going to limit her in that.
cyruz said:
Don't get me wrong. I actually share your opinion. That doesn't change the fact that you may not insult the other users. That's the only thing I was getting at. No flaming.
This, I commend.
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 6:32 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
ukonkivi said:
khorven said:
Again, a man to my heart you are.

Thanks, we do seem to have a lot in common.

Please, Rpgwiz99, learn to use some spacing. Nothing wrong with huge walls of text because it shows that people are interested in actually discussing something and not just raising their post count. It means it took longer to write and therefor inherintely has a larger quality that shorter posts don't have, however short and sweet and funny they may be. Long posts should never be bashed. However making proper spaces when doing so is more professional and more readable.

Rpgwiz99 said:
Khorven, your a sick fuck. You think that just because a little underage girl tells you its allright to have sex with her its allright? The only fucking reason she probally even consents is because you bribe her with candy and put chockolate syrup on your genatils. I would ask you if this is true but there is no need as you will alayays have something to back up your immoral, pedaphile, child molesting sick ways just because it was approved of thousands of years ago.

You're using ad hominem, that is a logical fallacy and just plain rude. The only ad hominem I approve of is the band. And that's "you're a sick fuck" by the way. Also, paedophile does not have an 'a' there, it's an 'o'.

Basically the words and the way you're using them would be like me saying "Oh you can bash attraction to lolis all you want you're just some idiot who can't spell. And you'll just continue to think the same things you do be your intelligence is just too low to think in any way than but what you're told to think so discussing with you is useless and your opinions are useless." Ad hominem is bad, stop it.

Rpgwiz99 said:
I would say what ever you like than go for it but I have younger syblings and If I ever heard of something happing like this to them there wouldent be anything that would stop me. Whoever did it would be in a body bag and I would spend my life in prison with no regrets. I would say that people like you need to be locked up somewhere so someone can do experiments on you to see why you have that fucked up ped mindset along with constant torcher but that is far to nice for the likes of you. All you child molesters and Pedaphiles are just alike and need your limbs cut of and to be piled up in a ditch until you blead to death.

And you go around calling other people sick fucks? The things you just said are horrifying.
I think you need to take a good hard look at yourself.

If I was your little brother, and someone had sex with me, and you did that to them, I don't think I would care for you as a brother anymore. And plus I wouldn't have any time to spend with you to make up for how scary you became to me anyway, because you'd be rotting in jail, and I'd be forced to get over you.

Rpgwiz99 said:
I really cant understand the way you think...If your answers yes stop reading this and find the nearst rope or weapon and end your life now.

Likewise, I really can't understand the way you think.

And with such random flames, I think a simple NO U is appropriate.

Rpgwiz99 said:
innocence.

Is sex....dirty?


Like I said, I wont debate anymore but I dont need your grammer classes, and I would appreciate if you look into things before you post too. my little brother just turned 6, he has only been alive 6 years. Thats all I need to say. I refuse to debate in a one sided argument but once again anyone would dare have sex with a little 6 year old boy deserves whats coming to them, and how can you even have any idea about how the people in my life think. Ive been to jail several times before that added up to over 4 1/2 years total and my little brother never stopped caring for me let alone was "forced" to get over me, he sent me things in the mail and came to see me often. You really think something as little as a few walls will keep him from caring for me? If thats how it is in your family I really feel sorry that your are forced to grow up in those conditions, and if you had a younger brother or sister who some strange dude had sex with and you condone it I also feel sorry for the that you supposaly care for have to grow up in them conditions too.
Oct 10, 2008 6:35 AM

Offline
Oct 2008
243
I say, to each their own.
Oct 10, 2008 6:50 AM

Offline
May 2008
31862
Rpgwiz99 said:
someone can do experiments on you to see why you have that fucked up ped mindset

Now this I don't mind. There needs to be more research done on what makes people attracted to those under the age of consent.
Including your fucked up anti-pedo mindset.

It's good to know why people think the way they do.

Rpgwiz99 said:
I really cant understand the way you think but if you had a little sister lets say she was 7 and you found out she was getting fucked would you approve of it just because she said she wanted it?

If you had a little sister lets say she was 7 and you found out she was given a doughnut would you approve of it just because she said she wanted it?

This has all sort of possible negative implications because donuts are fattening and this situation could lead to obesity and therefor bad health.

Oh wait but this isn't food this is sex. The place where children aren't supposed to want it but adults are, women aren't supposed to want it or they're whores and sluts, and men are supposed to want it or they're gay, ugly, a loser, a religious freak, ect.

Hell it's not fun growing up and realizing things about sex. That homosex is not considered alright. That you're no longer able to look at the people you grew up with the same way as you used to. Not your first girlfriend. Nobody. And that a woman who likes sex is a worthless slut and not okay. And that a male who doesn't like sex is a liar or a freak. Hell I wish I could have never found that out. But society raped me and indoctrinated me into this system.

But that's the way things are. And that's not the sex itself that was the problem and made me feel bad about sex my whole life. It was the way sex was viewed.

Personally, I think a bigger problem is the view in which sex is treated. Not how young some people are allowed to have sex. Which is in some countries, quite young.

Rpgwiz99 said:

Like I said, I wont debate anymore but I dont need your grammer classes, and I would appreciate if you look into things before you post too.

I did. I merely used that as an example to show you what you were doing.
You on the on hand did seem to do much debating to begin with, and instead went with ad hominem and from what I could tell, a little bit of strawman.

Rpgwiz99 said:

I refuse to debate in a one sided argument

Then why have you been trying to make it one sided.

The debate itself at which one's age can be decided that they can truly be okay with sex is unsure. But one thing is for sure, we're supposed to be protecting people from rape, not sex.

And even if I was raped at six years old. Not allowed it mind you, but raped. Even then I still think I would be more disturbed by having a brother who had life in prison. And I think at least partially it would feel partially my fault and I would be disturbed for years to come by the whole thing far more than if people were just quiet and comforting about it. You can make something horrible ten times worse by making a big thing about it.

Instead of putting your protective and perhaps even possesive shoes as an older brother into the situation, but yourself into the shoes of a person underage at various areas, and think about how YOU would be affected.

Old avatar and sig retired for now.
Oct 10, 2008 6:58 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
ukonkivi teh win, create me your bondage Slav.
nihlniisadxhaiOct 10, 2008 7:03 AM
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 7:32 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
2162
What it all boils down to is that your someone who seems to hide behind their computer screen knowing nothing of the actual world, mind you I say actual world the real one not the one in your head. Its not like I want to waste my time talking to the likes of you as my mindset is on a much higher level than yours and you really cant seem to comprahend anything I say anyway. I can indeed spell correctly, and hold a perfectally normal conversation but really dose it matter one way or another when i'm "Trying" to talk to neanderthaws. Notice I say "Trying" as I really don't think its completly possibple to hold a conversation with anybody who has and IQ below 10 but I'll try my hardest. Actually I applaud you so far for at least trying to make your point even if it only ammounts to a complete pile of, well nothing. I find it odd and sick that you relate giving a small child a piece of candy is the same as Giving them your dick just because they say they want it. I try'ed to be nice but I found out early in life that there is only 1 way to learn anything and if you are stupid enough to play with fire than you deserve to get burned. Really you are stupid and at a complete lost on legal matters too as I could commit an act of first degree murder and under the right circumstances get out in 10 or less years with the right attorney and parol. And about the 1 sided part. How can I be making this conversation when you are teaming up with your fellow child molesters to make the sickist point in history. I guess all it comes down to is if a 5 year old kid asks for death than its fine to kill them as long as they consent, right? Well if thats what you believe then this world is far more corrupt than I once thought it was. Anyway come back at me with your best remarks as your antics truly entertain me. Not the ones that condone rape and child molesting with no punishment but ones where you really think you can prove a point to ME. I actually don't even care. but really watch it because the next time you decide to give a little 5 year old you'r "doughnut" just because she supposeably asked for it then you might end up in the pen getting that ass pounding even if you don't "condone" of it. And let me tell you this the child molesters and the people who rape little kids are the people who get fucked up the worst in jail. People might be in there for muder and worse but they litarlly take everything out on the ones who feed on the innocent.
Oct 10, 2008 7:56 AM

Offline
Sep 2008
1055
I guess all it comes down to is if a 5 year old kid asks for death than its fine to kill them as long as they consent, right?
Definitely, I know what it's like to live as a suicidal five year old and I should've died then before I made 'friends'.

Als, from what you post here... view people with brains would class you as more intelligent than I.

"....I can indeed spell correctly, and hold a perfectally...."

Not being able to spell correctly is no shame, I use a spell checker in fact, not being able to admit that your spelling sucks is another. I know my spelling sucks when I type, that's why I use a spell checker.

Seriously, your question about rhyming didn't make appear you very smart. And apparently I'm not smart because I don't agree with you even though I have shit loads of arguments on the academic levels and all you come with is dogmata. I doubt even the APA would not class you as highly unprofessional a debater here. I'm heaps and bounds above you in intelligence, eloquence and quite simply a read nature about the world dawg, and besides, you thought I was a woman, ahahahah.

Any-way,ukonkivi, let's make out!
nihlniisadxhaiOct 10, 2008 8:37 AM
Perelman, martyr
Oct 10, 2008 8:12 AM

Offline
Jul 2007
816
khorven said:
url_elf said:
But all of that presupposes a sociocultural context which doesn't have all sorts of baggage with sex. The reality is, we do have a rich history of sexual-related baggage, and thus, a sociocultural context which inevitably induces confusion/shame/guilt/an effect on the child.

Because of their age, this is something they can't bargain for, or fully consent to. Thus, I can't see how it's ethic to let children walk into those sorts of situations, where they can end up traumatized over things they had no ability to forsee but adults did, and could have guarded them from at such a young age.
I am highly sceptical towards this argument as time and time again it was held of certain social groups with no research done into it and every time it was proven false, I thus opt for 'One is able to make decisions unless proven otherwise.' how it works for aduls, also women and blacks nowadays thank LORD..

I'd say that the research I cited suggests that children aren't able to fully comprehend the situation or make this decision. I think it's a bit of a gap in logic to compare children to women or blacks because, unlike children, women and blacks are fully developed adults, not unlike the white men who oppressed them for more purely selfish/control/power reasons.

However I think we're going in circles now, you don't agree with what I say and here's why and I don't agree with what you say and here's why... I think we more or less know what the other is going to say by now.

Although before I was arguing more about adults having sexual relations with children (what the two articles khorven posted were discussing), I now see that while I've been asleep the focus has shifted somewhat towards children having sexual relations in their peer groups. I can't speak to that yet, given that I don't know anything about it.
This topic has been locked and is no longer available for discussion.
Pages (8) « 1 [2] 3 4 » ... Last »

More topics from this board

Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )

Luna - Aug 2, 2021

272 by traed »»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM

» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )

Desolated - Jul 30, 2021

50 by Desolated »»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM

» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.

Desolated - Aug 5, 2021

1 by Bourmegar »»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM

» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor law

Desolated - Aug 3, 2021

17 by kitsune0 »»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM

» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To Itself

Desolated - Aug 5, 2021

10 by Desolated »»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM
It’s time to ditch the text file.
Keep track of your anime easily by creating your own list.
Sign Up Login