If pedos wank-off to drawings, so that they don't have the urge to fuck kids...

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
B

Billy Beer

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 23, 2021
Why don't they just hire midgets and dwarfs, dressed in school uniforms, and fuck them instead?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Cause dwarfs already look fucked most of the time, nobody is stopping you from putting a school uniform on a 20 year old 4 foot 4 Macedonian prostitute
 
Upvote 3 Downvote
From my admittedly scant understanding, they're interested in sexually abusing real children, which is why they end up getting vanned after downloading their tenth terabyte of actual CP. Can't say for sure if they're wanking off to drawings in a bid to stave their urges, in the first place.
 
Upvote 2 Downvote
Probably because real females are gross

852.jpg
 
Upvote -1 Downvote
The whole notion that "watching X porn makes you less likely to do X" is dumb.
"Venting" is pseudoscience. People who are prompted to beat the shit out of something when they're mad tend to show more aggressive traits than those told to just wait it out (too lazy to pull up studies on the matter). What's happening is conditioning.

Beating your dick to children only makes you more sexually aroused by children.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Penis Drager said:
The whole notion that "watching X porn makes you less likely to do X" is dumb.
"Venting" is pseudoscience. People who are prompted to beat the shit out of something when they're mad tend to show more aggressive traits than those told to just wait it out (too lazy to pull up studies on the matter). What's happening is conditioning.

Beating your dick to children only makes you more sexually aroused by children.
Click to expand...
It's not my theory. It's just some dross i've heard spouted by mongs. I agree with you, fwiw.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Penis Drager said:
The whole notion that "watching X porn makes you less likely to do X" is dumb.
"Venting" is pseudoscience. People who are prompted to beat the shit out of something when they're mad tend to show more aggressive traits than those told to just wait it out (too lazy to pull up studies on the matter). What's happening is conditioning.

Beating your dick to children only makes you more sexually aroused by children.
Click to expand...
I notice anything that's fictional seems to be given a pass except loli stuff. If the news claims violent movies and video games causes violence they usually get laughed at by the internet, oldschool christians were saying metal music leads people to worship satan which was widely mocked, people claiming fictional racism against fictional fantasy races leads to real racism usually get laughed at as well. There seems to be the common theme of "fiction doesn't lead to reality"

But when stuff like lolicon gets involved the argument shifts at a break neck pace. Is there any logic that differentiates the above examples from loli shit?

And I want to clarify I'm not saying you're wrong, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out its true that people looking at drawings of this stuff are more likely to try and fuck a real kid. I just don't understand the inconsistency with the fiction vs reality debate.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SandyCat said:
I just don't understand the inconsistency with the fiction vs reality debate.
Click to expand...
The inconsistency is just an ideological thing. Kinda like how intersectional feminism is embraced by the right, under any other name, when describing the complex power structures that extend beyond race and gender but then simultaneously rejected when the left uses the same arguments for a different purpose. The scientific literature is pretty clear on the subject:
Watching violent material and being encouraged to enact simulated violence tends to encourage real violence (caveats abound, but the "bo-bo doll experiment" is a good place to start). People get in a tizzy when they interpret that finding as "This material is bad" which is not a scientific claim in the slightest.

If a moral argument is to be made based on this shit, it would be to curate the media your child consumes so that it reflects a healthy view on violence and when/how it should be applied. But that's philosophy: not science.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom