💰 Grifter "Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions

[spergetti & NEETballs]

Possibly late, watching live now. My initial impressions:

• Masturbating to/looking at/creating lolicon.. that's an action, not a thought, so it doesn't fall under the purview of a "thought" crime. Whether or not lolicon is a victimless crime is debatable, I guess. Not trying to be pedantic here; the difference is meaningful in this case.
• It doesn't matter if Digi identifies as the loli or not.

I guess the arguments here are that (1) his reasoning for pedophilia (being trans, rather than being the victim of molestation himself) somehow makes him less prone to molesting a child, and (2) that he is less likely to harm a child if he takes the role of the child in his fantasies. However, if you read accounts of victims of child sex abuse, predators often want to act out specific scenes related to some sort of trauma. (1) This trauma doesn't have to be sexual in nature. I once read an account of a girl who was shot in the leg by her abuser, as part of a twisted sex fantasy relating to his own trauma from when he was shot in the leg himself as a child. My point is, if Digi has heavy baggage regarding is sexual identity, that is even more of a red flag. (2) Furthermore, Digi's desire to take the role of loli in his fantasies does not matter, because pedophiles project their weird fantasy storylines onto the victim.

I also agree in Null's assessment that Digi and his partner are both pedophiles, and that they are legitimately dangerous, particularly together. This is the most terrifying thing, imo. It gives me a sick feeling in my stomach.

• Dick made a big logical error when he deflected the convo towards lesbianism.

Null said: If you look at anime feet, you probably like feet
if you look at anime children, you're probably attracted to children

Dick's response: So if you like lesbian porn, you want to be a lesbian?
Dick basically twisted it into, "If you look at anime feet, you want to BE anime feet" and then derailed the convo.
I'm not saying that he did so intentionally, but it's not a fair comparison.

Regarding lesbian porn.. I agree with Null that there are a lot of autogynophiles out there who want to become the lesbian, but there are also a bunch of normal, straight guys who want to see two or more girls engaged in sex acts without having to look at dicks because lolgay. To bring it back to Dick's point, if you fall in the latter category, you don't want to be the lesbian, but you do wish you could fuck them. So yeah. If you extend that analogy to lolicon, it's still repugnant.

My take: Lolicon is harmful to the mental health of those who consume it, and to people close to those who consume it. Anyone with sense stays far away from loli content/those who consume loli content, regardless of whether or not it is moral/ethical/legal.

 

[4str4staleatherbelt]

The better angle Dick could've gone with was simulated incest porn that's VERY popular with some of it also being pedophilic in nature.
"Do people who consume incest porn want to have sex with their brother/sister/mom/dad/uncle/aunt/etc ?"

I feel there is a definite sense of something being wrong/naughty at play when it comes to some forms of pornography. "It's wrong which makes it hot." This is more easily seen in more "tame" things like incest porn than it is with more obscure porn like hentai.

 

[Gravityqueen4life]

Why would they have to be real? The act of being aroused by children, which Digi has admitted to, is the definition of pedophilia.

i dont like lolicon. i dont like defending lolicon but i still dont think it makes you a pedophile. can it be used as a gatewaay to actual pedophile? i think so but at the end of the day, its not real and i dont want to give the government anymore power by banning it, since it can lead them to censor others things they dont like. unless digibor has said "i get aroused by children, fake and real, it dosent matter." he dose not fit the bill being a pedo. his still a weirdo and it would not shock me if he was ever caught with actual child porn.

 

[JewBacca]

i dont like lolicon. i dont like defending lolicon but i still dont think it makes you a pedophile. can it be used as a gatewaay to actual pedophile? i think so but at the end of the day, its not real and i dont want to give the government anymore power by banning it, since it can lead them to censor others things they dont like. unless digibor has said "i get aroused by children, fake and real, it dosent matter." he dose not fit the bill being a pedo. his still a weirdo and it would not shock me if he was every caught with actual child porn.

All a pedophile means is some sexually attracted to children, which Digi has proudly admitted to. That's it nothing more, I'm not saying he is a child molester or rapist, simply being a pedophile is bad enough.

 

[Gravityqueen4life]

All a pedophile means is some sexually attracted to children, which Digi has proudly admitted to. That's it nothing more, I'm not saying he is a child molester or rapist, simply being a pedophile is bad enough.

but is he sexually attracted to 2D children or 3D children? or his he attracted to both? if its only 2D, his still not gone full pedo but its still weird and uncomfortable.

 

[WeedMeister]

I don't think Null does himself any favors by intentionally denying any nuance for this topic. Jerking off to traps is gay by definition but it does not mean that anyone who does it can be lumped in with people who literally date and fuck/get fucked by men exclusively. In fact a lot of people who do it are perfectly heterosexual all the time they aren't looking up femboys on pornhub just because they felt like spicing it up a little. But it also doesn't mean that ALL people who jerk off to this kind of stuff are like that. Kinsey scale is a real thing.

Same logic can be applied to drawings of children. The act of jerking off to them is pedophilic in nature but lumping all the people who do this, or even just joke about the matter, with actual child fuckers and broken paraphiliacs is retarded. Null's sampling of a bunch of posters from fucking 9chan of all places is obviously extremely biased towards the latter ones due to the nature of the place AND the fact that most people into this kind of shit would just keep it to themselves instead of spending days reposting those drawings on imageboards.

But this is also the reason why Null's argument about Digi is perfectly valid. Lolicon can be safe and may not turn you into a pedo who craves real children but it's still is degenerate as fuck and is ought to be kept private. You can not expect any reasonable person NOT to assume that Digi is way past the "safe zone" on that pedo Kinsey scale when he goes out of his way to make it such a big part of his persona.

But, once again, by denying any nuance to the core topic at hand Null is pretty much asking for the public to disregard all of his valid points and makes Digi look like a victim of another internet Karen.

 

[Twinkie]

But, once again, by denying any nuance to the core topic at hand Null is pretty much asking for the public to disregard all of his valid points and makes Digi look like a victim of another internet Karen.

What nuance Dick was just strawmanning the whole time.

I can't imagine how fucked in the head you'd have to be to consider Digibro any kind of victim. The public would agree with all of his points. Normal people ie the public believe that if you are attracted to depictions of children being sexually exploited and abused, you are a pedophile.

 

[Agent of Z.O.G.]

I'm pretty confident that Digi's 'victory' really doesn't amount to much. He still gets fuck all views on his videos, has zero future prospects IRL, and just continues to limit further avenues to efame with his fervent lolicon advocacy. The guy's a loser that thrives on attention but is slowly taking more and more drugs to explore himself cope with his pathetic existence. He's either going to eternally wallow in his pitiful existence like 4/5ths of the lolcows we have threads on, or else something will eventually snap and he'll be in serious health or legal troubles. I don't see digi having a happy ending.

The value of a free rung on the dick show ladder has gone done massively since NP2 got shoah'd but I'm sure he had fun seeing Jersh confirm that Digi was able to get under his skin with 0 effort and isn't that what life is all about?

 

[Twinkie]

The value of a free rung on the dick show ladder has gone done massively since NP2 got shoah'd but I'm sure he had fun seeing Jersh confirm that Digi was able to get under his skin with 0 effort and isn't that what life is all about?

no effort? lol they filmed a music video

there's nothing shameful about admitting that creepy tranny pedos get under your skin, either

 

[JewBacca]

but is he sexually attracted to 2D children or 3D children? or his he attracted to both? if its only 2D, his still not gone full pedo but its still weird and uncomfortable.

The definition of a pedophile does not distinguish between drawings, pictures or IRL children, all that matter is if a person is aroused or attacted to children. Since Digi admits to ejaculating to images of children, so to me at least that shows attraction. I dont understand the meaning of "gone full pedo", either you are attracted to the thought of the raping of a child or you aren't, there is no half way.

The argument of 2d over 3d doesn't fly either, photographs are two dimensional objects yet still constitute child porn. I am not saying loli is child porn but it's the attraction that determines the definition. I did not create the definition, I'm just using it correctly.

 

[WeedMeister]

I can't imagine how fucked in the head you'd have to be to consider Digibro any kind of victim. The public would agree with all of his points. Normal people ie the public believe that if you are attracted to depictions of children being sexually exploited and abused, you are a pedophile.

You just have to
1. Possess the basic understanding of the fact that jerking off to hentai with underage girls (that's like 50% of all of it) does not necessarily make you a child molester who is ought to be killed
2. Not be exposed to Digi's content enough to realize just how much of a obsessed fucking creep he is and that Null's gripe with him goes way beyond basic arguments about legality of lolicon.

The latter one is boosted by the fact that Dick is the one speaking on Digi's behalf the whole time instead of just allowing him to hang himself in the conversation.

 

[Agent of Z.O.G.]

no effort? lol they filmed a music video

Do you actually think it had effort put into it?

 

[Twinkie]

You just have to
1. Possess the basic understanding of the fact that jerking off to hentai with underage girls (that's like 50% of all of it) does not necessarily make you a child molester who is ought to be killed
2. Not be exposed to Digi's content enough to realize just how much of a obsessed fucking creep he is and that Null's gripe with him goes way beyond basic arguments about legality of lolicon.

The latter one is boosted by the fact that Dick is the one speaking on Digi's behalf the whole time.

1. A pedophile is someone sexually attracted to children. It is not synonymous with child molester though needless to say there is huge overlap

2. It doesn't matter how much other shit Null has going on with Digibro, I don't know and don't care. The desire to distance yourself from pedos and pedo apologists is natural and normal people understand that.

So I maintain that to look at Digibro as a victim one must be either fucked in the head or arguing in bad faith

 

[Not Even Twice]

Do you actually think it had effort put into it?

As much effort as Digi is willing to put into anything that doesn't involve children, yes.

 

[WeedMeister]

1. A pedophile is someone sexually attracted to children. It is not synonymous with child molester though needless to say there is huge overlap

Yes. But Null went out of his way to provide people with enough soundbites of him completely disregarding this nuance and going "reee just kill all of them"

2. It doesn't matter how much other shit Null has going on with Digibro, I don't know and don't care. The desire to distance yourself from pedos and pedo apologists is natural and normal people understand that.

Agreed. It is a perfectly reasonable position and you can not criticize anyone for taking it. The problem is that Null went out of his way to poison it with a bunch of shitty emotional non-arguments when simply saying "This fucker openly brags about jerking off to drawn children. I refuse to associate with that." would have been more than enough and wouldn't lead to that retarded 40 minute long convo.

 

[Twinkie]

Yes. But Null went out of his way to provide people with enough soundbites of him completely disregarding this nuance and going "reee just kill all of them"

This is what normal people actually believe :3

Agreed. It is a perfectly reasonable position and you can not criticize anyone for taking it. The problem is that Null went out of his way to poison it with a bunch of shitty emotional non-arguments when simply saying "This fucker brags about jerking off to drawn children. I refuse to associate with that." would have been more than enough and wouldn't lead to that retarded 40 minute long convo.

Okay be mad at Dick then for entertaining it? This wasn't a debate anyway, I don't know why you're analyzing it like that. It was Null explaining why he's stepping back. Oh but there was emotion involved! Does not compute beep boop where's the nuance?

 

[WeedMeister]

This is what normal people actually believe :3

"This is what oblivious boomers completely unexposed to the thing in question and tradcons believe." fixed that for you. Needless to say that people one would consider "normal" or "average" are not the target audience of neither Null nor Dick.

Okay be mad at Dick then for entertaining it? This wasn't a debate anyway, I don't know why you're analyzing it like that. It was Null explaining why he's stepping back. Oh but there was emotion involved! Does not compute beep boop where's the nuance?

The show itself may not have been labeled as a debate but there is no way you can listen to that fucking convo and pretend that they were not debating that topic.
And it was Dick's show. You can not blame him for turning it into content, which he did. Even with those retarded lesbian arguments, he still the one who benefits from that conversation. It was entirely up to Null to just stop and refuse to go any further.

 

[Big Bad Wart]

The show itself may not have been labeled as a debate but there is no way you can listen to that fucking convo and pretend that they were not debating that topic.
And it was Dick's show. You can not blame him for turning it into content, which he did. Even with those retarded lesbian arguments, he still the one who benefits from that conversation. It was entirely up to Null to just stop and refuse to go any further.

Just because two retards on the internet are arguing over topic does not make it a debate. Debates are formal in nature while this was more of just two people bickering about a subject. TBh i was expecting them to Reeeee at each other a lot more.

I know by now that Dick is a retard, but watching him whiteknight an unironic pedophile Digibro so much was outright surreal.

Isn't he a libertarian? I always thought he was so it was more a matter of when vs if he would since , my experience with online libertarians always leads them to these kind of things.

 

[CivilianOfTheFandomWars]

Honestly, I think both sides made good and bad points.
I agree with Null that if you are into loli, you are by definition a pedophile. On the other hand, Dick is right that human psychology is a fucking mess. Either way, you’re still aroused by the image of a child, and that’s an issue.
Null also, I might be wrong here, seems to take the stance that if you’re a pedophile you don’t deserve to be alive. Dick comes from a different angle, saying that human life has inherent value and pedophilia is an affliction and should be pitied yet dealt with. I tend to side with Dick here, because I personally don’t think someone who hasn’t committed a crime should die, but that ideally they would find some way to benefit society without having any contact with kids or anything. It’s a hard question, what do you do with someone who hasn’t offended but is still a risk in a just society?
As for the Digi Question, Digi and May should not be near kids. I honestly don’t think they would do anything, but I wouldn’t risk it. I do know that May was sexually assaulted, according to the two of them anyways, and there is the phenomena of victims of rape being ‘into’ rape porn as a strange way of feeling like they have some control. That doesn’t excuse pedophilia, but it’s another one of those things that makes it hard for me to say they should all die.
Pedophilia is never a good subject to talk about in a public place, one wrong word and you will look like a monster. But it’s a discussion that needs to happen because it’s a massive problem that needs to be dealt with.
But, as for actual lolicon, I don’t think it should be put anywhere near the same level as actual CP. If you enjoy it, you are a pedo, but I’d rather that the pedos have loli than CP. I don’t know if it makes them more likely to offend, but even then I don’t know if it should be criminal. From a practical standpoint, that law could never be written well. Patreon is a perfect example, it had a very hard time figuring out what actually counts a drawn beastiality and such when they made that rule. By what degree is a loli is not a question that our law makers will answer well, that’s for sure.
Overall, it’s a big mess of a topic.

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

As for actual lolicon, I don’t think it should be put anywhere near the same level as actual CP. If you enjoy it, you are a pedo, but I’d rather that the pedos have loli than CP. I don’t know if it makes them more likely to offend, but even then I don’t know if it should be criminal. From a practical standpoint, that law could never be written well. Patreon is a perfect example, it had a very hard time figuring out what actually counts a drawn beastiality and such when they made that rule. By what degree is a loli is not a question that our law makers will answer well, that’s for sure.
Overall, it’s a big mess of a topic.

I agree with the first point, but only on the basis that there is no direct victim. However, it should still be illegal.

With regards to offending, this is not conclusive but it is worth noting that the people who often get caught To Catch a Predator Style after talking to children online tend to move from fantasy, to talking to underage people sexually, to meeting them. Much like with drugs, the initial hit is fine but eventually it just doesn't do it anymore so people want more or try to access drugs that would give them a bigger rush - and in this sense what these people are after is the chemical cocktail their brains release after they have engaged sexually with a child. Now maybe it doesn't work in all paedophiles in the same way, but I would bet that it does for a lot of them.

Additionally, recidivism for a lot of offenders can be massively reduced with the right treatment - that is to say, through a combination of therapy, punishment and supervision a lot of these people never re-offend once caught. This treatment never includes giving in to, or encouraging to these urges and instead involves ways of avoiding or suppressing them - Loli is doing the exact opposite of this, so I fail to see how it could actually help.

As for how you would make it illegal, I don't think this is too difficult. While it is easy to make it illegal to depict children doing explicitly sexual acts, acts that don't reach this explicit level can be harder to define. Where I am from the standard is whether or not the image is "sexually suggestive", how this works is based on two things, first the purpose of the image - so if you found an image of a young girl in a bikini on someones hard drive it would matter how they acquired it, their relation to the person and what else was on the hard drive as to what you would classify it as. It could be entirely innocent, or damning. The second point is the nature of the image, going back to the bikini example, there is a huge difference between just an innocent picture and one where they are in a suggestive pose. Of course these are somewhat subjective and could be argued, but that's why we have courts of law.