Pedophiles are Weird - I don’t get it

  • 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

Is pedophilia weird and evil?

  • It’s weird and evil

  • It’s not weird and evil


Results are only viewable after voting.
Perhaps you're right and that's a second category of pedos.
I believe we see similar head gymnastics with zoophiles who try to justify fucking animals (it's why there's a specific category for zoo-sadists who fuck, murder and torture animals... well torture beyond the inherent torture of raping an animal). So I do think there's definitely a types of degenerate which justifies their actions along similar lines including pedophiles.

It could be that these people are just low IQ, schizos, or just created an elaborate mental delusion to paint themselves as not being evil to protect their ego and self image.
To use a not necessarily related example: two people break into a house to rob it, the one thief is like "fuck them rich folks, I wanted that shit and I took it" the other one tries to argue "I'm broke, I don't have a job, I needed money for my kidz and shit". Both did the same thing and both are equally in the wrong, but how they justify it to themselves and others is different.
 
Acknowledging there's a massive difference between literal baby rapists and sex with a minor months away from 18 isn't a defense of the latter, both are wrong but to wildly different degrees. You have to make that distinction because not only is it obvious and real, but pedophiles want society to water down the term, so it's only doing them a favor.
True, just every time I've seen this discussion anywhere not on the farms, dumbass fuckers will come in and try and justify their lust for teen girls by pointing out pedos fucking younger kids and it makes me sick
 
They sure are.

1735686443347.png
 
A lot of famous people are, I think it comes with the territory.
 
have a schizotheory about this topic

I've always gone the other way with pedophiles, well what i consider real pedophiles. I think it's a form of emotional and psychological retardation.
I believe they haven't grown out of being a child due to some kind of issue. And because they are still mentally a child whether emotionally or psychologically or both, they relate to children and are "attracted" to them the same way any of us were when we were of that age.
And I think this helps explain why so rich and/or powerful people seem to be pedophiles the same with some communities like black communities. But it's not the fact they are actually retarded... well for black communities I consider it due to general low IQ making them incapable of actually growing up past a certain point. But rich people, who are born rich, usually don't have to grow up at all, because they'll never face the real world. Actors who start acting young miss out on their childhood and have a chance to not properly mature either. Also I can't emphasize the growth damage that occurs to someone who skates through their late teens/early 20s. Look at all the psycho lefties who never see the real world trapped in academia where you don't have to properly grow up.

Even for seemingly opportunistic pedophilia of teachers or priests, if you examine the path they follow to get there you'll find they've likely missed key growth at important parts of their lives, namely college and the cloth. I'll also say, I would not be surprised if the military had a similar effect on people. When I joined and during my time I was shocked at how essentially military is life on easy street. I joined latter in life, but if I went in at 18, I could 100% see it causing the person to miss hardships most people go through.

Tl:dr; I see real pedophilia as a retardation, and I see many offenders who are functionally normal as just not being retarded but missing out on key growth in life that has left them emotionally or psychologically immature.

Edit: decided to have a look after posting and sure enough...

Pedophilic disorder appeared nearly twice as often among veterans than civilians (62.7% vs. 38.7%)
 
True, just every time I've seen this discussion anywhere not on the farms, dumbass fuckers will come in and try and justify their lust for teen girls by pointing out pedos fucking younger kids and it makes me sick
People do often try to justify their own degeneracy just because it's whatever degree less degenerate than what others engage in, your concern is valid. You don't want to validate them, just because there's worse people out there. It'd be like giving thumbs up to a pickpocket just because he's not robbing a bank, he's not suddenly innocent.

I see real pedophilia as a retardation, and I see many offenders who are functionally normal as just not being retarded but missing out on key growth in life that has left them emotionally or psychologically immature.
How does that account for the violent ones then? A lot of them seem to hurt kids, even kill them sometimes. You might be right but there's clearly more to it.
 
You're asking the same community that regularly drools at the idea of documenting and doxing pedophiles if they think that it's evil and weird? Is your next question going to be if the sky is blue?
 
So if 17 was the average 100 years ago, what was the average for the first menstruation for centuries? For millennia?... I figured that nutrition/body mass played a part in a girl getting her first period...

I don't think pedophiles really want their victims to be able to give birth even though it for sure would get them off to force them to abort. The trauma from it indeed stems from the corruption of innocence, but the huge push for puberty blockers suggests pedophiles don't want children to be breeding at all since menstrual blood and semen production is "mature".
I'm going to go a bit tinfoil. Given all the lies we've been told in the last few years and how there is a clear bias to what's accepted as 'facts.' I do not at all believe that women (and probably men too but that's harder to track because men are retarded) hitting puberty earlier by one half to two thirds the time is because 'we are super healthy and we just have so much food.' Which is the popular theory. Also, just because women are menstruating earlier, it doesn't mean they are ready for childbirth at the same time. It still takes time for the hips to widen and other anatomical changes to make it easier for the body to give birth. Anyways, 'we are menstruating earlier because we have such great food,' sounds like some Kellogg level funded theory to distract us from noticing that they are filling our foods with manufacturing waste byproducts. Sure, people who eat that slop mature earlier but probably not because we are so much healthier, but because the exposure to the chemical waste byproducts increases. It's also basically impossible to study this now because there is no way to establish control groups. 100 percent of genitals and breast has contamination in them from microplastics and other toxins.

There's an uncomfortable thing to talk about. While many adults who are SA'd avoid sex, many children who are sexually tortured become hypersexual. Think about all the porn stars/escorts/prostitutes who have a history of childhood sexual abuse. It's like 90+ percent. Even those who don't admit to it will often admit to being groomed and getting exposed to sex way too early. If you are exposed to sex too early, it fries your brain. It's too much for an underdeveloped brain to handle and both men and women become coomers. Look at our culture, I think it's unquestionably more degenerate than it ever has been and I think it's directly because bodies are being induced to hit puberty before our brains are ready to handle it. The answer isn't more demonic chemicals by the way. You are right that pedos want to delay puberty. The only way is to do so naturally by removing the poison from our food.
Psychopaths lie incredibly easily and they're always telling stories. That said, I do wonder if this guy was someone who was molested himself as a child, and is now using this giga-cope to justify his own behaviour as well as his past abuse. Perhaps you're right and that's a second category of pedos.
Continuing the tinfoil above. I absolutely do not believe that raped children become rapist. There was this amazing video posted by a therapist who works exclusively with psychopaths in prison a few years back. I'm forever sad I'd didn't archive it. In the video he talks about how most research on psychopaths are junk because the researchers just spend one 30 minute to 1 hour interview with the psychopaths and take their words at face value. Psychopaths lie, they view social interactions as games to get whatever they want. Often times reduced sentences, and they have zero remorse about lying. He said the rape vampire theory is a common lie they use because they know it's an affective way to manipulate compassionate niggers.
 
Last edited:
Are pedos with a higher age range of 15-17 the same type of psychopath as pedos into younger kids?

There's a reason nobody calls Jane Austen a pedophile apologist, despite Lydia Bennett being 15 or 16 when she marries Mr Wickham. Had Lydia been seven or eight in the story, we'd all view Austen and her book much, much differently than we currently do. However, on that same token, even within the context of the book itself, we're supposed to recognize that Wickham, who is in his late twenties, is a creep, Mr Bennett is a bad father, and Lydia is far too young and silly to be making these kinds of life choices.

In the modern context, this discourse seems to be downstream from our cultural transition from spending your time with the opposite sex looking for your future spouse and parent of your children to hunting for your next piece of fuckmeat. When we discuss what kind of women a man is into, we're not talking about what kind of wife he hopes to marry; we're talking about what sorts of fuckmeat he likes to consume and discard. It seems to me that guys obsessed with young fuckmeat tend to suffer from arrested development themselves. One example is boogie2988, who appears to have a mental self-image unchanged from when he was 19.

So keeping in mind that fuckmeat-hunting is intrinsically disordered and antisocial, it's especially disordered when a man is 40 years old and looking to use girls who are less than half his age, even if they're past the legal age of majority. By age 40, he should be married and raising his own children. We used to raise an eyebrow when a man was thirty-five with no prospects, now we just debate about whether there's something wrong with his latest slam piece being 19, because we can't bring ourselves to say that you should ever have to grow the fuck up.
 
Holy shit. Did I ever double check so hard to make sure that my fat fingers that always fuck up these phone touch screens didn't select the wrong voting option.
 
It's obvious that it's not a sexual orientation as you can chemically or physically castrate them, and they will still target kids. We also know that different regions of the brain activate when they view children and it's not the same region that people have when they see someone attractive. You could say that there is nothing sexual even about it, just the desire to do harm like @The Skeksis Emperor said.
It's called cuteness aggression When Too Cute Is Too Much, The Brain Can Get Aggressive
The holiday season is all about cute. You've got those ads with adorable children and those movies about baby animals with big eyes.

But when people encounter too much cuteness, the result can be something scientists call "cute aggression."

People "just have this flash of thinking: 'I want to crush it' or 'I want to squeeze it until pops' or 'I want to punch it,' " says Katherine Stavropoulos, a psychologist in the Graduate School of Education at the University of California, Riverside.
 
Pedophilia can easily be debunked using simple logic and I think its mainstream spread of it being a "mental health disorder" or orientation is further proof that the goverment is trying to normalize pedophilia as a concept.

It is about power and the loss of innocence because kids at any age, even 17, are inherently innocent and naive, it has nothing to due with a child's body and has everything to do with the concept of what I just mentioned.
Same can be said for zoophilia.
This is why porn addiction gets people into both zoophilia and pedophilia. The concept of a pedophilia simply being "misguided" and "oh I just want to love them" is such blatant manipulation that it makes me concerned how there are people who fall for it.

The cure for pedophilia is to strip the person from porn or give them therapy where its to address their need to hurt/exploit others in general. Most of these people, it's porn addiction.

But for the some where porn plays no part, the likelihood of rehabilitation is insanely low. Notice how a good chunk of these people end up killing others or otherwise being physically aggressive? They lack empathy, and if they have empathy they are a BPD/NPD who is still a danger to society due to their constant desire to exploit everyone around them.
 
It's obvious that it's not a sexual orientation as you can chemically or physically castrate them, and they will still target kids.
"For male sex offenders with severe or extreme paraphilias, physical castration appears to be effective. It results in a 20-year re-offense rate of less than 2.3 percent (versus 80 percent in the untreated control group), according to a large 1963 study involving a total of 1036 sex offenders by the German researcher A. Langelüddeke.[32] This was much lower than otherwise expected, compared with overall sex offender recidivism rates."

The men who want to have sex with teenagers are creeps but they are still turned on by the sexual development of these teens. Epstein was one of those. I don't buy that 'ephebophilia is a natural thing' bullshit
"One of the best indicators of men's involuntary sexual arousal in response to images is phallometry which consists in measuring penile tumescence. Multiple studies have been done to assess the male arousal profile in response to erotic stimuli featuring females of various ages.

One of the first such studies by Freund and Costell (1970) involved 48 healthy young men of average age 20 enrolled in compulsory military service with no prior history of any mental or physical problems. These men underwent phallometry during the presentation of pictures of naked males and females in three age groups: children (4-10 yrs), adolescents (12-16 yrs) and adults (17-36 yrs).

The strongest penile response was found for adult and adolescent females without significant difference between the two groups, with about 83-88% of males experiencing sexual arousal. Furthermore, 52-58% of healthy men experienced a positive penile response indicating some level of arousal to female children. The control response to males of all ages was low.

This result has since been replicated many times over the following decades.

Hall (1995) examined pedophilic stimuli among N = 80 men drawn from a community sample of volunteers recruited by newspaper advertisement. He found that 20% of men self-reported some level of sexual interest in pre-pubescent female children and 26.25% exhibited strong (equal or greater than their arousal to adult female erotic stimuli) objective penile arousal to sexual stimuli that was clearly stated as depicting pre-pubescent female children.

All of the men in the study had reported prior sexual contact with adult women, and the authors of the study noted that sexual arousal to children was not necessarily predictive of actually going on to commit child sexual abuse, as prior research had demonstrated that a large amount of child molesters do not actually exhibit a "deviant" sexual arousal pattern whatsoever (in terms of being exclusively or equally attracted to children vs adult women), when monitored.

Similarly, Becker-Blease et al. (2006) found in a sample of N = 531 undergraduate men that approximately 18% report having fantasized in the last 12 months about perpetrating child sexual abuse (e.g. "how often have you had fantasies about sex with a child?") and 8% had masturbated to these fantasies. Only a minority of men in the sample seemed to have any intentions of acting on these fantasies, however, 4% did indicate that they would possibly engage in sexual activity with a child if there was no risk of exposure.

Filip Schuster (2014) conducted a meta-analysis revealing that 22% of normal men show greater or equal sexual arousal to child stimuli (individuals up to 13 years old) than to adult stimuli. About 3% of men have a preference for pedophilia (mostly sexually aroused by prepubescents) and about 16% for hebephilia (mostly sexually aroused by pubescents).

The scientific consensus is that arousal by child pornography is not necessarily indicative of the paraphilia to be attracted to females far under the legal age of consent, and indeed, such arousal is normal."

1738413178902.png
Normal erectile responses for healthy nondeviant men (Freund and Costell 1970)
 
I don’t really understand the motivations of a pedophile
It can be summarized by these strokes:

Thy meat is young
Untouched flower not deflowered
Taboo as passion, though risky notion
Thee haveth illness beyond of thee control


If asking directly, you've already answered your own question.
They. Are. Just. Evil. Might they have soul or lack one it wont matter due to the fact that they are predators lusting for minors.

It seems weird to me. Like they’re just evil.
Because they are, frankly. I may genuinely believe that not all of them are really intend to harm, it may be that, but there is no and simply cannot be any mean or reason for justification of their ill doings, whatsoever.
And like @The Skeksis Emperor mentioned, it's an illness of mind which resulted in mental psychosis caused by certain happenings in life of an individual that have caused an irreversible damage which resulted in aformentioned individual to get themself unhumanization therapy via crossings of the points of no return.
 
Filip Schuster (2014) conducted a meta-analysis revealing that 22% of normal men show greater or equal sexual arousal to child stimuli (individuals up to 13 years old) than to adult stimuli.
Sounds a contradiction of terms. If only 22% of men showed such stimulation then they're a minority and therefore not "normal". Even that seems high and probably fake, plus I wonder about the racial breakdown of the men involved. Anybody who still trusts The Science™ is retarded.

(could've sworn I posted this already)
 
Back
Top Bottom