Pedophilia Debate Thread - What are your thoughts on people who masturbate to neko shotas?

[An Account]

Pedophiles are vibrant and majestic creatures. Listen to the beautiful mating call of the Pedius Autismius Maximus

So. Majestic.

 

[AnOminous]

Why is ephebophilia wrong in the west when getting married young used to be normal and teenage marriages are still common in some third world societies?

It's actually a myth that child marriage was ever normal or common in Western societies. While it did occur, and does still occur in areas where it is legal, it was generally unusual or for some reason other than sexual relations, such as a royal marriage to cement some alliance.

For much of the Middle Ages, average marriage age was actually mid-20s.

Western European marriage pattern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

It's actually a myth that child marriage was ever normal or common in Western societies. While it did occur, and does still occur in areas where it is legal, it was generally unusual or for some reason other than sexual relations, such as a royal marriage to cement some alliance.

For much of the Middle Ages, average marriage age was actually mid-20s.

Western European marriage pattern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There are societies where it was common. It was encouraged by the parents and and the brides managed to function in life without needing therapy. I think this indicates that while child marriage isn't ideal, it's not inherently traumatic in the right kind of environment. From wikipedia:

Before the industrial revolution, in many parts of the world, including India, China and Eastern Europe, women tended to marry immediately after reaching puberty, in their mid-teens. Societies where most of the population lived in small agricultural communities were characterized by these marriage practices well into the 19th century.[26] Men tended to marry later in societies where a married couple was expected to establish a household of their own. That usually meant that men remained unmarried until they accumulated sufficient wealth to support a new home, and were married in their mature age to adolescent girls, who contributed a dowry to the family finances.

Child marriage - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It seems kind of like FGM and circumcision: shitty, but not necessarily life ruining.

 

[AnOminous]

There are societies where it was common.

That's why I specified Western societies. The ones that do are places like your examples, China, India, Eastern Europe, that is to say, shitholes.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

That's why I specified Western societies. The ones that do are places like your examples, China, India, Eastern Europe, that is to say, shitholes.

The Russians and Ukrainians are going to get offended now.

I'd like to point out that there's a pretty strong correlation between younger marriage rates and mortality rates. If lots of babies are dying and parents are also tending to die younger, it creates a very apparent motivation to settle down and get to baby making earlier to both make sure some of the kids you have during the wife's fertility window survive and so that you can feel like you've lived a full life when you croak at 30, 40, or 50 from an infection, injury, or disease.

There were a lot more young marriages in the frontier parts of America too, for the same reason. As those places became more developed and less dangerous, it tended to gradually phase out.

So in that regard there is some justification for the "shitholes" characterization.

 

[AnOminous]

There were a lot more young marriages in the frontier parts of America too, for the same reason. As those places became more developed and less dangerous, it tended to gradually phase out.

The thing is, premature adolescence is mostly a problem in modern, too well fed societies. Even if you had young marriages it was still very dangerous to give birth and giving birth underage is even more dangerous, more likely to have complications, and when you have complications in a shithole, flat out dying is more likely too.

 

[TruthSeekingDaimon]

Hey pedophobes!
Pregnancy is not a problem.
You like abortion remember?
Gay pedos dont have any problems at all! because nobody can get pregnant.
Explain these.

Jajajjajajajajja

 

[Zonga]

Oh boy! I love throwing water on a grease fire!

So, I have a serious philosophical/ethical question, that I don't know the culturally-appropriate answer to (because I suspect there isn't a coherent one): are young teenagers their own persons, or are they the chattel property of their parents, or are they the chattel property of the state?

The answer matters LOT for this topic.

 

[LargeChoonger]

There's a difference between fucking a majority-passing 16 year old who snuck into a bar and raping a child. If it's the latter, just shoot the pedo and be done with it

 

[The Sauce Boss]

Oh boy! I love throwing water on a grease fire!

So, I have a serious philosophical/ethical question, that I don't know the culturally-appropriate answer to (because I suspect there isn't a coherent one): are young teenagers their own persons, or are they the chattel property of their parents, or are they the chattel property of the state?

The answer matters LOT for this topic.

Legally, it's a grey area depending on where you live. In some really backwards, traditionalist society, they're 'under the guardianship of their parents', which gives the parents legal right to do pretty much anything short of rape / murder them. In more modern societies, basically everyone is, for all intents and purposes, property of the state b/c such is the nature of governments, but young teenagers are subject to the rule of law of their parents. In exchange of this 'unwritten contract', the parent is expected to provide for the teenager in question and not commit acts of bodily or psychological harm to them until they are of the age of majority, at which point they are considered their own independent person beholden to the state.

 

[TruthSeekingDaimon]

are young teenagers their own persons, or are they the chattel property of their parents, or are they the chattel property of the state?

They are farm animals for breeding and harvesting meat.

What you expected a sugercoated blue pilled trash?

a) If they are their own persons then they can decide who to have sex with.
b) If their pets of their parents then parents can decide who they have sex with, have sex with the kids themselves.
c) If they are government cattle then they government can send them to any farm and breed them the way they like.

 

[Zonga]

There's a difference between fucking a majority-passing 16 year old who snuck into a bar and raping a child. If it's the latter, just shoot the pedo and be done with it

Right, this is why distinctions matter. It gets sticky though.

Rape is rape. Raping children is especially heinous. "Statutory rape" takes a bunch of different scenarios and tries to stuff them all into the "rape" bucket, and demand that they're all equally heinous. That leads to some huge problems, and eventually evolves into the whole #metoo mess we've gotten ourselves into.

The problem with the philosophy of "power differentials make consent impossible" is that there's ALWAYS some kind of power differential SOMEWHERE, and demanding absolute moral purity in all sexual negotiations means no one fucks ever, which means no one has kids, which doesn't work out so good for society.

If you're willing to say that a mature and eager 16 year old should be tried as an adult for producing child pornography and exploiting a minor when they sent a picture of themselves to a boyfriend, because they (the 16 year old) were ob orviously old enough to know better than to exploit a poor innocent child who wasn't old enough to know better (who is the *same 16 year old*), then you're basically saying that logic has no place in your sense of moral outrage.

Once you accept that logic has no place in your moral outrage, you can basically start calling people who date 21 year olds "pedophiles" completely straight faced, and start using words like "grooming" and "predator" to talk about ... Well, anything you want, basically.

But at the same time, this shit is OBVIOUSLY fucked up if someone is doing it to 6 year olds, and convincing them to go along, and then claiming they "consented". So we have to have a line SOMEWHERE, and "17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59.99 seconds, plus or minus 24 hours on leap years" is what our insane culture has neurotically fixated on. So okay! One second before that line, you're a pedo. One second AFTER that line, and you're STILL a pedo, because you were just WAITING, weren't you?

...oh crap, were gonna have a problem.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

Hey pedophobes!
Pregnancy is not a problem.
You like abortion remember?
Gay pedos dont have any problems at all! because nobody can get pregnant.
Explain these.

Jajajjajajajajja

You really started overplaying your hand after coming back to this thread. Trolling works a lot better when you have a bit of subtlety, but if you're going to act like an absolute mongoloid you need to do it straight out of the gate, otherwise your intent is too obvious.

 

[TruthSeekingDaimon]

If you're willing to say that a mature and eager 16 year old should be tried as an adult for producing child pornography and exploiting a minor when they sent a picture of themselves to a boyfriend, because they (the 16 year old) were ob orviously old enough to know better than to exploit a poor innocent child who wasn't old enough to know better (who is the *same 16 year old*), then you're basically saying that logic has no place in your sense of moral outrage.

A 14 year old sending their picture to their absolutely non-pedophile non-exploiting boyfriend is the pedophile for child pornography will get sent to prison and then Tyrone will rape the 14 year old pedphile. . . .wait. . .

You really started overplaying your hand after coming back to this thread. Trolling works a lot better when you have a bit of subtlety, but if you're going to act like an absolute mongoloid you need to do it straight out of the gate, otherwise your intent is too obvious.

At least I can see how stupid all sides are, know how to point it out. Watch it burn as all sides try to come up with the dumbest arguements.
Who are the mongoloids? everyone?
Also mongolophobia.

 

[LatinasAreTheFuture]

Whether you think pedophilia is wrong or not, I think that we can all agree that it is obviously the child’s fault that this problem is happening in the first place. These “problem children” need to be shunned and removed from society

 

[JaneThough]

Whether you think pedophilia is wrong or not, I think that we can all agree that it is obviously the child’s fault that this problem is happening in the first place. These “problem children” need to be shunned and removed from society

 

[Zonga]

Whether you think pedophilia is wrong or not, I think that we can all agree that it is obviously the child’s fault that this problem is happening in the first place. These “problem children” need to be shunned and removed from society

Couldn't you do that by just giving them to the pedos, though? Let the problem take care of itself, iow. /Justsayin

 

[Basil II]

PEDOPHILES ARE PEOPLE, TOO

Lmao at the janny who posted this, death to pedos, you can't A-Log literal subhumans.

 

[💗Freddie Freaker💗]

We're just about set to flip the technocracy switch.

To address the argument that they can't help it:
All animal behavior is determined by the genetic composition and variance of that organism.

Whenever a black person steals something, that's just something their genes made them do. In this sense, morality isn't real.

Given this information, what ought we do with criminals? There are a few ways to go about it.

1. Have an aristocrat class of people who decide the direction of society based on their thoughts and then kill the criminals to go in that direction.

2. Figure out what traits weren't around when your society was at its best and kill the people who have those traits.

3. Hold criminals in jails and let them out after a few months and hope they "learned their lesson"

There are more than just these 3 but I don't wanna be even more spergy than this post already is.

1. If we consider free will to be a myth, why would the aristocrats be exempt? What they do would also be based on their genes instead of their thoughts. And why should we trust them not to be criminals? Our current crop of aristocrats seems fond of kiddy diddling.

2. Nobody agrees on what the best state of a society is. This solution would lead to genocide and civil war.

3. That's naively hopeful. Some people have shown they can't be reformed.

Right, this is why distinctions matter. It gets sticky though.

Rape is rape. Raping children is especially heinous. "Statutory rape" takes a bunch of different scenarios and tries to stuff them all into the "rape" bucket, and demand that they're all equally heinous. That leads to some huge problems, and eventually evolves into the whole #metoo mess we've gotten ourselves into.

The problem with the philosophy of "power differentials make consent impossible" is that there's ALWAYS some kind of power differential SOMEWHERE, and demanding absolute moral purity in all sexual negotiations means no one fucks ever, which means no one has kids, which doesn't work out so good for society.

If you're willing to say that a mature and eager 16 year old should be tried as an adult for producing child pornography and exploiting a minor when they sent a picture of themselves to a boyfriend, because they (the 16 year old) were ob orviously old enough to know better than to exploit a poor innocent child who wasn't old enough to know better (who is the *same 16 year old*), then you're basically saying that logic has no place in your sense of moral outrage.

Once you accept that logic has no place in your moral outrage, you can basically start calling people who date 21 year olds "pedophiles" completely straight faced, and start using words like "grooming" and "predator" to talk about ... Well, anything you want, basically.

But at the same time, this shit is OBVIOUSLY fucked up if someone is doing it to 6 year olds, and convincing them to go along, and then claiming they "consented". So we have to have a line SOMEWHERE, and "17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59.99 seconds, plus or minus 24 hours on leap years" is what our insane culture has neurotically fixated on. So okay! One second before that line, you're a pedo. One second AFTER that line, and you're STILL a pedo, because you were just WAITING, weren't you?

...oh crap, were gonna have a problem.

Truth is, no one is sure what to do. Teenage sexuality is a moral grey area. The age of consent is just the best solution we've come up with.

 

[Hylics]

Many individuals with a pedophilic disorders report that they themselves were molested as children. The trauma received from the abuse warps their understanding of sexuality, love, identity, etc. It's difficult for us to address the fact that a young child that we see as a victim, that we care for, pity and wish to protect, may one day become the very monster that hurt them. I know that personally I've had that exact cognitive dissonance. It's an illness. If you act on it, you're a criminal. If you suffer from these desires, you're someone who needs help, and you deserve to get that help. Unfortunately, as has been repeatedly discussed in this thread, the recidivism rate is very high. I don't know what the right answer is. I wish I did.