Because adults take advantage of children. It's not right you sicko and you fucking know it.

>learning the structure of atomic orbitals
that has nothing to do with sexuality you cuntpipe

children have different capacity of understanding while they grow up. the trauma effect depends on this. what we need to discuss is society and ethic rules

i see your point

You're either a troll or an insufferable idiot. You've obviously not done five minutes research, or you'd know you're completely and utterly wrong. Either way, you're a disgusting excuse for a human being.

>>8708685
And that doesn't happen to other adults? Why don't you get societally crucified for that?

Also, children have been observed masturbating as early as 5. Take that how you will.

>>8708642

AUTISM + PEDOPHILIA?

YOU GOT A SHITTY GENETIC MAKEUP

MIGHT AS WELL AN HERO YOU WASTE OF LIFE

well, children are still developing; sexually, mentally, etc. So are most adults before 23-25, but not in the significant extent that children are. May as well sexually assault a mentally handicapped person.

>PROTIPS brought to you by /adv/

Remember to SAGE before you go an a 1000 word rant about someones fucktardedness. Sometimes after a flourish of FUCKS and ASSHOLE we bitterly punch the send button. Pre-saging allows the sewage to freely flow to the back of the board and you can finish clean without bumping the garbage you have disliked.
BONUS for thumping the mouse buttin to send while flaccid. PICS for justice

>>8708727
yes. also children likes to hold poop when they discover anal pleasure.

>>8708735
Kimmo Alm?

I'm not the OP, and I don't advocate sex with prepubescent children, but I would like to mention that it was only a few decades ago that it was perfectly fine for someone to wed a 13 year old. the whole "don't have sex with anyone under the age of 18" is a very recent and new development.

The reason why it's "sick" and "disgusting" is because society has decided that 'from now on' it will be sick and disgusting to have sex with someone that is underage.

I see to reason to oppose the law and indeed I prefer to have sex with women in my own age bracket; I'm just saying that your perception of "what's sick and wrong" was decided by taxpayer vote. I'm gonna go fix dinner.

This is why IT's wrong.

1. >I say no
2.>America say no
3.>We both say no
4.>Only young whores like Pedo's
5.>Young whores are gay
6.>And I don't understand your logic.

I DO NOT COMPLY
But This thread is obviously a nigger.

>>8708758
Also, ancient Greece. And mediaeval Japan. And the Middle East.

As far as I know, those cultures didn't go batshit insane from fucking little boys. Well maybe except Rome, but I'd attribute that to drinking lead-contaminated wine every day.

To everyone who tries to argue "It was done once, ITS JUST SOCIETY", We've found concrete, solid evidence that sexual activity in children, in general, IS NOT HEALTHY.

It has long term effects on their psychology and development, which are not good for them. It is a damaging and horrifying thing.

We didn't just ban it for some stupid, prudish reason. As we gained more knowledge, we realised how much damage it did, and took measures to stop it.

>>8708793

Yes, But nobody cares, Half the people that complain about it are just mad because they don't Get to give the little girls butthurt. 90% of America is a lie. and the 10% is a minority

>>8708793
Link to said concrete, solid evidence and studies? Shouldn't be too hard to come up with from an unbiased source, yes?

>>8708793
And those studies were done when fucking little kids was already taboo. I don't believe it unless we've got some studies from Japan or shit.

>>8708642

because they don't understand it at that age, when they grow up a little, go through puberty, make friends and understand more about life, that is the point where a memory of what they experienced as a child could trigger psychological trauma

>>8708835

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse hurr durr wikipedia, but read through the citations if you want to argue its wrong. This article is, for wikipedia, pretty damn accurate (Or was last time I checked)

>>8708642
OP you are somewhat right... the social stigma behind this probably is there because its so easy to define, compared to the more horrid ways in which people take advantage of each other daily, which are all too blurry.

>>8708758
And decades ago it was deemed acceptable by some to lynch black people on account of being black. Then for some stupid reason a bunch of taxpayers decided to say it was wrong and outlawed it. Seriously, are you fucking stupid?

It's wrong twofold because children are not fully mentally developed and often not good decision makers, and because early sexual activity can leave lasting psychological damage.

I mean, fuck, just a cursory glance at this board and the number of fantastically gay threads that pop up hourly should tell you what kind of lasting damage having a sexually inappropriate childhood can do.

>>8708874
> implying that homosexuality comes from abuse

>>8708874
>early sexual activity
Young girls are going through puberty as early as 10 now.

Yeh, all those abused kids commit suicide just because of the societal conception that what happened to them was wrong, even though they don't have the slightest problem with it personally.

:/

Fuck the psychological damage, think about the physical damage for a second. An adult male putting his large dick into a small child, that would cause serious damage.

>>8708906
>implying it doesn't
Ever notice every culture that condones homosexuality has had institutionalised paederasty? Yeah.

mot ppl:
>implying child sexual abuse and consented sex with an underage are the same
>implying

Why is pedophilia worse than murder?

Can someone answer this?

I'm not even a pedophile but I can't understand how pedophilia is seen as the worst thing ever.

>>8708981

Often, a pedophile will have affected more people, and rather than just ending one life and upsetting the lives of those around it, they may well ruin the entire lives of tens and in some cases hundreds of individuals.

Also, its preying on children. Basic human instinct should tell you that is Not Cool.

>You don't hear of children getting scarred by learning the structure of atomic orbitals too early, do you?
atomic orbitals arent a huge part of our psychology

>>8708867
more correlation vs. causation bullshit. give me some fucking brain scans and prove me why they're so massively damaged.

>>8708925

Not all adult dicks are large, But they must be in your world? Nudge nudge wink wink.

>>8709011
i started having sex at 8, im not psychologically damaged...no one cared that i i had sex

My sister is a child psychologist who works with abused children.
I met a little girl who got molested by her neighbor.

She's not happy. She did not "get over it". She is not smiling and running around with all the other kids.
Her entire existence has been altered by that asshole fingerbanging her. Every relationship she ever has is going to be overshadowed by that memory. It is a specter that will haunt her for the rest of her life.

When I was young, I wasn't thinking about sex. I didn't want it, I didn't know what it was. I was a lot happier, things were simple. The reason I love kids is because they aren't like adults, they aren't obsessed with this bullshit and they they don't worry about it. Innocence really is a beautiful thing. People who want to take that away from children piss me off.
Let children be children and keep your fucked up sexual shit and the emotional baggage that comes with it to yourself.

You're wrong. Although, I don't think there is anything wrong with being attracted to children, people just can't help that. Actually touching a child is different though. They aren't old enough to chose that, and it is extremely violating to them. Especially bad when it is family or a kidnapping which are very common.

>>8709077

Ironically, that little girl is going to become a whore after she goes through puberty.

>>8709133

Abuse can lead to hypersexuality, but in most cases it'll lead to a fear of sexuality. trufax

>>8709077
>implying children are innocent

>>8709160

Concur.

OP adults are too big for children so it doesn't work physically, and children know when they are in a potentially dangerous situation, and that brings fear. New things are scary, not nice.

TRAUMAMAMAMA

>>8709077
introducing is different from abusing. Introducing could be showing them porn

Okay Uh.

First, you are all very dumb.
Second,
WHAT THE HELL?

Seriously, none of you guys have actually asked or stated the fact that, it's all VERY RELATIVE.

If a 8 year old was madly 'in love' with a 37 year old.
And they did stuff.
The 8 year old when he/she was older, would have a memory of it, and wouldn't be grossed out, or anything.

Why am i saying that like i could state it as a fact?
Because the memories, hold feelings/emotions.
When you think of something that happened to you, you FEEL it.

And if that 8 year old was in love with that 37 year old, and was having fun while they did sexual things. He/she will hold that feeling, and when they look back at that memory, they will just feel that same feeling he/she had.


But on the other side, if a 37 year old always MOLESTED, a 8 year old. That's another story.

It's just like adults. Same thing.

Yeah kids might not know about sex. Might not know about a lot of sexual things. And they are just kids.

But so? it's all relative.

But we just say "OH NO" Out of no where, because we don't really see a kid falling in love with an adult very often..

Oh and to that fag who said kids that might have a trauma effect.
LOL. WHAT ? Get it straight yo.
Instead of researching, eh, use your common sense will yah ? :]

Oh, and the kid who started masterbated at around the age of 5, is talking here.
And the one who fell in love with a guy who was over twice her age. too.

;]

>>8709160
>Implying children understand everything they do.

Hell no, they just do whatever comes to mind. They don't think about shit and they don't understand the consequences of anything. They don't have enough experience for that.
That is basically innocence incarnate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence

>>8709065
but did you have sex with a significantly older person?

>>8709077
GEE THAT SURE SOUNDS A LOT LIKE RAPE

HEY GUYS, DID YOU HEAR? HETEROSEXUAL MALES SOMETIMES RAPE FEMALES. WE SHOULD CLEARLY MAKE IT TABOO TO BE HETEROSEXUAL, BECAUSE SOME HETEROSEXUAL GUYS ARE ASSHOLES WHO ARE JUST INTERESTED IN SEX

>>8709230

IM PRETTY SURE YOURE CONFUSING CHILDREN WITH EXTROVERTS

>>8709227
>Instead of researching, eh, use your common sense will yah ?

>>8709243

Yes, she was 34, and my aunt. You mad?

>>8709291
You're a dude? Aww, my boner went away...

I don't think being a pedophile is wrong exactly, but raping, abusing, or taking advantage of a child is. It's a shame that those who have those thoughts, but don't act on them, are still considered worse than murderers and can't get help.

Nothing wrong with ephebophilia though, people get them confused.

>>8708981
It is not worse than murder by any means. Anybody who thinks this is utterly stupid.

>>8709227
You don't know what you're talking about. I had bad sexual encounters as a kid and was happy during then. Now it haunts me after I got older and realized what actually happened.

>>8709227
Fact:Children know jack shit about sex
Fact:Because they know shit, it is up to an adult to "show them"
Fact:This act is in and of itself exploiting a child, because they don't know what they are doing.
If I fuck a dog up the ass, it didn't choose. I just fucked it up the ass and it accepted it. Same thing with kids.
Sex always comes with emotional baggage, even for adults a good portion of the time. Why the fuck would you want to throw all that shit on a child's shoulders?

I understand that and i agree that innocence is beautiful and all.

But, that's because she was ABUSED.
Main topic here is what's so wrong with pedophilia.
And what you posted is just the NEGATIVE, side to it.

For example, I'm a weird case i suppose.

I loooved My cousin, who was 5 years older than me. Or 6, not sure.
I was around 7-8, and i have memories of us, almost kissing, and playing hide and seek. Also running around the house and me falling, then him falling on top of me and, what i didn't understand back then, i now understand it was him humping me?..

I'm not traumatized. :S
=s I wasn't traumatized.

:S I wasn't scared...
I had no fear like most of you stated. =x

Soo.. Uh, I think you all are just like the rest of the fags out there, closed minded. Not really thinking out the box.


COMMON SENSE PEOPLE.
COOOOOOOMMMON SEEEENSEE..

A child can be described as a young human, with barely no experience in life, that cannot make decisions by itself. It is easily influencable and its opinion cannot be trusted at any time, as it still does not have the ability to generate a critic opinion which rely on its proper values and its own decisions.

Thus, pedophilia is wrong for a single reason; you're abusing of the naivety and credibility of a young human, which cannot make decisions on its own yet. And in any case, having non-consensual sex with anybody is called rape.

>>8709333
Fagot alert.

>>8709246
You cannot have sex with a child without exploiting their innocence for your own carnal desires. Is this really different then rape? They didn't choose it, they just did what you told them too because they thought they were supposed to.

children cannot defend themselves. So as adults we must look after them until they can make the decision themselves.

I do like your point on female rape though, no way it can be as bad as the femanazis make it out to be.

>>8709381
I dunno, what if she likes getting touched in the pussy, and what if she's willing once she gets introduced?

>>8709369
So what about Native Americans? Why do they get the short end of the stick and no one gives two fucks about it? Their percieved naivete was abused, but nobody gives a shit. inb4 Red Herring, etc., I just want to know some opinions.

Because its rape. That's why. Any questions?

fuck you, my father molested me for years. any sexual contact makes me sick to the point where i don't even bother beginning relationships.

it was scary and weird and painful when i was a kid, and it just felt wrong and i cannot shake that feeling, no matter how much i want to.

>>8709381
>implying children are innocent.

i know a pair of 10 yr old lesbians

>>8709366
Getting dry humped by your weird cousin without you knowing is different then having his dick shoved into you, isn't it?

>>8709246
>Two consenting adults who know exactly what they are doing
Okay, nothing wrong with that

>A 40 year old creeper telling his neighbors daughter he "loves" her then "making love" to her all while she is confused, crying, scared, and generally not happy. But she goes along anyway because this is what love is...even if it feels weird and she wishes it would stop.

Yeah, totally not rape. Perfectly fine.

>>8709421

A children cannot easily stand up for itself and defend what he think is right...

Native americans, on the other hands, are human beings just like us and should be able to stand their point. Even if they have the short end of the stick, they're still adults and should be able to properly defend theirself. (I know that it's sadly not the case though.)

Hey OP. You get your answer yet?

If I could remove from my childhood how early I learned about and what role sex came to have in my life, I would.

It would've been nice to have a longer childhood with no grasp or knowledge about sex and sexuality.

>>8709421
>Implying native Americans where not aware they were getting raped up the ass by the government.

They were. And plenty of people DO give a shit about that.

>>8709441

>implying you don't schlick to daddy every single night

>>8709441
Butthurt catamite detected.

You loved the sensation, don't bullshit us. It's ingrained in our biology.

>>8709488

nope, and

>>8709505

no bullshit here, sir

non-pedophile here, i've fapped to pico to chico :D :D

#8709333

Never MEANT to say it was right or wrong.
Just stated the fact that it's very RELATIVE.
And who the hell said I want to throw such a thing on a 'kid's' shoulder?
No. Read my post again.

#8709316
Uh, You're lying.
Why? Because it doesn't make sense what you're saying. " I had a bad sexual encounter and was happy during then. "

You mean someone molested you but you as a kid kept on your life happy right?

But now that you're an adult you're traumatized by this?

Lol, you fail.

>>8709451
Well, all lesbians were ten years old at some point.

Usually after age nine.

I stopped raging at these threads a long time ago. These are clearly troll threads yet r9k never seems to catch on.

8709452

Of course it is :]

But Ha, Like i stated before. ..
It's all RELATIVE.

Aha.'

ITT:
People using reason and logic
and
Pedophiles lying to themselves so they feel better

>>8709366
So we should make rape legal because at some point in time one girl enjoyed it, right?

It's a very simple fact that children don't have the capacity to fully understand the implications of what they do. Even if only half of the children who are involved in sexual experiences with someone older then them, it's still wrong to put them in that position in the first place.

Also, anecdotal evidence is bad evidence.

>>8709559
It probably is trolls, but a serious conversation is going on regardless. At least it isnt /b/ where every single thread is a "troll thread" even when it isnt.

>>8709573
ITT: People trying to use logic and reason with trolls

Also ITT: Successful trolls

If a sexual act occurs between two parties where one did not give consent, then it is rape. Children cannot give consent. Thus sexual acts between adults and children are always rape. Rape is wrong.

I do not get what is so hard to understand about this.

I'm against paedophilia for a few reasons, but they boil down to "The kid's body isn't ready for that yet" and "they can't give informed consent".

I mean, the situation is greyer when you get past puberty, sure, but before that there's some damn good reasons not to play Cave Explorer with the little ones.

0/10 bro it's obvious its the samefag from a couple days ago asking why is rape so bad

of course it is wrong if one kid is being abused by there parents or someone older. Then they feel it's ok to go and sexually abuse someone else the same thing happened to me when I was in Preschool it just fucks with your orientation and causes confusion even sexual addiction. It's not that big a deal if someone gets raped or if someone gets touched as a child until it happens to them. It's called karma dumbass

>>8709634
And why cant children give consent?

>>8709366

Your personal experience doesn't account for everyone else you dumb, seething cunt.

>>8709806

Because MOST of them are too young to understand the implications of what they do, and their brains aren't done developing.

I can see why this argument might be relevant for someone that's been through puberty, but having sex with pre-pubescent children is very physically damaging, and the pregnancy or genital complications that occur as a result are horrible.

>>8708642
>You don't hear of children getting scarred by learning the structure of atomic orbitals too early, do you?
This is the awesomest comparison I have ever read

>>8709870
>Because MOST of them are too young to understand
>implying women don't have the mental capacity of children anyway

>>8709870
And they're too young to understand the implication of developing bad eating habits. Yet we don't think it's abusive when a parent takes her kid to a fast food place.

>>8709938

Try using a real argument, yeah?

>>8709961

...How the hell does that even relate to sexuality? At least try using a good comparison, fucking retard.

>>8709990
you are implying that sex is more detrimental to their health than terrible eating habits.

>>8709990
You said a child can't consent to sex because he/she (let's be honest, she) doesn't understand the implications and possible negative impact of what she's doing.

We say a child can consent to eating a hamburger right? Yet they, likewise, don't understand the implications and possible negative impact of what they are doing.

Why can a child consent in the latter instance. Don't say "sex" without explaining to me what about sex makes it different.

>>8710034

Bad eating habits are a result of bad parenting or social influence in American culture. Having sex with a pre pubescent child is very physically and emotionally damaging. If you really think rape is on the same scale as bad eating habits, I really don't know what to tell you.

>>8710060
Having bad eating habits can be physically and emotionally damage. Actually much more obviously so than sex.

You called it "rape" just then, but that is begging the question. It is only rape if she can't consent. But she quite clearly can consent, unless by "consent" you mean she has to know everything about it. And in that case, feeding her a cheeseburger is like rape, because she can't consent to that.

>>8708727
rape causes PTSD
SD and other disorders. Sex abuse causes hypersexuality, and other mental diseases.

>happened in the past.
so did slavery, fornication, and prohibition. (To name a few.) We learn and grow.

>>8710095

Yeah, because having bad eating habits when you were a kid often leads to emotional trauma that makes you unable to function in a relationship in your adult life.

>>8710136
Do you see the fatasses here? They are clearly emotionally crippled. Being fat can be devastating to a person. Why are you so flippant about it? Is it just because you can't come up with an actual response?
What about diabetics? They can lead to actual physical damage, not sopme made up shit.

>>8710116
>fornication
wat?

>>8710170

This is a red herring issue that is not comparable to sexual molestation in any way whatsoever, so I really don't feel like playing this stupid game with you.

Having sex with a pre-pubescent child is physically damaging, their bodies aren't built for sex and God forbid a little girl gets pregnant from it. Ignoring all the emotional/psychological reasons, the physical reasons alone are enough to outlaw sex with pre-pubescent children.

>>8710228
And being obese is physically and emotionally damaging. The physical damage done by poor eating habits alone should be enough to outlaw taking your kid to mcdonald's then, right?

You keep saying that it's totally different, yet you are unable to explain what it is that makes it totally different.

>>8710196
as in sex before marriage was illegal.

>>8710251

Again, red herring fallacy. Not arguing this with you.

>>8710265
I'm pretty sure you meant to say that you can't argue this. Because that is obviously the case

>>8708642
>it's just bullshit societal conditioning basically tells children to be scared of this, and it's a self-fulfilling prophecy from there. Just like how women get conditioned to think rape "strips you of your sexuality" or some feminist horseshit like that.


I think there's a depressing amount of truth in this.

>>8708727
>Also, children have been observed masturbating as early as 5.

I did this myself. And no, I was never sexually abused or exposed to adult content or somehow 'corrupted'.

>>8709333
>Sex always comes with emotional baggage
...Riiiiiiiight.

>>8710286

It's a red herring, you're trying to "win" an argument by presenting something unrelated to the topic and changing the subject. So yes, I'm ducking out if you're going to keep pressing an issue that's unrelated.

>>8710329

No, hes just making a point about how fucked up society is that it allows one fucked up thing to happen quite happily, yet gets completely batshit insane over another. Kinda how weed and coke are illegal, but booze, cigs and every other fucked up perscription drug are legal.

>>8710170
srsly? If A 5 year old eats a hamburger, they can live a normal life. If a kid is molested/ abused (anything of a sexual nature)/ or raped, they're scarred for life.

>>8710329
No, I'm trying to win it by showing you that your premises are incorrect. Which, as far as I can tell, I have done.

>>8710411
And what if they go to macdonald's weekly? There are kids who are fat because of what their parents do to them, you know. It is damaging, physically and emotionally.

But more to the point, we say that the kid can consent to that. Kids can consent to sex. Just like they can consent to lots of thing. You people have taken a legal fiction and touted it around like is some fucking immutable truth.

>>8709806
Parens patriae, because in sex cases children are not considered a legal party and the state can intercede on their behalf. Obviously in cases of rape the state did not give consent.

>>8709961
>>8710045
>>8710251
>>8710286
Look, your pathetic fallacious analogy falls apart on several levels. Let me break it down for you so you can stop wasting everyone's time, including your own.

First you'll have to prove the psychological damage caused solely by obesity. Next you'd have to prove the obesity was caused solely by bad eating habits. Then you'd have to prove the bad eating habits were formed solely by the parent(s). Finally you'd have to prove the parent(s) committed these acts. Then and only then would you possibly have any kind of case alleging harm or potential to harm by commission of the parent on behalf of the child.

You'd have a better case against the fast food companies (and people have tried it, ie Pelham v. McDonald's Corp.) than you would against the parent, especially as you can't prove intent to harm.

>>8710511
I don't have to prove any of that stuff. Hypothesize that it's true and kids can be damaged form that. Can they still not consent to eating a cheeseburger? Of course they can.

>>8710508

forcing kids to go to school can also cause trauma. let's just say kid's can't consent to anything and keep them wrapped up in a box.

>>8710411
Feeling pleasure at a young age will leave someone sexually scarred for life now? Hahaha, no. It's quite simple to see that this is mostly a case of social conditioning and stigma. All these people who had sexual encounters when they were younger in America feel more "damaged" because they are being told that they are damaged, used, abused, raped, etc etc by either psychologists or society in general. Lots of women simply don't remember, or don't care. Most of these women don't reside from America.

>>8710561
Why? You are the idiots who think sex is somehow special and kids can't consent to it. I think they can consent to eating a cheeseburger, BECAUSE THEY OBVIOUSLY CAN. Just like they can obviously consent to sex. That you think it's gross doesn't mean they didn't consent.

guy with th food comparison here

BTW, I was "molested" when I was a kid. I am not emotionally scarred from it.

>>8710511
>First you'll have to prove the psychological damage caused solely by obesity. Next you'd have to prove the obesity was caused solely by bad eating habits. Then you'd have to prove the bad eating habits were formed solely by the parent(s). Finally you'd have to prove the parent(s) committed these acts. Then and only then would you possibly have any kind of case alleging harm or potential to harm by commission of the parent on behalf of the child.

Shit, that about applies to half of the obese kids in America today.

>>8710558
You'd have to prove all of that or the chain of culpability is broken, do you understand? Laws are not based on hypotheses. That is why your red herring fails.

Back to the topic, you're fucking retarded if you think children can consent to sex. I mean that legally and psychologically. Just throwing that out there to everyone reading this thread.

>>8710620

and a lot of kids that were molested are. why do you think you're special?

Other people would call me a pedophile, but such a statement would be patently false; I am a lolicon and I do not advocate child abuse. Loli should be kept to 2D only, afterall.
Pedophiles are lumped with sexual predators, which is unfortunate. There is nothing inherently wrong with pedophilia. An adult and a child are perfectly capable of having a loving relationship, but 90% of pedophiles simply rape kids, which is damaging and scarring, no matter the age. In an ideal world, there would be nothing wrong with a pedophile having a consensual relationship with a child, but then again the world is full of faggots.

>>8710511
So do you have to prove that having sexual stimulation causes (and is the sole cause of) psychological damage? I mean, what if it was social stigma? Can you prove it?

Go back to bed Kimmo/Sysop.

>>8710645
You can't prove that being "molested" directly leads to psychological damage. There could be causal intercessions, like society, and assholes telling you you were abused. You can't prove it either.

>>8710656

in an ideal world, having sex with a prepubescent child wouldn't cause extreme physical damage and pregnancy complications that could lead to death.

alas, it's not an ideal world and a child's prepubescent body isn't biologically built for sex. sucks for you, huh?

>>8710691
of course, even if that were the case, you would still be against it.

>>8710691
What if he just licked her vagina a little bit? That can't lead to pregnancy or death.

>>8710645
So, What if she starts grinding on your sleeping body, and then when you wake up, she tells you she wants sex? Did she not consent to sex in that case?

If you say "no", you have to go through the most insincere mental contortions imaginable.

Anyone who believes in Santa or the Easter Bunny cannot consent to sex. This is scientific fact.

>>8710759

You might have a point if such a scenario occurred anywhere other than your wet dreams.

inb4youlie

>>8710781
Well why can they consent to eating food that is bad for them?

Or are you saying they can't? At least that would be somewhat more consistent.

>>8710666

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10197407
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=10450264
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10450264
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/102529637/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12577276
http://jiv.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/088626000015005003

there are some links, some medical studies that have been done to show that molestation can lead to disorders such as depression, PTSD, etc.

of course, you won't read any of them, but just throwing that out there.

OP is a Catholic.

I cant believe nobody pointed out the fact that this is delicious copypasta

>>8710666
>>8710683

You're not understanding. The food analogy goes like this: the parent caused harm to the child by taking them to McDonald's. In order to prove that the parent caused harm, we have to go through all of those legal obstacle courses, hence why no such case has ever existed. The parent taking the child to McDonald's is not a crime, the parent causing harm to the child is, do you understand now? We have to prove that the crime itself existed in order to charge the parents with anything.

We don't have to do any of that in cases of statutory rape, because the rape itself is the crime. All we have to do is prove that the rape took place, without needing to prove intent because it's a strict liability crime, and we don't have to argue about consent because again, children cannot give consent via parens patriae.

The world of law is quite fascinating, folks. I suggest you read up on it sometime.

>>8710785
So you are saying it is *literally* impossible for that to occur? It obviously isn't.
You are just turning away.

>>8710815

No. I'm saying that it, in fact, does not happen. We don't base laws on ridiculous hypotheticals.

>>8710813
lol
I'm a lawyer

And I'm not talking about legality here. If this argument were "is sex with an underage girl illegal?" this would be a much shorter (and extremely pointless thread).

I know that, according to the law, kids can't consent to sex. I am telling you that you are idiots if you think that actually means kids can't consent to sex

>>8710832
Why do you bring up laws?
Is it because that's the only argument you aren't going to lose? We all know it's against the law, bro. That's not even an interesting conversation. OP was asking why it's "wrong."

>>8710805
And do you need me to cite studies that show that eating poorly can lead to obesity and psych problem?

I was told I had to prove it was the sole cause. Do any of those studies control for everything else? I highly doubt it.

>>8710801
Because eating food=getting fucked in the underdeveloped vagina/ass of a child amirite?

>>8710838
I'm the emperor of the fucking planet.

I can tell you now that Jellybeans are now the currency of the realm.

>>8710892

i highly doubt you READ any of those studies.

>>8710903
They obviously aren't they same thing (which is what that symbol means), but you guys have yet to explain what is the relevant difference.

>>8710927

because sex =/= eating food?

seems pretty different to me, bro.

>>8710924
I didn't have to.
It is not possible that they could have controlled for everything else. What I was told I had to do to prove it was impossible.

>>8710936
I know they aren't different. I jsut said that. You need to show me what the relevant difference is, and why that difference is relevant.

>>8710948

of course you're not going to read the studies.

you can go ahead and post your obesity articles, but i don't see how the issues are related.

>>8710960
*are different
obviously

>>8710927
I am 90% sure that if you can't see the difference between eating food and having sex with a child, that is the definition of autistic/retarded and pedophile.

>>8710860
Maybe if you can read you'll see I was responding to the food analogy argument, and showing why it fails, and not to the OP.

>>8710966
They are related in that the argument I posed to you shared the same structure. If consent require that you know everything about something that is potentially harmful, kids can't consent to eating cheeseburgers. If it doesn't require that, then you have to revise your reasoning for why kids can't consent to sex. This is simple logic.

ITT: one pedo samefagging

it is the same anyways where are my jellybeans?

>>8710801
I think everyone arguing in favor of a child's ability to consent has never been a parent, or had to care for children. children are by instinct, obedient little robots. yes, some kids are bratty, but if you are a person of authority in their lives (an uncle, trusted family friend) 90% of the time they will do what you say.

if you put a hamburger in front of a kid and tell them there will be no ice cream if they don't eat it, they will probably do it. even more sinister, if the kid is raised eating nothing but hamburgers, and never veggies, they will come to demand it and refuse healthier food. kids are mostly blank slates.

if you start touching your little niece, the chance she will fight back is pathetically slim. as is the chance she will tell someone about it. in her mind, Uncle Anon is a good person, so if she feels bad about something he did to her, then she is being a bad girl. Hell, if you whipped her with an electrical cord, made her eat her own vomit, and stubbed out lit cigarettes on her bare skin, she will neither fight back nor tell anyone about it.

>>8710982
I FUCKING SAID THEY OBVIOUSLY AREN'T THE SAME THING

Are you serious?

here, I'll quote it for you
>They obviously aren't they same thing
There, I see differences. Now explain to me why the differences are morally relevant.

>>8711005

kids can't consent to going to school.
kids can't consent to where they live.
kids can't consent to, kids can't consent to...

this argument gets really stupid because there are A LOT of things kids can't technically "consent" to.

>>8711005
People need to eat to live.

If the parents are responsible for bad health, I believe sometime in the future, we'll be able to prosecute parents for making their kids fat.

However, you can overcome obesity through exercise.

Sex=/=eating poorly you fucking ignorant pedophile.

>>8711000
I didn't bring up laws, either. So why respond to me with "hurr durr, it's illegal"
I know it's illegal, brah

>>8710948
I seriously don't get how people like you can read a post and move on like it was never written.

I don't have to prove that the sex act was the sole cause of the psychological damage. You know why? Because I'm not claiming the adult caused psychological damage. I'm only claiming the adult raped the child.

You however, are alleging that the parent caused psychological damage to the child, and did this via taking the child to McDonald's. Hence you've got a lot of things to prove before your claim is valid.

This is why the food analogy is fallacious and inaccurate. The two incidents (rape and McDonald's) are two entirely different crimes in discussion.

>>8711041
You keep telling me that the two aren't identical, and I keep telling you that I know that.

Sex is a biological imperative as well as eating. What should the fact that people need to eat to live matter to whether or not kids can consent to eating a cheeseburger?

The food/sex analogy is excellent. I think the only problem is that people say that children can't consent to sex, not that children can't consent at all.

That said, they offer no reason why children can't consent to sex. And okay, for the sake of argument, let's say they can't. Then what about touching/fondling/oral stuff/etc. Suddenly the argument expands to children can't consent to anything sexual, not just sex. But now the interesting thing is that children don't even recognize some things as sexual. If you do something to a child that the child does not see as sexual, confusing, stimulating, or anything like that, then is it a problem?

>>8711077
Why are you interjecting with things nobody is talking about?
I get it; it's illegal. If you want to have this boring conversation, leave me out of it. I am trying to figure out what is immoral about sex with a child and whether or not kids can consent

>>8711005
there is no such thing as "consent" from children. this is why the State steps in to prosecute child abuse and will remove a child from a bad home. children have no experience and no confidence in their own authority. they have only a rudimentary value system, which actually changes along predictable patterns as they age. they lack the cognitive building blocks of an adult's mind, so they can't go through the same decision making process that an adult goes through.

a child has no understanding of the full ramifications of sexual intercourse, so they can't consent with the full understanding, like an adult can. its like settlers buying Manhattan Island for some beads and animal pelts.

NSA @1-320-266-1249


St Cloud, Mn USA

>>8710781

If we're on the imaginary friends vibe, anyone who believes in Jesus, Muhammad and all the other happy tree friends can't consent either... :)

>>8711122
Ok, so if kids can't consent to anything, why is sex with a kid any worse than doing anything else with a kid?

let's say, giving them poor eating habits (since that has an obvious harm)

>>8711100
No, the food/sex analogy is fucking stupid and it is abominable that the same retard samefagging has actually succeeded with this travesty of a red herring.

It began with this retarded statement:
>And they're too young to understand the implication of developing bad eating habits. Yet we don't think it's abusive when a parent takes her kid to a fast food place.

See how it is logically disconnected from the topic at hand right from the beginning? The person claims that an adult is abusing a child by taking the child to a fast food place, yet this foundational premise is never supported (and for good reason, because it's legally fucking impossible), and then tries to use that base to draw the comparison to statutory rape, in which case the abuse is already legally defined and proven many times over.

>>8711122

Funny thing that you brought that up. The Indians thought they were pulling a fast one on whitey, and the white men thought they were pulling a fast one on the stupid savages. Why is one direction more moral or consensual than the other?

Back to kids though, you're mixing up the English word "consent" with the concept of "legal consent". Consent just means "saying yes". Kids can say yes. Kids can give consent to anything, it's just a function of language. Kids can't give "informed consent" to a list of things, including binding contracts and sex. But to say it doesn't exist at all for kids is a bit silly.

>>8711172

You don't understand the food/sex analogy. We have a bunch of retards in this thread saying "kids can't consent to anything", without understanding that by making it so broad they make every interaction with kids illegal, not just sex.

Well I didn't make the food analogy but that's my interpretation.

>Well I didn't make the food analogy but that's my interpretation.

Methinks thou doth protest too much, samefag.

>>8711172
here
for the extreme simpletonn

sex with a kid can be harmful, and kids can't consent... so it's wrong

feeding a kid macdonald's can be harmful, and kids can't consent, so it's wrong

OR, if you think they can consent to eating a cheeseburger

Kids can't consent to sex because they don't understand the potentially harmful implications

Kids can't consent to eating macdonalds because they don't understand the potentially harmful imlications

It's pretty fucking straightforward.

>>8711153

The consent argument is complete bullshit, the only real only real reason there can be is that we as a society don't want it to be 'normal' - and so it isn't. The only hicup to that fact will be when they eventually find the gene that makes people that way, much like homosexuality was AN ABOMINATION for a few hundred years but is now accepted once again that its just genetics. Even then we'll just go 'nup still don't want this'.

Every other argument just boils down to social stigma and society freaking out (YOU'RE A VICTIM YOU'RE A VICTIM NO REALLY YOU'RE A VICTIM, WHY ARE YOU NOT ACTING LIKE A VICTIM WHY ARENT YOU DEPRESSED AND ON MEDICATION - until they are depressed and on medication, at which point every study declares that abuse fucked their lives up.

Actually that brings up a fun topic, what IS gonna happen when we find out what causes some to be pedophiles and that they literally cannot help it?

>>8711209
>feeding a kid macdonald's can be harmful, and kids can't consent, so it's wrong

Why is it harmful? Can you prove it?

>Kids can't consent to eating macdonalds because they don't understand the potentially harmful imlications [sic]

What harmful implications? Can you prove it?

See the logical disconnect there? And before you attempt the same retarded reach-around, see >>8710805 for proof of harm from sexual acts with children, which again, I don't even have to prove to begin with, because I am not alleging the adult caused psychological harm, I am only claiming the adult raped the child.

I don't see what's so wrong with making it illegal to give your children an unhealthy diet while they are under your parentage.

Hell, make it a felony. There are worse things to spend tax dollars on.

>>8711229
>The consent argument is complete bullshit
This is the truest thing in the thread that I didn't post.

>>8711100
I don't know what children recognize as sexual. I don't know what children identify a sexual act as, if they don't recognize it as sexual. I do know that sexual acts hold a significant place in a child's mind, and they recognize them as something apart from other activities. like a child can recognize a "bad" word as different from a normal word.

I was babysitting two daughters of a friend. one was 10, the other 5. we were playing a with balloons, when the 10 y/o stuffed them under her shirt and pretended that she had big breasts. she actually bounced them and flounced around and they both tried to sit in my lap. 10 is too old to be sitting in an adults lap! she never acted like that when her mother was around, and I know that her step father had molested her a year earlier.

she knew what boobs were for (getting male attention). she probably had some idea what arousal was, because I know that children have the same sexual reflexes that adults do. It was a crude form of flirting, but I would not be able to argue that she was asking for sex, because she had no idea what sexual intercourse was. what is more, her little sister was imitating her! of course, this is what small kids do: they imitate the older kids, even if they have no clue what they are actually doing.

>>8711236
It leads to obesity and depression
That is why it's harmful

Is this gonna go the same way?
>prove it is the sole cause
prove sex is the sole cause of psychological damage in people who were molested
>I don't have to because it's illegal
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING?

>>8711236
You are cowering behind the fact that it is illegal

I know it is illegal, bro. That isn't what we're talking about.

Pedophilia is a fetish, it's no different than having a fixation for feet or bondage. Case solved.

Rape/unwanted molestation/abuse is wrong. If the little kid wants to feel grandpas penis, its okay even if he doesnt know what hes doing. If the child decides to do so without ANY kind of pressure from the older person, its k.

As a child you played show me yours ill show you mine with your friend when mommy wasnt looking.

When I was younger me and my cousin bathed together a couple times in a jacuzzi. We pointed each other with ourd dicks and said "im pointing at you!"
Innocence (or ignorance as you want to call it) is good. Sexuality develops naturally as an increase of hormones which tell you "dude, start expanding the species". Now you see 10 year old lesbians because thats what they get from the media. They experiment and decide it feels good man. So theyre not really lesbians till they are IN LOVE with a chick

What sex feels to the kid is nothing. If a straight woman who likes men( and knows nothing about male anatomy) is blindfolded and told shes gonna have sex with a man, but instead does it with another woman, she'll say it feel good. Sensations and thoughts are two different things.

Sexuality isnt bad or shameful. Its a natural part of life and should be treated just like that. As normal as eating and breathing. Society makes it taboo because "oh noes! if it feels good then it must be bad!! sinner !! BUUUUUUUURNNNN IN HEEEEAAALLLLEEEE"

You better discuss this if i wasted 5 minutes of my life when i could be countinuing this assignment i have to do

>>8711209
agreed. if a kid can "consent" to a cheeseburger, its only because they know that the cheeseburger tastes good. they have no idea what trans-fats, bovine antibiotics and growth hormones, proper nutrition, or factory farming are. And if given this information, they wouldn't have a context in which to appreciate its significance, so they couldn't assign a value to it and use it to inform their decision to consent or not

>>8711229

The difference is gay people can, believe it or not, be adults. I know, right? It's pretty damned hard to imagine. And gay adults screwing other gay adults is not a bad thing. Pedophiles are by nature, attracted to people that are not adults. There is nothing that can be done about that.

Solutions? Therapy, medication, and if they are a danger to society because they are unable to control said urges, admittance to mental hospitals, just like we do to all the other people with fucked up brains.

>>8711252
At least there is intellectual honesty there. The only problem is that people won't agree with you anymore.

>>8711264

What I was talking about was more along the lines of things that adults may find sexual but kids may not. If you are a pedophile with a foot fetish and you tickle a little girl's feet, that may be sexual for you. You may be molesting the girl in a sense. But it's very unlikely that the girl even knows something sexual is going on. Is that wrong and harmful, wrong but not harmful, or fine?

>>8711197
No, I understand it perfectly, and it is fundamentally flawed for numerous reasons which I have outlined repeatedly already. And yes, kids cannot consent to anything, but that doesn't make every interaction with children illegal, it only makes the interactions with children that require consent of the participants to begin with, such as sex, illegal. Hence why we need the consent of the parent, acting on behalf of the child, for all kinds of activities, ranging from field trips to boxing lessons.

Let me try to put it this way:

I am saying that it is wrong for a parent to stab their child with a knife because it is a crime (and because it harms the child, but I don't have to prove that because stabbing is a crime to begin with).

Food analogy retards are saying it is wrong for a parent to force their child to board a bus because that might lead to a lifetime of bus-riding which might lead to the bus getting into an accident which might lead to the child being harmed. Such a contrived chain is impossible to prove, and the food analogy retards have provided no support whatsoever for the initial claim (which in this case, is that forcing the kid onto the bus causes harm).

Do you see it now? Goddamn.

>>8711264

>I do know that sexual acts hold a significant place in a child's mind, and they recognize them as something apart from other activities. like a child can recognize a "bad" word as different from a normal word.

No it doesn't and the only reason they know some words are 'bad' from others is because their parents teach them that :/

As long as there is no violence involved trama only comes from the whole being told that people shouldnt be touching you in your special places - then counter being told by the person who IS touching you in your special place not to tell anyone, which then creates conflict in the kids mind which causes acting out, which then leads to other stuff, then BAM. Medication and depression time.

>>8711321
The same analogies are done. Children can't decide EVERYTHING but still have the basic concepts of wrong and right.
They surely cant be forced into "can i stab you with a knife" but sure cant be agreed with when saying "im not going to school"

How could licking a girl's vagina be harmful. She would love it, and she's rubbing up and down my leg anyway. Better that she experience that with me, so she will have an understanding

>>8711282
Eating at McDonald's leads to obesity and depression? Can you prove that? (And better men than you have already tried it, by the way.)

>>8711368
In the right doses:
Greases - obesity
Hormones - depression.
Proved have you been

>>8711172
Again with the legal arguments. This is NOT about legality.

>>8711400

lolno, provide some sources.

>>8711368

Wasnt there a film made that did ? :)

>>8711282
actually... that is a pretty weak argument. that anon should have pointed to this post >>8710805 which gives studies in support of the idea that molesting kids fucks them up for life.

if you are going to argue that sex doesn't warp children, then you would have to isolate what "sex" means. if you are just talking about physical pleasure, then you are in the clear. unfortunately, its impossible to experience physical pleasure without some action causing it. if the kid has discovered that squeezing their Barney plush between their legs feels nice, that is harmless. if Uncle Anon is doing the squeezing, that changes the situation entirely. its the inclusion of another person that causes the problem, because it messes with the child's understanding of relationship roles and social structure. I would have to assume that children understand that sexual touching is something they should not be doing with an adult, because they are so often messed up after it happens.

I also think its a bit like gravity. no one knows how it works, but it works every time, so no one fucks with it.

>>8711368
a Big Mac with large fries and coke are something like 2000 calories. obviously eating that much in a single meal will lead to obesity.

as for depression...

>>8711354
I don't even know what the fuck you're saying here. If you're trying to somehow allege that a kid cannot consent to being stabbed with a knife, you're on the side that claims kids can consent to begin with, so that's a rather self-defeating argument. You can't have it both ways, folks.

In fact, I think I may be onto something here. Why is it wrong for adults to beat and stab children if the children gave express consent from the beginning? Answer that question and you may finally realize why we as a society hold statutory rape to be wrong.

>>8711439
>relationship roles and social structure

This may well be the fault of excessively strict social roles, rather than any real damage. Although I'm not sure much can be done to change this.

>>8711430
Supersize Me
you are correct.
or, were not really asking, and trying to be snarky?

>>8711411

So you're saying that we should toss aside all matters of practicality and focus on armchair philosopher bullshit of "is this stupid hypothetical that will never happen REALLY IMMORAL FOR REALS, anon?" so you don't feel morally culpable when you stick your dick in a child?

And THAT'S an interesting discussion for you?

Cool story, bro.

Being obese used to be cause for the obese person to be depressed, but given how fat America is now, its seen as perfectly normal (or they just change the measure for what is technically obese). Funny how things change like that. It's almost like social norms are fluid and aren't based in like, anything other than popular opinion.

>>8711439
Also you are linking pedophilia directly with incest. One can exist without the other, and the dynamics are going to be different for each.

>>8711321

>And yes, kids cannot consent to anything, but that doesn't make every interaction with children illegal, it only makes the interactions with children that require consent of the participants to begin with, such as sex, illegal.

It makes almost every action with kids illegal because nonconsensual actions are mostly illegal and could be calling things like false imprisonment or assault. I mean ask yourself if you did not consent to eating a sandwich and someone forced you to eat a sandwich anyway, would that be legal or illegal? It's illegal! Even medical procedures can be classified as assault if they are done without consent.

>Hence why we need the consent of the parent, acting on behalf of the child, for all kinds of activities, ranging from field trips to boxing lessons.

This is a good point, we have a mechanism for actions involving children to have the stamp of consent which avoids the problem above, it's just given by the parents instead of the kids. Why can't parents give consent for their children to have sex then?

>>8711483

supersize me is a very extreme situation.

obviously, eating mcdonalds EVERY FUCKING DAY for EVERY FUCKING MEAL will be harmful, but every once in a while isn't going to make you obese and depressed. fuck.

red herring again, tho.

what the fuuck 12 buca nah shu

shoooesroxmahxblox

>>8711474

Statutory rape is wrong because parents want to control their kids' sexuality for as long as possible, not because it's harmful. I mean seriously, you might as well be arguing that interracial sex is also harmful because it used to be illegal, without recognizing that it was because white men wanted to control white women and black men.

>>8711487
Yes, it is actually. If the damage is just a result of current social structures, then figuring out whether it is morally wrong is a worthwhile pursuit. For the record, I'm not interested in children that have no reached puberty (which is another argument) but I also believe in challenging conditioned beliefs, particularly those that treat pedophiles as if they were terrorists.

The real (and only) problem is that children's relationships with adults are not of the same kind as between adults or between children. Children are preprogrammed to accept adults' power and authority over them, so sexual relationships that started from this position are not the same as based on relatively similar position of the partners that would happen otherwise. This is why it's damaging -- sexuality is not compatible with such unequal position, and development of child's emotions will be severely damaged if sex will be associated with submission to authority.

All the crap about "innocence" is completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with reality, as one of the most important processes in child development is learning about society and developing the ability to deal with things that they find uncomfortable.

>>8711473
Michael Phelps eats something in excess of 10,000 calories a day. Clearly, he is not obese.

>>8711430
There are tons of films all over the place that prove McDonald's food is unhealthy and is a factor in obesity and other health problems, but that is a far cry from proving a McDiet is the sole cause of any person's obesity.

Super Size Me (one of my favorite films, btw) makes some pretty convincing claims that a McDiet can cause weight gain and mental side effects, but there have been all kinds of counter-experiments that proved the exact opposite. For more information,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me#Alternative_experiments

>>8711356
she would love it, and in 10 years she would have be having nightmares and getting into abusive relationships with older men because her self esteem was crushed and she was having sexual experiences before she could understand them and place them within the context of society and human interaction.

and if you get the rare kid who isn't fucked up by this, then you have the statistical equivalent of an albino alligator. Neither the court of law, nor the court of public opinion will hear your arguments because the chances that your arguments are correct, and not cobbled together from some half-baked bullshit, is hilariously small.

just because you can imagine a thing might be true, does not mean it actually is, or even can be

>>8711439
>if the kid has discovered that squeezing their Barney plush between their legs feels nice, that is harmless. if Uncle Anon is doing the squeezing, that changes the situation entirely.

How so? I don't see any inherent difference.

>I would have to assume that children understand that sexual touching is something they should not be doing with an adult, because they are so often messed up after it happens.

Ah, well, I have some counterevidence for you: http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm

"In the adult retrosptective study, victimization was reported by 27 percent of the women and 16 percent of the men. The median age for the occurrence of reported abuse was 9.9 for boys and 9.6 for girls."

So do you think that 27% of women are "messed up" to a significant enough degree that we can call this a serious problem?

This thread is just dildos.

Children-sized dildos.

>>8711505

If a cild needs a risky medical procedure, someone has to make the desicion for them, because they can't. It has large and important implications, but life's life and nothing can be done, so the parent will have to choose.

Sex, on the other hand, is something that is not necessary at that age. It has large and important implications, but at some point the child will be able to choose for himself. In situations where it is not necessary, the parent shouldn't be able to make decisions like that for the child. I think situations like this are rare enough that they can be noticed and laws made to accoutn for them without radically altering the parent/child relationship.

TBH this thread would have been over pretty quick if someone had just wrote:

'Without violence, nothing. However due to current social, religious and psychological understanding paedophilia is currently considered outside social norms. Ignore anyone who brings up consent, they're idiots.'

>>>8711569
>sexuality is not compatible with such unequal position

Most sex comes from an unequal position, and in many cases, this is not a bad thing. Whether or not is an issue with children, I can't be sure. I think it really depends on the intent of the older person. If the guy/girl has good intentions and doesn't force or use power to manipulate a child into doing what they want, then I don't see the problem. Also, if a child wants to explore their sexuality, and even instigates it, is this still rape?

I guess the practical concerns are a valid one, if this was allowed for the people who are consensually having sex with children, those that were actually flat out raping their children may get away with it more easily.

>>8711632
I would say, almost 100% of American women are significantly messed up, thanks to their fucked up position in American society.

>>8711569
>Children are preprogrammed to accept adults' power and authority over them, so sexual relationships that started from this position are not the same as based on relatively similar position of the partners that would happen otherwise. This is why it's damaging

Oh man, but this is also why it's NOT damaging! I forget who said it, but someone famous noted that if we were able to remember the trauma of childbirth and babyhood, we would all be insane. Likewise if the control and oppression (let's face it) we experience as post-baby kids had any detrimental effects, we'd all be insane too. So again, why is there a special case carved out for sex?

>>8711632

What the fuck? You seriously don't think there's a difference between masturbation and sexual interaction with another person?

You're a fucking idiot.

>>8711600
>michael phelps
if you are smart enough to read counter arguments to Supersize Me, then you are smart enough to know that your Phelps argument is bullshit. there is no way you can actually believe that crap, but you think I am stupid enough to. therefore, I suspect that SSM counter-argument is bullshit, too.

and if you are stupid enough to not differentiate between an Olympic athlete training 6 hours a day for a grueling sport and an inner city kid, then I KNOW that SSM counter is bullshit, because you are too stupid to actually judge it critically

tl;dr Fuck you

>>8711672

Not substantially, no. In the example of "squeezing my legs around my barney toy feels nice" there's no link to sexuality or understanding of *why* it feels nice. Why presume there needs to be such a link or understanding of "when I sit on my uncle's lap he does something and it feels nice"? Why does it have to go further than that?

I don't care if this is a troll thread or not, its been one of the more interesting threads on r9k for a while :)

>>8711660
You don't understand.

This inequality is fundamental -- children literally do not recognize adults as the same kind of being as themselves. This gradually winds down as the person matures, and often still never disappears as applied to parents or other "significant" people in their lives.

>>8711682
This person tried to get away with claiming caloric intake is the sole cause of obesity. I disproved that nonsense with a singular example. I don't get why usomad, bro.

>>8711660
actually... sex occurring in a relationship with a power imbalance is a very bad thing. a girl with low self esteem offering sex to a guy with high self esteem is a girl being taken advantage of. she has no power over that guy, nothing he wants, so he can use her for his purposes and reciprocate nothing. he has no reason to respect her, so he won't.

now, imagine if that guy were 15 years older than she was, and she had no power AT ALL. what is to protect her from abuse? what will compel the guy to consider her feelings and safety and to reciprocate in the relationship? why should he even consider her a human being, if he can void that identity with no repercussions? what can she offer him in a relationship that will be equal to what he is offering her?

>>8711708

I have always considered my parents to be on the same level as me, or rather consider myself to be on the same level.

Fuck your argument.

Are the counter-pedophiles giving up?

Well it's a difficult stance to take if you try to rely on reason.

>>8711660
Are you honestly trying to claim that, say, sex between an employee and his/her boss, is the same thing as a child having sex with an adult? Seriously, honest question.

>>8711778

No there is just no point in arguing with the mentally ill, which is what pedophiles are. Chemical/physical castration should be used as punishment for child rapists.

>>8711768
It's all about intent, buddy. Just because they are bad people that abuse their power, doesn't mean everything should be illegal. Their will ALWAYS be power imbalances in relationships, that's just the way it is. What is matters is whether or not that power is abused.

>>8711664
>Oh man, but this is also why it's NOT damaging! I forget who said it, but someone famous noted that if we were able to remember the trauma of childbirth and babyhood, we would all be insane.

Whoever said this, is an idiot. When that happens, brain is not developed enough to form any significant emotional response, leave alone be traumatized. Until much later, crying is an instinct, not indicator of the depth of emotion.

>Likewise if the control and oppression (let's face it) we experience as post-baby kids had any detrimental effects, we'd all be insane too. So again, why is there a special case carved out for sex?

No, however sex will be important LATER when people develop relationship with each other. If it's already attached to early acceptance of adults' authority (and that authority will disappear after a while), it can not participate in normal emotional development. It will remain associated with now-gone authority, manipulation and forced emotions.

>>8711741
because you consciously ignored the surrounding factors. obviously caloric intake is not the sole factor, but it is commonly understood that the lifestyle the person engages in while taking in all those calories plays a critical role, as well.

if I have to reinvent to wheel for you just to explain how cars work, then you are either incredibly stupid, or are intentionally using faulty logic to make a point you don't even believe could be true. that is: you were trolling

>>8711823
>When that happens, brain is not developed enough to form any significant emotional response

I find this very hard to believe, unless you are just speaking of newborn babies.

>my face when people try to justify pedophilia

>>8711771
>I have always considered my parents to be on the same level as me, or rather consider myself to be on the same level.

If you did, you would kill them. There is no other course of action based on child's understanding.

>>8708642

Children DO NOT WANT TO HAVE SEX when they are under the age of fucking 10 you sick, pathetic loser.

+10 is when they start thinking about sex, but it's not an excuse for horny 40 year old losers to start taking advantage of them. Go fuck a horse, maybe that will satisfy your need for forbidden sexual desires.

>>8711829
You're getting it wrong. I'm not the person who tried to claim caloric intake is the sole cause, the person I quoted was.

I'm actually on the side of "there are lots of things that cause obesity, which is why we can't hold McDonald's solely responsible for any one person's obesity".

>>8711846
>I find this very hard to believe, unless you are just speaking of newborn babies.

He is speaking of newborn babies.

>>8711821
and, how can a child understand intent? we aren't talking about emotional associations, we are talking about the development of a mind. if daddy says nice things and offers ice cream while whipping his kid with an electrical cord, the trauma of being tortured by a parent (who is supposed to provide care and comfort, not pain) will not be mitigated. these are not consciously made connections.

>>8711873

I still live with them (hurrdurr college), therefore obviously did not.

Your feeble mind is not evolved as I, even during the development stage.

>>8711778

Well its like, if you exclude social stigmas and there is no violence involved, the only argument left is 'its icky'. Which I suppose is ok and we should have laws protecting kids from ~abusive~ adults, but the whole 'THEY'RE WORSE THAN MURDERING TERRORIST GRANMOTHER RAPISTS' really needs to stop.

Its probably worth noting Im also in favour of temporary sterilisation for all and making parents more accountable as to how they bring up their kids. Then maybe a few more of them would actually give a shit about their child and give them the right kind of attention and raise them to be intelligent beings rather than dumb over protected robots we're churning out now.

..but hay ho.

>>8711823

You need to read that again... if we WERE ABLE to remember we'd be insane.

>No, however sex will be important LATER when people develop relationship with each other.

There are plenty of things that will be important later that we force kids to do or not do. We pick clothes for kids, isn't that an important skill for later? At the same time we stop them from watching scary movies, isn't it important to deal with fears later? And yet some parents let kids watch scary movies.. they can't both be right. Luckily kids are adaptable and also resilient.

>If it's already attached to early acceptance of adults' authority (and that authority will disappear after a while), it can not participate in normal emotional development. It will remain associated with now-gone authority, manipulation and forced emotions.

You just pulled that out of your ass. Why is sex different from any other function or skill? Hey, if you force your kids to brush their teeth and that is attached to early acceptance of adults' authority, they won't be able to participate normally in hygiene development. Bullshit.

>>8711919
>You need to read that again... if we WERE ABLE to remember we'd be insane.

There was no one to "remember" this. You as a newborn baby is not the same person as you, not really a person at all. Concepts of "emotion", "trauma" and "memory" are not applicable at that point yet.

Same is not true about children -- they do have emotions and thoughts, just their relationship with the rest of the world is different, their knowledge is limited, and their abilities are underdeveloped.

>>8711879

You think pedophiles only want to stick their penises into children's vaginas and have sex in the missionary position? Expand your horizons a bit man. Kids don't want to have sex, and it's pretty much impossible to have sex with them without injuring them. Okay. But is a blowjob harmful? Is touching harmful? Is taking nude pictures harmful? Is helping them wipe when they finish peeing or pooping and being a little too thorough harmful?

Pedophiles do all kinds of things besides vaginal rape! That's all under discussion.

>>8711863

Its not justification, its picking apart the WHY because pedophilia is currently given an almost religious dogma about it.

If you can prove once and for all through absolute reason alone and not societal laws (which is self-fulfilling), then isn't that great? But if you can't, then isn't it important that you find out why, lest you be doing something useless/wrong for the sake of doing it?

I don't put much thought into pedophilia. If I ever have children, I would not hide sexuality from them, but my advice to them would be to stab a nigga if they ever get exploited.

>>8711919
but... sex IS different from any ordinary experience. sorta like breathing is different from just moving your chest up and down. or, are you expecting someone to break out some charts and graphs to explain exactly how it is different?

are people really that disconnected from reality? do you really not understand that this is the case? are you one of those kids who had to be explained to why punching another kid in the eye was a bad thing? I though some concepts in life were so basic to the identity of a human being that they didn't need to be explained. but, maybe I am wrong. maybe I just picked up on this stuff with less effort...

Generally speaking, kids don't want to and don't enjoy it.

When talking about sex, all you need is a don't want to.

>>8711959

Same is not true about children -- they do have emotions and thoughts, just their relationship with the rest of the world is different, their knowledge is limited, and their abilities are underdeveloped.

Yes and most of that is shaped by the world around them. Primarily their peer group/parents and its when outside influences conflict with information gained from that group that problems start to occur as their tiny brains freak the fuck out. So again we're back to social order.

>>8711971
so... do you want hash out a list of safe, acceptable activities pedos can engage in with children? what an amusing thought... I am game :)

>>8711919
>You just pulled that out of your ass. Why is sex different from any other function or skill?

Sex is not a function or skill. It's an instinct related to emotional development.

>Hey, if you force your kids to brush their teeth and that is attached to early acceptance of adults' authority, they won't be able to participate normally in hygiene development.

Brushing teeth IS an expression of acceptance of society's authority on matters of hygiene. A person may learn later why it is important, or become a biologist and verify it, however for vast majority of people it's first and foremost a course of action that society recommends.

>>8711959

>There was no one to "remember" this. You as a newborn baby is not the same person as you

You're not seeing the point, let me try again... you are explaining why we can't remember what happened, but nobody is arguing against that. The original statement is if we were able to remember, we would be crazy. The implication (and relevance) is that by our very design (or evolution) we cannot remember that trauma and thus all the crap that happens to us doesn't affect us as adults.

So then, if by our very design as children we accept the power and authority of adults (and neither you nor I are disputing that), and all kinds of power is in fact imposed on us as kids by adults (not disputed), and yet when we are adults that previous trauma generally does not have any negative effects on us (e.g. adults are typically not terrified of doors just because their parents used to keep the front door locked and as children they weren't able to open them), then why do you just assume sex is different?

>>8711896
If the sexual interaction is pleasurable and done without any malice, then how would it be damaging?

Same reason children aren't allowed to smoke. They're too young to understand the potentially serious consequences of what they're doing.

I do not think paedophillia should be punished, but child molestation should. Now of you'll excuse me I need to fap to some loli.

>>8712038

>Sex is not a function or skill. It's an instinct related to emotional development.

Fair enough but that's still not a valid distinction, it just calls for a different example. We encourage kids to practice tolerance although it is not in their nature. So the sarcastic analogy is:

Hey, if you force your kids to be tolerant of others and that is attached to early acceptance of adults' authority, they won't be able to participate normally in social development.

>Brushing teeth IS an expression of acceptance of society's authority on matters of hygiene.

You're focusing on the skill, but I was focusing on what the original person suggested - that if the activity is connected to authority, it automatically harms future development of that skill. I'm not arguing that brushing teeth is bad.

>>8711971

You actually made me LOL. Seriously? Children probably DO NOT want any touching, licking, or ass cleaning from some man who isn't their father. Are you serious? lol man come on

No they do not want any sexual contact with wierd ass men plus think about this. Would you want some creep or someone close to you touching your children that way? YOUR CHILDREN, if so then you need to be killed, burnt, and pissed on for ruining someone's childhood just so you can feel good and fulfill your forbidden sexual needs.

That's the truth and only truth, pedophilia can not be justified because again, children do not want sex when they're younger than fucking 11 years old, and even if they were older than 11 it's still not an excuse for some creep to take advantage of them.. from vagina rape to wiping their ass and cunts after excreting (LOL SRSLY?) it's still not worth their time just ot fulfill your sexual needs, loser.

because the old man touching you usually isn't the most attractive of the bunch

>>8712042
>You're not seeing the point, let me try again... you are explaining why we can't remember what happened, but nobody is arguing against that. The original statement is if we were able to remember, we would be crazy.

It's pointless to even consider that there is something that can be "remembered" about being born. It makes about as much sense as remembering being split into an egg and a sperm, or remembering being an egg that was being developed before your mother's birth.

>The implication (and relevance) is that by our very design (or evolution) we cannot remember that trauma and thus all the crap that happens to us doesn't affect us as adults.

There is no trauma. You need a developed brain and experience emotions to be traumatized. You can't traumatize a baby that is being born any more than you can traumatize a bee.

PEDOS ANSWER THIS

WOULD YOU WANT SOMEONE TOUCHING YOUR CHILDREN LIKE THIS WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION?

/thread

>>8712136
It's not just about not wanting. It's actively harmful. Underage sex ruins or alters their sexual values. If you force or even "persuade" them into sex before they understand it, they will most likely end up with very distorted values regarding sex and their own body.

The age of consent is not perfect, there are people under the age who would not be hurt, but it's designed because making someone wait a few months or even years is infinitely better than breaking someone who may not be ready. And people vary. It is there to protect people.

>>8712146

Okay you know what, forget what the famous person said and what I paraphrased. It doesn't affect my argument at all, I just added it as a little aside. To me it's an interesting point that adds a bit, but is unnecessary. I still think you're wrong about it, because you are focusing on irrelevant details and not the general meaning, but whatever.

Now what is your response to what I added, which is that if kids by their nature accept adult authority and accept pretty much whatever we do to them (I'd say as long as it doesn't involve pain), or whatever you said (I'm too lazy to find it now), and none of that stuff screws them up when they turn into adults, then why is sex different?

>>8712136
Here come the witch burning nutjobs.

>>8712132
>Hey, if you force your kids to be tolerant of others and that is attached to early acceptance of adults' authority, they won't be able to participate normally in social development.

Tolerance is, again, a society's directive to its members, delivered through authorities. It's also arbitrary -- there are societies that do not practice tolerance at all, and even though modern civilized people do not approve of this, it is not unheard of now, and was nearly ubiquitous over the history of mankind.

Sex and its role in emotional development is not arbitrary, merely associated rituals are.

>>8712130

Thats funny, I'm pretty I was told at some point that it'd be really really bad if I stuck things in plug sockets. So I didn't stick things in plug sockets - there wasn't however, as far as I am aware, a law that prevented me from being near a plug socket.

The child informed consent argument is a silly one, just stop it.

>>8712192
>Underage sex ruins or alters their sexual values

Elaborate on this. How do you define "sexual values" ?

>>8712196

The only nutjobs here are the pedophiles actually trying to justify pedophilia.

And I'm still waiting. Would you pedos want some random guy, or someone close to you, touching your children sexually without your permission?

>>8712136
>You actually made me LOL. Seriously?
I'm glad :)

>No they do not want any sexual contact with wierd ass men
Okay are you saying they passively do not want it (as in, they never think "I want it") or that they actively do not want it (as in, every night they pray that they will not be molested)?

I'd say the former, not the latter. So again, if there are actions that they don't even recognize as molestation, and they don't want it, but they also don't NOT want it (i.e. it just doesn't occur to them either way), then what is wrong?

>plus think about this. Would you want some creep or someone close to you touching your children that way?
Yes well that is an entirely different argument! I would say no for sure. But let's not go there because I'm interested in seeing what you think about the act in isolation, not from a third party view.

>>8712194
>Now what is your response to what I added, which is that if kids by their nature accept adult authority and accept pretty much whatever we do to them (I'd say as long as it doesn't involve pain), or whatever you said (I'm too lazy to find it now), and none of that stuff screws them up when they turn into adults, then why is sex different?

Sex is different because its role in emotional development is preprogrammed, AND this programming does not activate until puberty, AND even after puberty this role and understanding of it, still develops. Additionally, society places great importance on it, however this is not that significant -- even if it didn't, there are other reasons that do not originate in society's traditions.

My 2 cents: Pedophilia as a fetish itself is not bad.

Real (controversial) facts: Acting out pedophilia (molesting, etc.) is bad. But people underestimate how damaging these acts actually are to children, even short-term.

>>8712206

I don't think you're the same person I originally responded to. If you are, then I seriously don't understand your point. Where did this arbitrary distinction about "XYZ is an instinct, not a skill" and "XYZ is a societal directive" or whatever come from? Look at this original comment:

>If it's already attached to early acceptance of adults' authority (and that authority will disappear after a while), it can not participate in normal emotional development. It will remain associated with now-gone authority, manipulation and forced emotions.

Now explain the relevance of tolerance being "a society's directive to its members" in terms of that. I see no reason offered why tolerance, brushing teeth, or sex have no component of emotional development, regardless of the goals or justifications of each item. I see no reason offered why they will not remain associated with now-gone authority, manipulation, and forced emotions. In fact, your argument that tolerance is an artificial societal construct actually reinforces that it is associated with forced emotions.

So what is your point? Help me.

>>8712267

When I said that they dont wan't it, it's that they are not interested in it yet. And probably don't want some 20-40 year old guy touching them there because that will make them feel uncomfortable, thus confusing them.

I'm pretty sure that if you start wipping their asses or asking them to suck your penis they will deny it, unless you use force and threaten them or black mail them.

Don't try to justify pedophilia dude, children aren't interested in sex period. Not untill they hit their teen years.

So you wouldn't want other men to touch your children huh? Then why fucking do it asshole? THIS is why pedophilia is bad and illegal, because then pedophiles like you will start taking advantage of children just as soon as it gets legallized and even then, would you let some creep touch your fucking children?

Keep on trying to justify this shit, you're failing hard. Doesn't matter what you do a child BEHIND THEIR PARENTS, they will tell their parents and you will be put in jail and that's where karma kicks in... random, horny guys going up to you and start treating you like their bitch.

>>8712132
this is getting more into developmental psychology. sex is an involuntary desire with deep ties to the individual's sense of self. a raped woman with blame herself 90% of the time and will feel like a used garbage bag, regardless of society's mores, or her upbringing, or her social status, or whatever. it is hard-wired. children introduced to sex too early in their cognitive development will suffer psychological damage.

other psychological... functions, i guess... like being tolerant of others, or maintaining intellectual curiousity are extremely useful skills for navigating society, yet still have to be taught. but, you know what? birds have to be taught how to make nests. or, rather, they have to learn through trial and error. a lot of animal behavior is learned, just like a lot of human behavior.

in earlier ages, people were not tolerant of other races and religions. people also married girls at 13. you know what? people also used lead paint and ate arsenic tablets because being pale and sickly was fashionable. No, these things are not 100% guaranteed to kill you, but they maybe 30% or 40%. they less than ideal, and we should avoid them. when the consequences of a kid getting fucked up for life, why take a chance?

>>8710320
Acts and memories have effects on you as a person. You can fuck as many bar sluts as you want, you're going to remember them in the future and probably think "Wow, that person was stupid. And fat. God I was drunk..".
In other words, baggage.

No imagine doing this shit when you are 5...

>>8712294
>Sex is different because its role in emotional development is preprogrammed, AND this programming does not activate until puberty, AND even after puberty this role and understanding of it, still develops.

Okay, let me think about those 3 criteria. Let's look at another behavior that may be enforced in children prematurely that matches those 3 criteria. I'm going to say.. male competitiveness. Do you agree that it matches all of those criteria? I'll even add some two more --
1. Like sex, it exists in a nascent form even in young children, but is heavily influenced by the onset of hormone production, especially testerorone
2. It becomes a defining personality characteristic that endures for most of adult life, but usually diminishes at old age

Okay, hopefully you agree, I think it's pretty clear. Now. If a parent encourages their young child to be competitive -- start reading early, sing and dance in competitions, whatever -- are you suggesting that it is de-facto harmful to the child's development to the same degree as early sexual exposure? Why or why not?

>>8711741
I was not claiming that caloric intake was the sole cause of obesity, I was implying that caloric intake was a huge contributor. we are talking about statistical averages: the average person living the average life. you bringing up a 1/100,000 exception to that rule is useless and stupid. it adds nothing to the argument and only muddies the water

>>8712384
>So you wouldn't want other men to touch your children huh? Then why fucking do it asshole?

Okay whatever. If your mind is too small to participate without getting all scared and angry, then don't. If it helps you feel better and not have nightmares tonight, I don't do it, but I do debate about it because I find the reasoning at least as interesting as agnostic/atheist threads.

I'm with OP.

Children have sexual feelings. Adults can have sexual feelings for children. The clencher is adults who specifically engage in sex with children against their wishes or for personal gain. A responsible adult who had sexual contact with a child who could nuture their sexual feelings and teach them to enjoy sex responsibly would be ideal.

However, society would rather just blanket the entire situation, pick some arbitrary age and say no one over this age can have sex with anyone under it.

The theory is that its more important for people to not sexually prey on children than to have healthy sex with them. So the implication is that it's okay to be sexually manipulative over a certain age.

People should just outlaw sexually irresponsible people in general regardless of age. I'm tired of the government trying to micromanage everything.

ITT: PEDOPHILES FROM AnT TRYING TO JUSTIFY PEDOPHILIA AND CLAIMINING THAT THE CHILDREN WONT REMEMBER THE MOLESTATION AND THAT'S THE REASON IT'S OKAY, THEY WONT REMEMBER YOU MOLESTING THEM BEHIND THEIR PARENTS EYES. BUT IT'S SURE AS HELL WON'T KEEP THE CHILDREN AWAY FROM TELLING THEIR PARENTS "Mommy, Daddy, the man that lives next door touched me here" or "Mommy, Daddy, Daddy's friend showed me his PEE PEE (LOL) and he told me to put it on my mouth".

Man, I'm happy innocently interacting with little girls and dealing with my sexual urges by fapping to loli hentai. No one's hurt, and I'm satisfied. Anyway, the biggest joy a little girl can give you isn't sexual, but emotional.

>>8712357
>I don't think you're the same person I originally responded to. If you are, then I seriously don't understand your point. Where did this arbitrary distinction about "XYZ is an instinct, not a skill" and "XYZ is a societal directive" or whatever come from? Look at this original comment:

A person can live his whole life without coming into contact with a concept of tolerance (some do that even now, in societies that are supposed to be tolerant, but I digress). Society imposes tolerance on its members as a requirement for participation in a shared culture -- it just happens that tolerance also promotes development of society.

Another society may have, say, racism as one of its core values, and it will impose it on its members. While we perceive it as negative (and with a good reason), it is not the same as mild and unfocused instinctual xenophobia that humans are born with, it's a value and set of directives that society imposes on its members through authorities and culture. Parents merely act as one of such authorities when they teach those values and rules (be it tolerance, racism, greed, love of color yellow, etc.) to their kids.

>>8712445
Haha I love those exceptions though, it's as if these superhumans can make energy from nothing, or at the very least, metabolize things into energy that no other human being can! You'd think their genetics would have become the superior version during lean times in the history of prehistoric man.

I'll say it buddy.
>Calorific EXCESS is the SOLE cause of obesity in human beings.
Yes, excess. If you are more likely to store fat then your diet and habits should be different than the average person. You, fatty, are not a superhuman who can break the laws of thermodynamics.

>>8712463

Shut up asshole, you're running from my question.

Why risk your reputation, your freedom just to act out something like this? CLEARLY they aren't interested in such sexual activities and just because they won't remember it doesn't mean you are allowed to do it.

Doesn't matter if they won't remember it, they will still DENY IT and only FORCE will help you then. You like forcing CHILDREN to suck on your cock? Or to bend over just so you can wipe their fucking asses? LOL

So you don't want other fucking men t touch your children huh? Again, why do it? What would you do if they did it? YEEEAH that's right you would report them! DURRR HURRRR I GUESS THAT'S WHY PEDOPHILIA IS BAD AND ILLEGAL HUH? I answered OP's question.

>>8712553
Agreed. I wouldn't want some nigger dating my daughter either. That should be illegal too.

>>8712497

Then you are not a pedophile.

Lolicon hentai has very little to do with actual underage girls, people depicted in (both male and female) it are imaginary beings that have no coumterparts in real life.

>>8712357
>I see no reason offered why they will not remain associated with now-gone authority, manipulation, and forced emotions.
because they don't work that way. someone might associate brushing their teeth with being kicked as a child when they didn't brush, but the action is not tied with the brain's development in the same way as sex is.

if you seriously tortured your kid when they didn't brush their teeth, then you could get some wacky psychological deformities to develop. really, some of this stuff does affect people as adults. people with abusive fathers are likely to become abusers (if male) or to date abusive men (if female). but really, this sort of phenomenon is abnormal and requires special effort to make an impact on a person.

molesting a kid warps them much more quickly and more reliably than making them brushing their teeth

>>8712578
Did you just compare pedophilia to racism? I hope you didn't. Please tell me I am misreading it.

pedotitsssss


titititititits


tinychat.tv/fappery
tinychat.tv/fappery
tinychat.tv/fappery
tinychat.tv/fappery
tinychat.tv/fappery
tinychat.tv/fappery

>>8712598

Lol >>8712578 hurt >>8712598 's feelings! WATCH OUT HE'S DEFENDING PEDOPHILIA

>>8712598
I'll elaborate:

>So you don't want other fucking men t touch your children huh? Again, why do it? What would you do if they did it? YEEEAH that's right you would report them! DURRR HURRRR I GUESS THAT'S WHY PEDOPHILIA IS BAD AND ILLEGAL HUH? I answered OP's question.

You basically stated, that if someone doesn't want something, it should be illegal.
You don't want an older man touching your daughter. It should be illegal
I do not want niggers dating my daughter. It should be illegal.

Basically, your argument applies to both of these cases, meaning it's bullshit.

I understand your position, but please use real arguments.

>>8712540
>Yes, excess. If you are more likely to store fat then your diet and habits should be different than the average person. You, fatty, are not a superhuman who can break the laws of thermodynamics.

Even more so, no obese person can perform enough physical activity that will spend enough energy to counteract the excess of energy that comes with a diet they are accustomed to.

Thus making unhealthy diet THE ONLY thing that is responsible for continued obesity. All arguments against this are firmly in "tobacco is not addictive" territory.

>>8708642
It's because as children we are very impressionable. Is they experience, say, a 28 year old fucking them at an early age they take that experience through their whole life. Also, sex is mainly for reproduction, and at an early age children aren't ready to produce children.

Maybe you should think before you open your mouth. We all know you are a pedophile, we can see through your lies.

>>8712585
No sir, I am a pedophile. I find real little girls sexually attractive and have reoccurring fantasies about them, even ones I specifically know. But my conscious would never allow me to hurt a child, so I deal with it safely.

girl gets tickled in stomach
>oh, memories
girl gets tickled a bit lower
>I AM A BROKEN SHELL OF WHAT WAS ONCE A HUMAN BEING. I CAN NEVER FUNCTION NORMALLY IN A RELATIONSHIP

>>8712553
You are so full of shit. Where is it CLEARLY proven that kids are not interested in sex? I certainly was interested in sex, and was masturbating from a very young age, as were most of my peers.

Also, your blind and frankly, batshit insane reaction isn't lending any favours to your argument. Admit it, you're no different to the "scared shitless of everything" soccer mom.

I've posted walls of text very similar to yours OP, and anti-pedos are just completely blind to your logic in their hatred.

To sum up the things I've said before, the only way pedophilia will be accepted is when sex and nudity lose the stigmas behind them. In other words, any sort of pedophile rights movement won't happen until we live in a society where sex anywhere in public is legal as well as legal nudity. The idea that pedophilia is "wrong" is just as strong as the clothing stigma. We didn't have clothes to start. We didn't have "pedophiles" to start.

I could also write an essay about how the industrial revolution created the teenage phenomenon. Normally, kids left their family and went off to work as they became teenagers, which not coincidentally, was the same time they reached sexual maturity. Women would marry at this time since they did not work. Marrying at the age of 12 was common, especially with lower mortality rates.

It is very sad how chained down society is due to standards set down in the past.

>>8712385

>this is getting more into developmental psychology. sex is an involuntary desire with deep ties to the individual's sense of self. a raped woman with blame herself 90% of the time and will feel like a used garbage bag, regardless of society's mores, or her upbringing, or her social status, or whatever. it is hard-wired. children introduced to sex too early in their cognitive development will suffer psychological damage.

I don't know, maybe you are a psychology major or psychiatrist or something, and I'm not trying to offend you, but I'm shall we say skeptical of most psychological theories and claims. One problem with your use of the word rape. Okay so I accept that negative reactions to rape are hard-wired -- if only because "negative reaction" is part of the definition of rape.

However, this thread deals with the more general idea of sexuality. Notice how you switch from rape to simply "introduced to sex too early" as if those are obviously the same. This is where my skepticism is kicking in.

>other psychological... functions, i guess... like being tolerant of others, or maintaining intellectual curiousity are extremely useful skills for navigating society, yet still have to be taught. but, you know what? birds have to be taught how to make nests. or, rather, they have to learn through trial and error. a lot of animal behavior is learned, just like a lot of human behavior.

Very true.

>No, these things are not 100% guaranteed to kill you, but they maybe 30% or 40%. they less than ideal, and we should avoid them. when the consequences of a kid getting fucked up for life, why take a chance?

Okay you've switched to a utilitarian sense of morality, that's fine although I personally don't believe in utilitarianism. I totally agree with your statement but it makes no impact on the rightness or wrongness of the act and leaves open many other acts that are not physically harmful. Especially acts that children are not even be aware of.

>>8712636

DUDE! So you're telling me that even if PARENTS don't want their CHILDREN being touched, it's still should be allowed?

FUCKING ANSWER MY QUESTION YOU QUEER! Would you like other pedos touching your children and CONTINUE TO? I bet you would be against pedophilia if that happened LOL

REALLY? Come on man stop trying to sound like a smart ass on the internet.. on 4chan.. and admit that you would not want some creep touching your children, and even if they wont remember it.. IT'S STILL NOT AN EXCUSE FOR SUCH ACTS TO BE PEFORMED.

What would you do if I touched your kids huh? Let me continue? Because I can just to troll the hell out of you, I will even do it infront of you and just say "HAI, they won't remember it so it's okay!!!"

Go suck a horse's dick, that will definately satisfy your needs for forbidden fetishes, or maybe some poop sex?

>>8712672
>the industrial revolution created the teenage phenomenon

how so? give us a tl;dr summary

because it /does/ scar people for life

also trolls trolling trolls

>>8712595
>because they don't work that way. someone might associate brushing their teeth with being kicked as a child when they didn't brush, but the action is not tied with the brain's development in the same way as sex is.

>if you seriously tortured your kid when they didn't brush their teeth, then you could get some wacky psychological deformities to develop.

Ah, so you are just taking as fact that any sexual behavior is approximately equivalent to torture. I take exception with your logic.

Children cannot fathom the idea of sex or sexual pleasure and their minds are insufficient to make such critical decisions. THIS is why pedophilia is illegal. It's basically rape.

>>8712671

You know what I mean foo, pre teen fucking children. Children coming into their teen years are already masturbating and shit

You're on completely different levels.

It is like challenging a banana to a game of HORSE.

>>8712636
The difference between a fully grown nigger fucking your fully grown daughter and an older man fucking his younger daughter is that your fully grown daughter is old enough to make her own decisions, the 10 year old innocent girl cannot yet comprehend the consequences of an older man fucking her.

>>8712718
no doofus, sexual ABUSE is analogous to torture. LERN2ENGLISH

>>8712695
and admit that you would not want some creep touching your children

I admit it. I would not want some creep touching my underage daughter. I would not want some creep touching my daughter AT ANY AGE.

>>8712718
Are you retarded? He's COMPARING it, not saying that it's torture. Though it practically is.

>>8712758
I agree.

But that's not what I'm arguing against. According to >>8712598, sex with children should be illegal because I wouldn't want someone to have sex with my kid. Do you see the fallacy here?

>>8712701

tldr Increased productivity has allowed us to invest more in our children's future productivity because there's no immediate need for their labor. Kids can be kids for longer, even when they are basically adults, e.g. teenagers.

>>8712741
I said very young, and I meant. I've been masturbating and have been interested in sex since at least 7 years old, probably early. If I had the chance to fuck or lick a pussy that age, I would have taken it.

>>8712778

No I'm not retarded. He's saying that for imposed tooth brushing behavior to scar future adult behavior, it would need to be combined with torture. However, sexual activity does not need to be combined with torture to be as scarring. Therefore sexual activity is "approximately as bad as torture." Can you explain the flaw in my logic a bit more precisely than saying I'm retarded? I really don't get it.

>>8712778
Naively, it could be seen as a simple comparison, but he is obviously trying to imply that sex and torture are on the same level.

>>8712784
That's not what he's saying you retard.

>>8712767

GOOD! But I'm still allowed to behind your back LOL! and like you said, she wont remember it.. so no harm done and I can continue all I want till she's crying to make it stop, because I can fist her, lick her, fuck her outside on your backyard, cum on her face, and wipe her ass JUST BECAUSE SHE WONT REMEMBER LOL! NO HARM DONE HUH?!

>>8712817
I wasn't the one who said that

>>8712817
You seem to going into great detail. You sound like the closet homosexual that goes on a homophobic tirades. Is your daughter giving you feelings that you don't understand?

>>8712813
He's saying the damage sexually assaulting a young child and torture do to a child's psyche is the same.

>>8712845

I'm just trolling foo. Don't take the internet so serious

>>8712816
It is what he's saying.

Please elaborate how

>"So you don't want other fucking men t touch your children huh? Again, why do it? What would you do if they did it? YEEEAH that's right you would report them! DURRR HURRRR I GUESS THAT'S WHY PEDOPHILIA IS BAD AND ILLEGAL HUH?"

means anything other than if you don't like something, it should be illegal.

>>8712701
Actually, the industrial revolution doesn't necessarily prove that pedophilia is okay, but any sex after age 12 should be fine. Everyone is really attracted to teenagers as they are sexually mature, but they force themselves to look away, saying things like "shes too young!" in their head, knowing society would judge t

Like I was saying, the industrial revolution replaced so much manual labor and now kids would go to school instead, whereas before they would get a job at age 12 and purchase their own home as soon as possible. After the industrial revolution, kids lived with their parents until the age of eighteen, something unprecedented.

Parents never really saw their kids "grow up" all the way before. It was more like they watered the seed and then walked away as the kid left for a job at age 12.

Now, parents saw their kids grow to full maturity through the teenage period. They still see their kids as "their little baby, their little boy, etc" when he is really a semi-mature adult.

Teenage sex is perfectly healthy, but since teenage life is juxtaposed next to childhood, parents connect the two and see any interest in teens as being the same as pedophila, when it is not.

It is perfectly healthy. People married at age 12 before the industrial revolution.

Exhibit A. My show.

Did you see the way I was trying to kiss some of those girls, THEY DON'T WANT A DIRTY OLD MAN KISSING THEM.

>>>8712851

>Ah, so you are just taking as fact that any sexual behavior is approximately equivalent to torture.

He never assumed that the OP was saying it was torture, and neither did I. But equating sex, even underage sex, with torture is frankly, ridiculous.

>>8712862

Kimo is that you?

>>8712894
>>8712894
Did you just ignore it?
Torture hurts them physically and mentally, yes.
Sex with them hurts the mentally just like torture would.

>>8712763

Sexual abuse, when it comes to young children, includes all sexual behavior moron. Which of the following are not sexual abuse when it comes to young children:

1. Inappropriate touching or fondling
2. Taking nude pictures while a child is sleeping
3. Masturbating on a child's face while sleeping
4. Buttfucking a child who is screaming and crying

4 is sexual abuse and pretty much torture. 3 is sexual abuse, though still not torture; 2 is sexual abuse, but still not torture; 1 is sexual abuse, but still not torture. Get it?

ITT: retarded arguments from both sides

The reason the pedophilia is illegal is the same reason a child is not allowed to enter a contract: They cannot decide correctly for them selves.

>>8712911
So, you listed 4 forms of sexual abuse. How does this relate to things that aren't sexual abuse?

>>8711600
>Michael Phelps eats something in excess of 10,000 calories a day. Clearly, he is not obese.
You are making one example of a guy that works his ass off and is a competitive swimmer. I hate how people will take one fucking example and then try to say its not the norm. A person can smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day and live to be 100, that doesn't mean that cigarettes can't be harmful there is an exception to every rule

>>8712910

See this guys response
>>8712911
Pretty much the only form of underage sex that could be considered torture is flat out, brutal rape.

>>8712953

Well let me see. The question was, is all sexual abuse equivalent to torture? I listed 4 types of sexual abuse, only 1 of which I consider to be like torture. See the relevance?

This thread is getting depressing. I thought this r9k would be, I don't know, smarter than /b/ or something. Both the original idiot who thinks all sexual abuse is torture, and you, who can't read or understand a thread, are retarded.

>>8712980
I misread it then.

>Sexual abuse, when it comes to young children, includes all sexual behavior moron.

It seemed like you were saying all forms of sexual contact with children would be considered sexual abuse simply because those four things were sexual abuse.

Fuck, I wanted to go to bed an hour ago.

I think pedophiles that think children are interested in sex have never really been around children.

You know little girls aren't like the ones in Kodomo no Jikan, right?

Any sexual thing they do at a young age is purely out of CURIOSITY, "oh lawd i has a vagina" type shit.

There's a huge difference between "oh lawd i has a vagina and my daddy doesn't!" and some random creep licking her vajayjay or sticking it in her because "it feels nice".

>>8713011

Sorry for being short with you then! :)

You are pretty gracious

>>8713041
Problem is, if they exercise that curiosity in anyway, it's seen as something horrible.

I can agree that you shouldn't toss your kid into a pile of old men, but you should at least be allowed to let her poke at your penis if she wants to know what the hell it is (doesn't have to require anything sexual, it would be in the same way a little girl would play with your nose or something).

>>8713041
>There's a huge difference between "oh lawd i has a vagina and my daddy doesn't!" and some random creep licking her vajayjay or sticking it in her because "it feels nice".

There is a big difference there. You seem to thing the former is fine and the latter is not, which I agree with. Where do they cross for you?

>>8713041
My friend used to eat out this girl when they were in preschool (both around 5 years of age)

Hey guys, how long do r9k threads usually last. I'm going to sleep for 8 hours. Do you think this thread will still be alive?

>>8713187
It might. The influx of users recently might reduce your chances, though.