/jp/ - Otaku Culture

No

No

Hopefully

No way.

No.

No because what do you think normalfriends would hate after that?
Miniputt?

Just 2D loli.

Why not?

It is a possibility. I know, it's fucked up.
But it's true. Many of the normal sex acts performed today were considered perversions in the 19th century. But as the extreme repression of sexuality began to be lifted (thanks, psychoanalisis!) all of those became regular fare.
It's not that farfetched to think pedophilia will become normal one day. Probably and hopefully not in my lifetime.

Sure if everyone converted to Islam or something.

>>5046106
Homosexuality was illegal because "Lol bible". Pedophillia is illegal because "Kids aren't as experienced in life. They'll consent to anything. You're taking advantage of them. Suck it."

>>5046106
No, the next is clearly incest, there's groups already trying to push for removal of incest laws if not outright support for marriages.

>>5046431

You can rationalize it with layman language, bible folk do, but in the end its just lol morals.

>>5046438
After all, incest has no negative effects unless someone gets pregnant (coughdeformedbabiescough). Psychological damage is only because you're taught that it's a nono. Shame ensues etc.

>>5046441
Loli morals.

I don't ask for them to bless us, I just ask that people would understand that attraction to prepubescent girls does not automatically make you a monster.

>>5046463
Deformed babies only become a problem in generational vertical incest. Reproducing with a second cousin actually has the least chance of deleterious mutations.

>>5046106
>>5046397

You guys are using unfounded logic. By the standards of neuroscience and cognitive psychology pedophilia is a problem an error. I had a great link of a video with a criminal psychologist giving a speech about an inmate who went after boys but after a chemical treatment turned to men instead, but I lost it after reformatting.


>>046431

Actually, the Bible prohibits promiscuity and since statistically homosexuals are much more promiscuous than heterosexuals.... this is why celibacy and asexuality was cherished. The "Immaculate Conception" was a way to bolster this but ultimately everything in the Bible has ties to human psychology and behavior over long periods of time.

It'll be incest, then pedophilia.

>>5046495
So, is it an error because you're less likely to have sex with the more fertile or because society frowns upon it?

>>5046519
Rape isn't going to be legalized anytime soon, bro.

>>5046512
the second one

>>5046463

Actually it's more about the power balance in the family rather than deformed offspring. Also, children born and raised together will not couple.

>>5046526
Not with that attitude.

yes please

>>5046512
>>5046532

Society does not choose to arbitrarily frown on anything; there is a biological/psychological reason behind everything.

>>5046463
Well, Egypt commonly practiced sibling incest for about 400 years with no long term adverse side effects and even 1 generation of incest won't account for deformations. The worst you get is with people like the Ostrich People in Africa who have practiced incest for so many centuries or even thousands of years that they've got deformed feet.

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

I see nothing horribly wrong with incest and wouldn't mind so much laws being relaxed. Currently Sweden is the only country where it's legal to marry your sister while Germany is seriously considering removing anti incest laws.

I honestly believe that in another 20-50 years anti incest laws will be abolished in the US and other countries if not a legal precedent set for outright marriages.

What I would like is for people to stop calling everyone a pedo. For example, there were Metal gear solid peace walker threads on several boards here, it was about a special mission in which Snake has sex with a 16 years old girl. And on every board you could see people calling Snake a pedo or saying "Does playing this game makes me a pedo ?". Seriously, I wish these people would grow the fuck up.

I hope not.
The imagination of a cute little 12 year old girl dominating me and forcing me to do sexual things to her until she screams in ecstasy is probably my most wonderful fantasy, but I acknowledge that 12 year old girls aren't like that in real life.
Children are wonderful and no one should ever do harm to them, I'm all for consensual sex but sadly their minds are to young for it.

Besides, I'm ore of a hebephile myself, I don't feel any sexual attraction towards really young girls.

OP your a disgusting person you talk about homosexual as if they are commiting a crime for loving someone.peophilia is not even relate to homosexuality at all

>>5046694
2/10

>>5046694
>Anon you're a disgusting person you talk about peddophilia as if they are committing a crime for loving someone. Homosexuality is not even relate to pedophilia at all.
Hurr, durr.

>>5046495
>By the standards of neuroscience and cognitive psychology pedophilia is a problem an error.
Until 30-40 years ago, so was homosexuality.


http://www.ipce.info/library_2/files/asb.htm

This is an article about Richard Green who was one of the activists that got homosexuality removed from the DSM list of mental disorders. He is now trying to do the same for pedophilia.

This... this is a troll...

>>5046588
Am I the only one that notices the Kojima troll? Seriously, Solid is one hell of a prude when it comes to age differences and then bam-Big Boss taps a young nubile lass.

Well, technically homosexuality IS a mental disorder regardless of whether it has ceased to be recognized as such, as the goal of the human race (and any species) is to breed. That being said, I have no problem with homosexuality as it harms no one, and it is illogical to have any sort of problem with a gay person. Pedophilia on the other hand, is a mental disorder that is harmful to the rest of the population. Children are not developed enough to make such decisions, and sexual acts can have serious repercussions on a child's adult life.

Sadly, probably not in the lifetime, but in the future it's quite possible.
I wish in the lifetime they at least realize that pedophile =/= child rapist.

>>5046899
how do you know what the goal why dont you just live your life and dont worry about them

>>5046899
>can have serious repercussions on a child's adult life
Proofs? Only repercussions occur because society says them "it's wrong", "you've been raped", etc.

>>5046917
What? Apart from that not making sense, when I DO try to make sense of it, the answer is simple. Why worry about it? Because its legalization would be potentially fucking harmful, idiot. If pedophiles are sensible enough to know that IRL sex with a child isn't feasible, that's fine, but once it becomes legal we have entered entirely different territory.

>>5046917

Fucking moron that can't even finish reading a paragraph. Learn to read and comprehend fully, idiot.

>No
>no
>no way
>not in this lifetime
Thats what the people who are 50,60 years old right now said to gay marriage.

>>5046920
It's exactly the same as if you had sex with someone, and then later found out it was a mistake. You feel like shit about it. Except, when you are a child, it will always be a mistake because your decision making capabilities haven't developed.

this is the stupidest shit ever posted on /jp/
you already knew most people on here would agree with you and your homophobic ways and the world is populated enough we dont need more assholes who hate there lives.

>>5046950
Where in this thread do you see one homophobic post?

>>5046945

No, you're stupid. The biggest problem with pedophilia is that it does not build lasting relationships. Why the fuck would any little girl want to be with a social reject that fucks her while she's little and then throws her out when she grows up a bit? Disgusting and pathetic.

>>5046947
So what? Everybody makes mistakes. Sex is no such big deal to be worried about, unless of course the entire society tells you that it's horrible.

Pedophilia was legal not so long ago, give it about 100 years and it'll be legal again.

>>5046970
{{citation needed}}

>>5046979
So your defense of pedophilia is "Everybody makes mistakes". Are you fucking kidding me?

>>5046947
I don't get normalfags, they keep going on about how virgins are stupid and sex is no big deal but when a pedophile does something it's immediately evil and wrong.
Make up your fucking mind.

>>5047012
I have made up my mind. Depending on the person, sex can be a big deal. In a child's case, someone who is neither physically nor mentally developed for sex, yes, it is a big deal.

Why do people immediately associate attraction to sex ? You can be attracted to someone and not try to have sex or rape or whatver with them. It's the same for all sexual orientations. Since you guys are talking about homosexuality, let's take it as an example. There are closet homosexuals who refrain from doing anything with men and marry with women to have a "normal" life. It's probably the same for pedophiles, there are probably much more than the ones you see being arrested on TV, but you'll never know they are because they don't act on their pulsions and lead a normal life with a woman the same age as them.

>>5047012
We are not pedophiles. We are lolicons.

You kiddy fiddlers give us bad names.

If it's going to happen, it won't be anytime soon. In order to get society to stop hating something, you have to make it 'popular' in a way - look at the civil rights brigades over the last few decades. Publically defending something such as pedophilia is insanely harder than homosexuality - especially post 9/11 where non-discrimination and civil rights have become unpopular due to 'lol democracy'.

>>5047019
Yes. And I have absolutely no problem with this. That isn't the issue. At all. The issue is LEGALIZATION of sex with a child. Meaning, the arrests you are talking about wouldn't happen, and the "closet" pedophiles would have no reason to refrain.

>>5047026
Hm? Normalfag here, I have no problem with lolicons or pedophiles, as long as there's no actual child sex. No one's getting a bad name.

>>5046996
That was not my point. Even if you consider this a mistake it's no big deal. But in the first place you consider it a mistake because society tells you so.

Well, this thread basically proves it. Pedofags have the reasoning capacity of little kids. They're shut-ins who have failed to develop socially and mentally, so the only thing they are attracted to are children who also have not developed enough to see past their schemes. No wonder they spend all their time online with like-minded retards.

>>5047043
1/10

>>5047041

Will you stop hiding behind "society" you idiot?

If you don't let people make decisions until a certain age, they'll just make most of the same mistakes later.

>>5047043
what does staying inside have to do with liking kids?

>>5046950
I like the fact that you ignore most of the people in this thread, who happen to disagree.

>>5047041
There is no fucking logic with you, is there? You basically respond to the SCIENTIFIC FACT that children aren't physically developed to handle, or mentally developed to fully grasp the concept of sex (due to hormones etc.) with "Oh, but none of that matters."

>>5047053
Anything to say on topic, retard?

>>5046495
And you're using a science that's lead by people with a cultural bias. No one would put any money into experiments that prove pedophilia is not a "problem".
Once again, a few centuries ago, children weren't regarded in the same way as they are today. They were tiny adults or property at best.
So it is not farfetched to think that it could change again.

If you still insist on following the silly attempts of modern psychologists to pretend they're also doing science and not merely tying up correlations, then I ask you to please find a single disorder that has been defined and treated in the same way thorough history.

Take your time.

>>5047049

0/10


>>5047054

"Hey sweetie, you see that ugly man outside? You should totally let him have sex with you because you're learn that it's a mistake."

Like I said, mental capacity of a particularly stupid kid.

ITT Don't ask a scientist they be fucking lying and pissin' me off.

>>5047054
It's not about making decisions. It's about learning.

If you're an inbread fuckface who sleeps through school, of course you'll learn nothing and make the same mistakes later.

>>5047067
>SCIENTIFIC FACT
Is that people's brains don't fully 'mature' until they're in their in their late 20's. The argument over age of consent (especially it being a hard and fast rule with no exceptions unlike a minor's protection against criminal prosecution) isn't really founded in scientific fact. I'm not arguing to legalise pedophilia (far from it) but the current laws are absurd in their justification and application.

this is off topic but isnt the age of consent in japan 13(depending on the prefecture)?

>>5047069
There you have it folks. We have a winner. I thought I was doing a pretty good job arguing my points, but as it turns out all scientists are involved in a global conspiracy to keep knowledge well away from our sheep minds, in an effort to keep the the pedophiles down. The fuckin' man, eh?

>>5047067
Scientific fact is that women can have children when puberty begins.
Scientific fact is that the human sexuality develops very early.

>>They were tiny adults or property at best.

Oh great, let's treat children and women as property again! There's a reason we moved away form that shit along with pedophilia. It's called progress.


>>I ask you to please find a single disorder that has been defined and treated in the same way thorough history.

Well this is just nonsensical right here. Science and psychology haven't even existed through the vast majority of human history.

>>5047081
I dunno, Canada's laws are pretty good I would say. Here you can have sex with a 14 year old as long as you are under 18, and a 16 year old if you are over 18 (which makes sense because obviously at 14 to 15 people are at differing levels of maturity so 16 is a decent cutoff point)

That's pretty disgusting OP. Pedophilia is abuse of a child, which is way different from two consenting faggots or a nigger and a cracker getting married.

>>5047054
The capacity to fully understand the consequences is one of the last parts of the brain's function that is fully developed.
Children are simply not capable of informed consent which makes it not a question of making a mistake and learning from it but rather making a mistake when you have no ability to make an informed decision about whether to do it or not.

>>5047086
Ok, that would be relevant if pedophilia wasn't an attraction to prepubescent children. Good try though.

If you argue that our goal is reproduction and reproduction only, it follows that people should get started as soon as possible. It's a stupid thing to argue for in the first place, though.

>>5047026

Finally, someone who can make the distinction.

>>5047110
Who is arguing that?

>>5047117
same difference?

ITT people who don't realize that they are using the same word but meaning completely different things.

>>5047095
The fact that it's still a hard line is bad, though. It's also quite possible that 16-year olds don't have the mental maturity to handle sex. The point I'm making is that if children can be tried as adults in court as a defendant, but can't be treated as adults as a victim, it means the law has a huge discrepancy. So the kid can fully understand the ramifications of death and the impact on society and family, but can't handle sex.

>>5047109
>implying idiots don't call anything that has no cow tits pedo
>human sexuality develops very early
And by very early I mean far less than puberty.

>>5047081
Going purely by scientific fact age of consent should be something like 21. Now the problem with that is that something like 80% of the population would be child molesters if that happened.
>>5047095
That seems like a reasonable stance since the difference in development, maturity and expectations is a bigger problem than people under a certain age having sex at all.

>>5047124

Not at all. 2D is appealing to me. Disgusting, smelly, hairy, 3D disgusting pigs are NOT... at ANY age...

>>5047104

Right, it's like making a mistake when you have no idea or capacity to think that might be a mistake. Are we then to allow children to hurt and kill each other( which they are fully capable of) because they have matured enough to do so and it would be a good time for them to "learn" from their mistakes?

>>5047131
I like how you support your assertions so carefully.

>>5047129
Oh, yeah I totally agree with you there. Obviously there is a discrepancy, and that shouldn't exist, and obviously there are 16 year olds that aren't mature enough to handle sex, but if you can think of a better way of dealing with these issues, be my guest, because I can't. No hostility there, I'm just saying.

Threads like this are why the world hates the US.

>>5047137
They hurt each other a lot, and generally learn from it.

>>5047129
What age can they be treated as adults in court? Is it earlier than 14?
Because that's the earliest those laws imply that you're mature enough to have sex.

>>5047086
Scientific fact is also that pregnancies in early stages of puberty are unstable as the reproductive organs aren't fully matured

Scientific fact based on studies show that women (teenagers) who underwent pregnancy and gave birth had a much higher chance of producing offspring with genetic mutations, again because the reproductive system wasn't fully developed.

A mature woman's menstrual cycle happens at a regular date each month, a girl who undergoes puberty has an unstable menstrual cycle that happens sporadically, again, because the reproductive system hasn't fully developed.

You throw the word SCIENCE around like it's some kind of fucktoy, much like you would want to do with a little child.

A metaphor would be someone's cognitive ability to read. Just because you learned your ABC's doesn't mean you have the necessary skills needed to read a college research paper or a law book.

>>5047144

Only when adults tell them. If no adult is present a child can totally smash another child to take their toys and continue playing as if nothing has happened.

>>5047137
>Are we then to allow children to hurt and kill each other
Yes, in many countries they can't be prosecuted until a certain age.

If Hitler comes back and starts killing people, I hope he starts with you guys. This is probably one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen on this board. And I thought /r9k/ was full of apes that wanted to fuck everything that moved.

What do you consider to be a child ? Imo, above 12 a girl had her first period so she can't be considered a child anymore. Also, age of consent is only there to proscute adults, because girls don't wait till they are a certain age to have sex, they don't care about laws.
Most girls lose their virginity at 13-14, if they can handle sex with boys the same age as them or a few years older, why couldn't they handle sex with a man who is 10 years older or even older ? This isn't even pedophilia related anymore.

>>5047145
Any age, if the prosecution argues well enough. You're tried as an adult once your 16 or 18 in most developed countries but the judge can allow kids of any age to be tried as an adult with sufficient reason - there's been cases of charging 11-year olds with murder, for instance, as an adult. Yet they can't understand sex - gotta love society's baying for blood.

>>5047131
Then don't talk as though scientific fact is the prime reason they've set the age of consent where it is.

Scientific fact: people are individuals, even kids
Shocking fact: some kids have sex as early as 10 years old
Preposterous fact: little girls are attracted to older boys and do make advances.
Depressing fact: laws can't be made to account for individuals. In an incest case you can't expect the kid to be sincere and not groomed when they say they wanted it.
An obvious lie: It was her idea, officer!

>>5047137
Not a correct comparison and you know yourself why.

>>5047153
Then you haven't been to /b/!

</punchline>

K, thread's over guys.

>>5047138
The 80%?
I admit that came directly from my rectum butwould you argue that most people would refrain from having sex until the age of 21 if the age of consent was raised to that?

I'm pretty sure most people would still have had their sexual debut before that either way.

>>5047156
Stupidity at its finest.

>>5047156
Most girls lose their virginity at 13-14? Since fucking when?

>>5047165
0/10

For a second I thought I was on AT.

No, it won't be. Are you too blind to see that we're not moving towards an acceptance of paedophilia, but rather AWAY from it?

>>5047158
There's a recent case of a 9-year old raping a girl. 10's a bit high.

>>5047170
Extreme exceptions happen, so what?

>Will pedophilia be legal

Gray matter, seeping out of ears...

>>5047166
well at my highschool.....

>>5047166
Since we live in fucking Ethiopia, where if you don't have a kid by 14 (life expectancy is 28) you're an old hag.

>>5047170
Oh hey! A 9 year old! Raping another kid! Well, now I KNOW children are capable of making informed sexual decisions.

>>5047152

So there shouldn't be any adults around, is that what you're saying? We should just allow Lord of the Flies situations because of some law? Kids are fully capable of violence and cruelty and it's sickening to see you argue that it's fine.


>>5047158
>Scientific fact: people are individuals, even kids

No, "individuals" is an ideological term, unrelated to science.


>Preposterous fact: little GIRLS are attracted to older BOYS and do make advances.

See the caps?


>An obvious lie: It was her idea, officer!

Incongruous with what you wrote earlier.

Also, this is very /jp/ related, yup.

>>5047166
You're surprised?
My sister's friend had a boyfriend at 8. This was four years ago.

>>5047174
Dude I have been to 3 highschools, I can assure you yours is an abnormal case.

>>5047172
So saying 'as early as 10' isn't quite right. The as implies the most extreme case, doesn't it?

>>5047176
did he get a timeout?

>>5047166

Let me guess, you're a white middle class american and think all middle school and high schools gilrs are pure virgins who don't know anyhting about sex ? At what age do you think girl lose their virginity ? 18 ? Because that's the age of consent in yours state ? You really think girls care about a law ?

>>5047157
I'd agree that the same exceptions to the rule should be possible for age of consent. That if the defense can show that the "child" was capable of understanding what was happening sufficiently to give informed consent to the same degree that a "legal" teenager would then they would not be considered below the age of consent.

>>5047184
mine is in the deep south

>>5047181
> 8
That wasn't a sexual relationship most likely, just two friends being children. I had a "girlfriend" when I was 9, too.

>>5047181
Yeah and I had a girlfriend when I was fucking 4. What's your point?

>>5047148
We are talking about sex, not about getting pregnant. If it's possible to have a child, then reproductive organs developed enough to handle sex, right? Then your argument that
>children aren't physically developed to handle sex
is invalid.

And what about the next point?

I don't know about this 8/9 shit, but I've known many girls who started having sex (with 20+ year olds no less) at around 11-12.

Then again, they were mostly girls from Orange County, so it's not surprising and probably just due to location.

>>5047179
In your haste to categorize every poster as us or them you made the mistake of assuming I'm trying to argue either side here or even seriously taking part in this ludicrous thread.

>>5047193
Most people here who are advocating "legalisation of paedophilia" are attracted to prepubescent children, actually. The "they can totally have babies at that age" argument doesn't work.

>sex with real women, above age limit or not

Get the FUCK out of /jp/.

>>5047187
The fuck? Chillbro. I'm 18, Canadian, lower class, and I know a fuckload of girls in the range of 14+ and the average is around 16 or 17.

>>5047200
What the dick?

>>5047200
You now realize that the 3DPD meme is merely frustration.

>>5047193
Where in the post which you quoted is that my argument? You have me confused with someone else.

>>5047206
It's as if you've never seen this before.

>>5047206
newfag

No, it'll never be accepted unless you convert to islam and move to Saudi Arabia.

>>5047208

Frustration with reality not being good enough, yeah.

So stop talking about reality.

>>5047201

You say 16-17 because that's what statistics say. How can you know the girls you know are virgin for sure ? They can claim anything they want, that doesn't make it true.

>>5047214
Frustration about being left behind in the dust. Actually this is why a lot of paedos are paedos in the first place, too.

>>5047216
>You say 16-17 because that's what statistics say. How can you know the girls you know are virgin for sure ? They can claim anything they want, that doesn't make it true.

You say 13-14 because that's what statistics say. How can you know the girls you know are virgin for sure ? They can claim anything they want, that doesn't make it true.

>>5047216
No, most girls aged 14 haven't had sex yet. In most cliques, there will probably be one who has, but most girls definitely not.

>>5047217

I doubt there is even one person here attracted to real prepubescent girls.

>>5047212
>newfag

>>5047217

/jp/ isn't a place for pedophiles, though.

See this girl? She's over a millennium in age. Isn't she cute?

>>5047224

Continue living in your perfect fantasy world in which every woman is a pure virgin, then. If you refuse to see the obvious truth, no need to argue any further, sir.

>>5047227
I dunno bro, this board seems to be filled with them.

>>5047179
>So there shouldn't be any adults around, is that what you're saying? We should just allow Lord of the Flies situations because of some law? Kids are fully capable of violence and cruelty and it's sickening to see you argue that it's fine.
I'm not arguing about what's 'right' and 'wrong', like you do, because I'm not a fucking God to know that. We are talking about laws here, and I pointed that it's technically possible for a child to kill someone ('make mistake') and get away with it. So there should be possible to make a different kind of mistake too.

>>5047241

No, there's just the one guy who shouldn't be here anyway, which leads me to my previous statement.

>>sex with real women, above age limit or not

>Get the FUCK out of /jp/.

>>5047237
Holy fuck, seriously where are you getting your information? As far as I can tell you are the one living in a fantasy world. We don't "choose" to believe this because we like the idea of "pure" virgins, this is the fucking truth. I couldn't give any less of a shit whether a girl is a virgin or not.

>>5047227
Haha, as if.

>>5047237
Saying that most girls haven't had sex yet by 14 isn't claiming every girl is a pure virgin. Why must you insist they all had sex when they were 10?
I know you didn't say that, but then again you did the same

>>5047209
It's in the post to which I replied and received your answer.

>>5047242
Your argument is illogical, because on the one hand, there is a child making a poor choice because their brain has not yet fully devoloped, and on the other hand there is a fully developed adult manipulating a child into making a decision.

>>5047251
Most (80%) of /jp/ frequenters probably do crave sexual relations. It's the boards autistic misinterpretation of an old meme that convinces you otherwise.

>>5047263
Blame your (or not?) original post >>5047137

Should kids be forbidden from eating candy? It can harm them and they don't know any better. And it's easy to convince them to do.

>>5047278
Naw dude, I didn't say that lol

>>5047279
The impact of a sexual relationship and the impact of eating a candy bar are way different.

>>5047279
Kids should be banned.

>>5047279

Durr I fail at similes.

>>5047279
Well yeah, the reason it's harmful is because of hydrogenated corn syrup, and I actually think that should be illegal. Also, that argument is just all kinds of retarded.

What's pedophilia to one country is perfectly legal in another.

>>5047266

Actually quite a few members of /jp/ (myself included) seem to suffer from schizoid personality disorder.

One of the key figures of that is actively not wanting personal relationships.

I definitely don't want to go near a girl. Or boy. Or man or woman. Age or gender or anything, I don't want anybody getting so close to me, it makes me horrifically uncomfortable. I wouldn't even be able to get aroused.

>>5047286
What's that impact you are continue talking about?

>>5047295
>>5047294
>>5047288
>>5047286
Hahahaha everyone hates this guy>>5047279

I would love to have a 12 year old step on my penis with sock-covered feet. I want her to tease me all the time and call me a demeaning nickname in public. That is one of my greatest fantasies.

I don't think it will ever happen.

>>5047297
Paedophilia is attraction to prepubescent children. I dare you to find me a developed country where sex with PREpubescent children is legal.

>>5047302

Mental trauma from a social stigma, natch.

Self-perpetuating cycle and there's nothing you can do about it

Hey boys, I know the main topic here is big hairy guys raping little girls, but is it alright if I play with little boys?

I can't get them pregnant and they can't get me pregnant- is it okay if I suck on their little pee-pees and caress their cute little balls and finger their tight , petite anuses?

>>5047313

Careful. Anal damage can be much more severe than vaginal damage. I'm talking internal hemorrhaging.

>>5047312
> Mental trauma
yes
> from a social stigma, natch.
....
You believe that.

>>5047313
16+ or GTFO

>>5047286
But you agree that you shouldn't ban something solely because it can be harmful to those who don't know any better?

I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing here, seeing where it ends up.

>>5047313
Sure, it's fine! Just look at all those cases involving attractive young schoolteachers.

>>5047313
Oh boy, here we go!

>>5047313
I know that isn't a serious reply, but it brings up another good point. Children haven't fully developed their sexual orientation. For example, if a boy is hard-wired to be straight, and is molested by a man... well I can tell you that at any age, I wouldn't exactly enjoy getting fucked by a dude.

>>5047309
>Paedophilia is attraction
>attraction
>country where sex is legal
>sex
So, what's wrong with attraction and it's legalization again?

>>5047321

>>5047328
Is there hard-wiring of sexual orientation in the first place?

>>5047330
Read the post to which I replied
> What's pedophilia to one country is perfectly legal in another.

>>5047312
If everyone thought like that, mankind would never get anywhere.

>>5047330
Shut the fuck up and stop acting like a child. (no pun intended)

It's pretty obvious at this point that we're arguing about legalization of sexual relations with a child.

>>5047316
>You believe that.
Show proofs supporting existence of the other traumas (not counting rape and physical damage, of course).

>>5047312

You know, when I was young I used to torture animals all the time. Later on I was taught by kind people that it was wrong. It's a shame we have such a social stigma, that torturing is wrong isn't it?

And the funniest thing is that if nobody told me it was wrong I probably would not have arrived at that conclusion myself.

What you call social stigma is simply the collective existence of humanity striving to find the best conditions to live the best life possible.

This thread is bananas

>>5047336

Mankind gets places through science, not sex with children.

I don't think Newton got the idea of universal gravitation by plowing a toddler under an apple tree.

>>5047333
You honestly think people would choose to be gay? With all the pressures society puts on them? I have nothing against homosexuality, but I can sure as fuck tell you I wouldn't want to be gay in this world.

>>5047349
I don't think murder is objectively wrong.

>>5047352
thats right and i think its stupid when i hear christians and othe religious people rant about it being a choice.

>>5047349
That just means you're psychotic.

>>5047361
That's because you're a fucking basement dweller that wouldn't care if someone killed you.

>>5047361
i dont think the other are so bad but murder is terrible and it has nothing to do with society.murder is taking away someone RIGHT to live without there permission(though i think suicide is all right because you want to leave and end it).

>>5047364

Every child is capable of crushing ants and its a slippery slope from there. People like you like to single people out and call them special, psychotic( and there are some truly psychotic people out there) but everything else is simply a product of your culture and society.

>>5047368
If I found something that contradicted what I believe, I'd modify my beliefs. I haven't, and I doubt you could provide a solid counterargument.

>>5047349
What's wrong with it? As far as it doesn't involve other humans' freedoms it's up to you what your hobbies are.

>>5047374
Where does this right to live come from?

I recently realized I'm not pedo I just sexulizating girl's cuteness.

This is why you should fucking keep it in 2D where it belongs. Disgusting.

Why is /jp/ so shitty, /bun/?

>>5047374
Is suicide alright for children who can't make informed decisions?

>>5047383
you are born with it

>>5047384
So sexualize cute legal girls, you creepy faggot.

>>5047379

Because the torturing of lower life forms simply because they are lower is simply objectively wrong. Logically, you would then also say that it's fine for aliens and superior life forms above you to torture and kill you.

>>5047390
You didn't answer his question.

Not that you can, anyway.

>>5047396
I wouldn't say it's fine, but I wouldn't say it's objectively wrong.

>>5047389
if they know what suicide and know that there is no coming back then yes its all right

>>5047390
That's not very helpful. Think you could elaborate?

>>5047375

Can we really call ants "alive"?

They're hivemind monsters that live to systematically steal our sugar.

I mean spiders are better for us than ants are. Bees, also a hivemind monster creature with DEATH SPINES on their asses, at least pollinate flowers and we can steal their honey.

>>5047383

It comes from the human brain. Typical athiest/sciencefag. Because something is not 100% scientific and GENES then it has no purpose in life. Actually, this is just what people use as justification to inflict harm on others.

>>5047409
if you just pour food ouside for them everyone once in a while they will stop coming to your house and become like your pets

>>5047396
>simply objectively wrong
There is no such thing as 'objectively'. To be fully objective you must be a god. Otherwise it's just your opinion.
>it's fine for aliens and superior life forms above you to torture and kill you
Maybe, especially if such humans are raised for that purpose only.
Maybe not because humans are intelligent creatures.

>>5047375
You talked about torture, not just killing a bug. You said that you wouldn't have thought there was anything wrong with it unless told so by others. Would you refrain from torture because you were taught it's wrong or because it's actually unpleasant to see an animal suffer? Does your empathy work?

>>5047410
but religious people use religion for the same thing

>>5047410
Sugoi ad hominems, comrade.

>>5047410
Are you retarded? I have no problem with natural rights, but I like to see people having a decent foundation to base their beliefs on.

>>5047377
Ok, admittedly, nothing is objectively wrong. Because it's fucking objective. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to kill someone. Although, nothing has swayed your opinion yet, so perhaps you would like to live in a society run with a completely objective point of view?

>>5047405

If adults have trouble grasping things how can you expect children to? Little kids brag about knowing and understanding things all the time to seem big and grown up, but in reality they know nothing. I'm sure we all understand this since we were all children( and some of us still are) at some point.

The point is, your flawed perception and the child's lying under pressure cannot be used to allow suicide, and you have no personal connection to that person.


>>5047409

It has absolutely nothing to do with the creature being tortured but with the mind of the torturer.

>>5047409
Awaken my child, and embrace the glory that is your birthright. Know that I am the Queen; the eternal will of the ants, and that you have been created to gather sugar for me.

>>5047420
Maybe instead of the word objective, you should use intrinsic, because it seems that there is a semantic disconnect.

>>5047432
I don't think I would...

I was just throwing objectivity around to stop people being so absolute.

>>5047430

A decent foundation? Yeah, how about I enjoy living and therefore life is good? Who am I to take life from others simply because I can, because they're dumber or smaller than me? That's wrong and my mind has arrived at that conclusion. If you thought there was nothing wrong with it then you would also have to accept someone bigger and stronger destroying you, because "That's just the way life is."

You have failed to create unshakeable values and principles, which are absolutely necessary for a stable and successful society and high quality of life.

>>5047450
Haha a noble cause, but now the topic has moved from a debate over age of consent, to a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals arguing about things they clearly don't understand.

This is a bad thread and everyone posting seriously in it should feel bad. It's like you can really see the deterioration of the userbase by observing these types of threads and examining the level of discourse contained within them.

>>5047457
Mass self-deceptions are necessary for society to exist, because of human nature. This is connected to why religions come about.

>>5047457
What's with all the accusations?

You know, ultimately these threads are pointless. No matter how good the arguments contained within are, eventually everyone runs out of things to come back with, or just loses interest, and the shit 404s, never to be seen again.

I am a virgin, so I don't think any of your crazy sexhaver laws would affect me.

Unless of course they create a law where everyone is allowed to breed once every seven years. This would mean a lot less breeding for most normal people, but much much more for myself and /jp/.

>>5047482
You can say that about any discussion.

>>5047464
It kinda always was.

>>5047484
You have a two inch penis.

>>5047464
It's because there's no way they can actually justify legal paedophilic sex.

>>5047470

What you call "self-deception" is actually a decision to stand for a cause that has brought you meaning and happiness. Is choosing to help people a cause of self-deception, deceiving yourself into believing that people are worth helping or saving? Or is it a sturdy principle that ultimately progresses the evolution of the universe? Because progress is not necessarily inevitable. Biological progress maybe, but all other progress requires human thought fuel.

>>5047490

Did anyone even tried to ?

>>5047486
Yes, but the other discussions serve a purpose. I'm sure no one in here is getting any enjoyment from arguing when the other side is going to be seen as inferior no matter what. And because the thread is just going to 404, and everyone is anonymous, we aren't arguing toward anything, we are just... arguing.

>>5047490
And you can't compellingly discredit it either. Just like religion. People aren't so good at changing beliefs because the human mind can justify utter bullshit. Arguing against someone actually reinforces their opinion most of the time.

Seriously though, what makes any of you think that paedophilia could become accepted in our lifetime?
Look at the direction culture is heading. Any sexualization of underage people is frowned upon, and you're considered a vile beast if you sexualize prepubescent people, more so than 30 years ago.

>>5047489

Is size really that important? Maybe there is a female out there who doesn't mind extremely small penises.

>>5047491
It can't be helped. What is best or true doesn't directly relate to survival.

Imminent sleep required; clarity dropping.

>>5047511
Keep telling yourself that. No girl wants to get fucked by a two inch penis.

>>5047518
There are some pedowomen.

>>5047511
But you can't break hymens with small dicks.

>>5047525
ZUN!bar plays guitar. Maybe he has long fingers.

>>5047522
Well, considering Zun here is on 4chan, I highly doubt he is a prepubescent boy.

>>5047517

Which is why we choose to recognize and honor heroes. Of course the "universe" didn't just say "Hey, honor exists. Heroes exist." It took human thought to come forth with the notion that does that sacrifice their survival for others are to be given higher status, because it requires a "higher" man to do something like that. Lowly beasts don't willingly sacrifice themselves to save strangers.

In order to create the ultimate truth and best life we must break away from the rigid view of survival. We have to look at the grand scheme of things.


>>5047518

There are good women out there, if rare. To say that the worth of a man is in his penile length is nonsense. Many women enjoy oral sex more.

>>5047511
I sometimes wish my dick were smaller so I could fuck lolis. After that, I soon realize how illogical that way of thinking is. Just be glad you don't have a long penis that falls out of underwear, or causes you to get lightheaded and drowsy when you get an erection.

I'd secretely love to have a woman call my penis cute, but I know it will never happen.

>>5047529
Judging by the quality of posts in general, I don't doubt that there are prepubescent boys here.

>>5047535
Yeah, I guess if you're really close with a girl she'll pretend not to mind that your dick is small, but how close are the majority of people here going to get with a girl? And I can say that because I've never actually been on here before, I just came for the lulzy pedo argument.

>>5047536
;_;

>>5047548
Wait, you've never been here before but you just knew there would be a "lulzy pedo argument"?

>>5047548
Why would you even care about the lenght of your penis when you're obviously never gonna use it ?

>>5047548

She'll pretend that your dick isn't small just like you'll pretend that her breasts exist and her face isn't butt ugly and her ass doesn't resemble a bleached raisin. It'll work out, trust me.

>>5047557
The thread could be linked somewhere.

>>5047557
Yeah, here's a step by step for you, if you really feel the need to overanalyze everything.

Step 1: 4chan homepage
Step 2: Tired of stupid shit on boards I have tried previously, so look for something else
Step 3: See Otaku board, remember a chapter in World War Z regarding Otaku shit
Step 4: Enter, see lulzy pedo argument, enter

I hope that clears things up for you and you are able to sleep tonight.

>>5047568
Uwaa
That's so embarrassing!

>>5047566
>implying that you have seen my girlfriend
You sir, have some explaining to do!

>>5047577
> my girlfriend
No, YOU have some explaining to do.

>>5047577

Blame the cow, not the farmer!

>>5047599
Already did, bro
Here -> >>5047572

>>5047610
Alright then sir normalfag, what's your opinion on the matter [of the thread]?

>>5047617
Oh, I've been arguing along with it. Basically, I have no problem with pedophiles, as that would be illogical, but for a number of reasons, I don't think they should be having sex with actual children.

>>5047623
And where does being actual child begin and end?

>>5047623

....

Lolicons. You don't have a problem with lolicons. If you don't want pedophiles to do that then you do have a problem with pedophiles. This overbearing focus on neutrality is really undermining your persuasiveness.

>>5047630
Oh, I just meant actual as in IRL.

But as for what you mean, there's really no way to tell. As it stands though, the current laws work just fine. The percentage of PREpubescent children that are equipped to deal with sex is so low that there is no reason to change the law. And when is the last time your parent found out about who you had fucked? Never. And that's because at our age we're not fucktarded enough to go around telling our parents our lays. And if a child is able to deal with sex, neither are they. Problem solved.

>>5047634
You DO realize lolikon is the Japanese word for paedophile, don't you?
There's no distinction between a lolikon and a paedophile. The former might sound better to you.

>>5047634
You don't seem to know what a pedophile is. It's not someone who necessarily has FUCKED a child, it's just someone who finds them attractive.

Like it has been said, people are discussing two different things. Most Americans still think of having sex with a 14 year old as "pedophilia", while in countries like Spain, that's above the age of consent.

Also, I, too, doubt that people arguing in this thread are really attracted to pre-pubescent children, and not the 12 year olds+ after reaching puberty.

I see the flamewars in this thread as simple cultural confusion, shock, etc.

Most people are probably trying to argue that having sex with 12 year old+ does not necessarily cause any harm, it can be consensual, laws should be modified to reflect "reality", etc. While the other side see all this "pedophilia" talk as strictly referring to pre-pubescent childs.

I blame the media for labeling people above the age of majority who have sex with people below the draconian ages of consent as "pedophiles". I believe this is where the misunderstanding come from.

Also, English is not my native langue, so excuse me if I sound odd. This is my take on the discussion.

>>5047634
Also, holy shit, aren't you just a bitter asshole?

>>5047642
Actually, it's just short for lolita complex. It has nothing to do with being sexually attracted to children.

>>5047647
I am attracted to prepubescent girls as well as to mature women, and I'm advocating a high age of consent.

>>5047647

You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

>>5047649

And aren't you an emasculated faggot?

>>5047658
I realize that you are trying to justify your previous post as something that didn't make me less intelligent after reading it, but in what way am I an "emasculated faggot"?

>>5047642

>You DO realize lolikon is the Japanese word for paedophile, don't you?
>There's no distinction between a lolikon and a paedophile. The former might sound better to you.

Non-japanese speaker detected
Come back when you know the difference between ロリコン and 小児性愛

>>5047673
ロリコン is a loan word, so what? Japs use those all the time. It still means pedophile/pedophilia.

>>5047677
Sorry bro, you're just flat out wrong on this one.

>>5047668

You started off with "Oh" which is a typical calling card of women and faggots. Masculine men don't say "Oh" neither in everyday conversation or in bed. Women are typically the ones who say "Oh" when they are engaged in intercourse, and since faggots are men who act like women and thus have lost their masculinity you are an emasculated faggot.

>>5047673
Not one of the underage faggots raging in the thread, but 小児性愛 is only used in medical literature and formal newspapers. Mass media uses "lolicon" for pedophile.

>>5047678
No I'm not. There's no magical distinction between 2D and 3D pedophilia, not even in Japan.

>>5047687

And mass media uses words incorrectly all the time.

>>5047682
Whoa... whoa. I don't even have words for how... Oh man. See what I did there? I said "Oh" again. You know why? Because despite your long-winded explanation, the word "oh" has absolutely no connotations whatsoever. There are so many terrible things I can say to you right now that they are getting mixed up and I can't get a single one out. That... was the single most retarded thing I have read in this entire thread. And that is really saying something.

>>5047699
Mass media = colloquial speech, deal with it.

Stop shitting the shitty thread with your underaged e-peen flamewar, you two faggots. Take it elsewhere.

>>5047700

Fancy yourself intelligent or something? "Oh man" is also something said by emasculated faggots such as yourself. Real masculine men don't use phrases like "Oh man" or "dude" or any other stoner hippy, whitewashing words. I hope you're young because if not you have some serious progress to make in terms of fortitude and strength.

>>5047714
You have some issues, brother.

>>5047714
You know what? I have seen the light! I will become a better person! I will stop saying the word "oh" and suddenly I will possess great "fortitude and strength"! Nevermind the fact that you, being on this particular message board, probably don't have a shred of masculinity, or the fact that this isn't the 1800's and people no longer worry about things such as the impact of a word on one's masculinity! With all this extra strength and fortitude, maybe I will no longer be the kind of person that lies awake at night thinking about that fucking guy that used the word "oh" on 4chan! What a dick!

Cool game of post tennis, you two Anons.

Keep on hitting that ball back and forth for another 10 posts though; you have almost killed the troll thread. Good work.

I can't believe you two are still at it, trying to prove your masculinity or whatever on 4chan. 4 FUCKING CHAN. Of all places.

>>5047761
I don't give a fuck about my masculinity, I won't lie, I'm a pretty feminine dude. I'm just getting mega-lulz from the fact that someone could be this stupid.

>>5047765
>lulz

Get out.

>>5047736

Year is irrelevant. All of your actions have an effect and saying something, consciously or subconsciously, is an action. If you were improperly conditioned then you will have to work doubly hard to recondition yourself with good, constructive habits of life.

And you are being quite simple-minded, although sarcastically, to say that just stopping the repetition of a certain word will boost your strength. The usage of this word is symptomatic of a greater, deeper, inner crumbling of your masculine pillars. You will need to address the problem at the core and not the exterior(the words and phrases uttered by habit).

>>5047771
Hahaha okay. I would just like to let everyone to that you are all serious fuckups. Goodbye. I'm off to go live a full life, fuck women, travel etc.

>>5047779
later bro

i think you're actually just going to sleep, however.

>>5047779
See you tomorrow, Anon. Have a nice nap.

>>5047765

If you stand for nothing then you will fall for anything, and fall you shall in the upcoming years, for they shall bring great fear and darkness, along with pain and misery. You will look back one day and understand that my prescription of masculinity could have been your saving grace. But you won't care because you have been conditioned to not care. And you will understand that you are worth less than a maggot, because you have utterly failed to construe a strong and unyielding meaning in this endless web of life and death.

Bump:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0kddjBgnuM
If this is normal, I'd say pedophilia already pretty mainstream.

>>5048117
Their parents should be ashamed of themselves... This kind of disgusting 3D display should be banned.

>>5047779
A full life of arguing with /jp/.

>>5047793
What the fuck? Do you just talk like that normally? Because that is awesome if you do. Holy shit.

>>5048117
Now you realize how they grow up to be whores.

>>5047793
Oh come on now, that was a bit harsh.

I bet most people don't find meaning.

>>5046106
It will be if you live forever... Everything can happen in forever :D

>>5048189
...
That's a really idiotic comment.

>>5048117
I wonder who chose/made the outfits for the girls.

>>5048438
Well it's the dancing scene, so I guess some homo or whorish woman without brains.