/jp/ - Otaku Culture

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>TOO

Also
>16 YEAR OLD
Reported for pedoshit.

[Moe !TRONurrVj. No.]

tkyosam is a cooldude

[Anonymous No.]

Come to Japan to play MarsMatrix

[Anonymous No.]

lo

[Anonymous No.]

But honestly I hope people don't believe this...unless you are rich or extremely handsome all you will attract is "hamburger queens" (girls who like white people exclusively) or people who want you to teach them English.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301558
Mmm, mmm. It's true that being exceptional brings you better chances to get laid. That is why Africans damn love French. But there is one thing. You must be average.

[Anonymous No.]

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuukkkkkkkkkk yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301596
>extremely handsome
How much? I'm pretty handsome. I want to go to Japanese to insult jap boys and turn their girls into sex toys.

[Anonymous No.]

Stop caring for sex since a long time ago. 5 hours ago

From now on I'll never be a lewd little girl. And if I break that promise I'll post lewd pics as a severe punishment.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301565
>16yo
>pedoshit
This is what muricunts actually believe.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301666
but it's true, not only in murrika

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301647
I hope there's a penis in there

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301666
Trying to have sex with school-age schildren is pretty pedo, dude.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301647
Lewd! You are lewd for even offering to post such pictures!

Now, where are they?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301647
Old picture is old.

[Anonymous No.]

How can I become a jrock band groupie?


I want to have all the jrock cock inside of me.

[Anonymous No.]

I think this whole concept is a myth. There are more American girls who will sleep with anyone than Japanese girls who will sleep with any foreigner.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301666

If a person isn't able to make responsible decisions and you manipulate them into having sex, that's not okay. I don't care what you call it -pedophilia, ephebophilia, whatever, it's fucked up.

[Anonymous No.]

Actually girls who are higher than 4-6/10 by 3D standarts would never date/have sex with a gaijin.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301697
>16yo
>isn't able to make responsible decisions
I didn't know murikunt kids are so retarded.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301699

"I know exactly what adult Japanese girls think!"

- White teenage male

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301703

Some of them are and some of them aren't. There isn't a magical age where you learn the consequences and advantages of decisions. It's different for everyone.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301704
whatever helps you to wet yourself at night

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301712

LAL OWNED

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301699
>higher than 4-6/10
wtf is this stone age measurement system

[Anonymous No.]

>16 year old
Jesus, look at their fucking faces, they look like they're in their 30s (and they probably are).

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301703
It's not just the kids. If they really cared about ability to take responsibility, you shouldn't be allowed to have sex until you're at least 30.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301774

No they don't?

How many women have you met in your life?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301697

I'm fine as long as it's all consensual.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301790

Consent doesn't matter if the person consenting doesn't know the gravity of what they're consenting to. It's not okay to have sex with a toddler because you asked them, "Do you want to have sex?" and they said yes because they think it's candy.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301697
You make it sound like sex is a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301799

Sex isn't a bad thing in all cases - only when people are undertaking it without understanding it or its effects fully.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301802
That's why all sex involving minors should be under the guidance and supervision of a responsible adult.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301802
i masturbate 7 times a day
does that count as sex with my hand?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301810

No, it's why kids should be educated about sex properly.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301802
Cute

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301797
> It's not okay to have sex with a toddler because you asked them, "Do you want to have sex?" and they said yes because they think it's candy.

How is this a bad thing? What is there to understand about sex? It feels nice.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301797
>>9301790 here

Quoting >>9301799 cause it's exactly what I was going to say. Seriously.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301818
But what if the toddler gets pregant?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301697
>manipulate them

Who said anything about manipulation? Normals always jump to conclusions to try and justify their blind hatred of people who like things they don't like.

What is wrong with an adult man and little girl participating in sexual acts, if the girl wants to?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301818

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/163/6/721.short
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/184/5/416.short
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213495001123
http://psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=176040
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/113/1/164/
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=172867

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301828
Owned. Didn't think that through, did you, >>9301818?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301818
Maybe to you. But toddler would scream and scream. IT HURTS! I'M BLEEDING! MOMMIEH!!!! And then years later become fat fuck and post on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301828

That's where we comes in. It goes without saying. Seriously. I'd even offer her proper lessons on sex if she allowed me to. I have no malice intent after all and would like it even more if my partner is educated in sex.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301829

Because it *is* manipulation. The little girl doesn't know what sex entails. Someone who wants to have sex with a child is not going to brief them on its dangers and consequences. They may not be physically capable of understanding it, either, depending on their age.

[Anonymous No.]

It's ageist to say two-year-olds can't make informed decisions about sex. They're just as capable of critical thought as you or me.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301830
Kids are traumatized by sex when all of their loved ones react with shock and horror, and send them to a psychiatrist who further explains to them they have been manipulated and used?

Shocker. Do you honestly believe that if an adult man and a young girl lived in a cabin away from society, and partook in a sexual relationship, she would be traumatized by it?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301854

Yeah. And while we're at it, let's start dicking dogs too. That dog is as smart as the average three-year-old. It can understand sex fully. This has been proven by BIOTRUTHS.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301855

Got any hard proof of this? An argument doesn't work where you just make assumptions and pass them off as fact. The burden of proof is on you.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301828
>>9301832

Why would you let that happen in the first place? You're all a bunch of sperglords. I'm making love to my partner with intent of pleasuring each other, not for the procreation faggots.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301879

>using sexuality as an insult

Get out.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301848
So if I ask a little girl if she wants ice cream it's manipulation because she doesn't know everything about ice cream?

Why are normals on my fucking board? You don't have to understand all the intricacies(there are none) of sex in order to partake in it. It feels good. Kids start masturbating when they are a couple years old, they are sexual beings.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301835
>IT HURTS! I'M BLEEDING! MOMMIEH!!!!

Why does everyone just assume the only way to have sex is to jam it in despite bleeding, pain and screams?

Surely there are better ways to make love with a toddler.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301894

Nope. Giving a little girl ice cream, despite her ignorance about its properties, won't damage her psychologically for the rest of her life.

FYI: this board doesn't belong to pedophiles. There are dozens of others like us. You are the minority here.

The entire staff bans pedophile apologists on sight. Go ask the mods in IRC. Go e-mail moot. Moot deleted the loli board because 'he was tired of pandering to pedophile shits.'

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301848

How about no. You should get out of that retarded logic.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301876
It's a question.

If an adult man and a little girl who loved each other lived in a cabin away from society, and had a sexual relationship, that she would suddenly become suicidal and traumatized?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301911

>*ableist insult*

That's not how you refute points.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301909
>won't damage her psychologically for the rest of her life

Why not? She doesn't understand the ice cream. According to you the reason that sex with children is wrong is because they can't understand it, so why does sex traumatize kids and ice cream doesn't?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301896
Well, what else is there? The same problems apply for the anus, and everyone knows handjobs/blowjobs are too lewd to be considered "making love".

Good thread on 4-ch about this:
http://4-ch.net/sexual/kareha.pl/1220566446/

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301913

Dunno. Nobody's done tests for this. You can't use it in an argument if there's no proof of it. You've piled a heaping helping of confirmation bias onto it already though ("who loved each other.")

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301929

It's wrong because they can't understand the consequences. There are no consequences for eating ice cream which even come in proximity to the consequences for having uninformed sex.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301909
>Nope. Giving a little girl ice cream, despite her ignorance about its properties, won't damage her psychologically for the rest of her life.

It would if ice cream was demonized by society and she would find out later she is now ruined for marriage.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301931
Glad you admit that the only tests that have been done are ones inside societies that are virulently anti-pedophilia.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301896
Are you a virgin?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301942

Yep. What are you gonna do about this? Find me a pedophilia-neutral society and do a few hundred scientific studies then get back to me, because that's the only way to be sure that the studies I've linked are biased.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301953
I'm posting on /jp/ aren't I?

[Anonymous No.]

ITT Sage and that one retard who thinks having sex with 16 year olds is pedo shit.
>mfw it is legal EVERYWHERE else in the world besides america
>BUTT HURRRR,HURRR DURR HURR MAH FREEDURM

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301941
What are the consequences of uninformed sex for a child that can't get pregnant?

It's not like the majority of pedophiles would have STD's, sex with them is astronomically safer.

[Anonymous No.]

I like the girls in op pic

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301974
>What are the consequences of uninformed sex for a child that can't get pregnant?

They are now sluts before even knowing what a slut is.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301955
Just establishing that any sources you provide are extremely biased and can't be accepted as even remotely objective.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301984
Have you looked at the state of the female population lately? They are all sluts.

Real women are incapable of being pure.

[Anonymous No.]

>16 yo
>Can't have sex

LOL!
Most 12 year olds these already had sex, you guys need to keep up with the times.

[Anonymous No.]

>little girls traumatized

You make it really seem like sex is a terribly awful thing. Most of their trauma would probably have come from sex abuse or non-consensual sex.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301968

I really don't care to have a semantic argument with you about what qualifies under the labels of 'pedophilia' and 'ephebophilia' or whatever - the argument is that it damages children psychologically to have sex with them before they are able to accurately understand sex, its consequences, etc.

>>9301974

>It's not like the majority of pedophiles would have STD's, sex with them is astronomically safer.

Got proof?

>>9301987

You haven't measured the severity of the bias, or even its existence, but you're already submitting that the studies are 'extremely biased' and 'not even remotely objective.' This is confirmation bias.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301956
Then you don't know a shit. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.]

Well I have a surprise for you /jp/.

Romantically Active Japanese Elementary School Children:
http://aramatheydidnt.livejournal.com/3920698.html

And these aren't even teenagers. Go figure.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301987
That's a funny way of saying ``I can't be bothered to read things.''

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301996

>Most of their trauma would probably have come from sex abuse or non-consensual sex.

When you make an assertion in an argument which isn't able to be proven with prior universal knowledge (eg. "Ice is cold") or isn't of significant gravity (eg. "My name is John") you have to provide the best evidence available for your claim. If you have no evidence for the claim that 'most of their trauma would probably come from.... [things]' then it is a completely empty assertion.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301998
>I Don't feel like defending my argument so I will just ignore you
I didn't know I was posting on /a/

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302018

It's not my job to find sources for your out-of-thin-air guess. That's your thing to do.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301995
There's no way to know that the girl wouldn't want to save herself for marriage when she got older. Toddlers obviously wouldn't know or care about things like romance and marriage. Every little girl I've ever talked to insisted that they'd never get married and never wanted a boyfriend. And if you honestly believe that 100% of women go around fucking whoever they want then you're delusional.

[Anonymous No.]

HERP DERP KIDS ARENT TRAUMATIZED ITS TEH PSYCHS AND PARENTS TAHT MAKES THEM TRAUMATIZED!!!1

Stop it with this line you ignorant fucks. You could apply it to PTSD or accident victims or anything. There are enough cases of kids who received no support and ended up messed up anyway. There isn't some anti-pedo conspiracy, the therapy is there BECAUSE the kids end up messed up.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302031

DUHURR BUT I JUST WANT TO FUCK KIDS ;(( THE ROMANS DID IT AND EVERYONE KNOWS THEY MADE GREAT DECISIONS

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302007

This. We're in the goddamn 21st century. Newer generations can get informed really really early about sexual matters.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301998
>Got proof?

Ok, since that's the only retort you have, then I guess you accept the premise that the only "danger of sex" for children is the possible STD.

Let's say this kid waits a couple years and is now a teenager. Guess what, they have sex too, with other teens who know as little as they do! When you have sex, there is a chance you will get an STD, this goes for all ages. If the child's first sexual experience is with someone older, who is knowledgeable about the dangers, she will be much better prepared in her future sex life.

>You haven't measured the severity of the bias, or even its existence, but you're already submitting that the studies are 'extremely biased' and 'not even remotely objective.' This is confirmation bias.

You just admitted that the only sources you have about sex with children being harmful are from societies where sex with children is a huge taboo. Therefore these studies are biased and "not even remotely objective".

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302031
No they are not.
Stop being a retard biased faggot.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302039
You leave the Romans alone, faggot. They were a great people.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302042
>Newer generations can get informed really really early about sexual matters.

What boggles my mind is that there are people against this.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302050

*more ableist/homophobic insults*

"LOGIC'D"

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302048

>Ok, since that's the only retort you have, then I guess you accept the premise that the only "danger of sex" for children is the possible STD.

>You accept... (something I said and you didn't)

A.K.A strawman fallacy example #1

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302039
>>9302031
>>9301998

This redditor is samefagging hard. Are you a little upset?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302061

We're different people, shitface. Sage posts have an 80-second cooldown.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302075
>There's no secret society manipulating the facts to prevent you from fucking kids. Why would they even do that if it wasn't harmful? What would they stand to gain?

they just hate us harmless kid-lovers for no reason
it's a conspiracy dude

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302050
If being biased towards the truth means I'm biased, then, holy shit, yes I'm biased.

Actually READ the studies in >>9301830
I didn't make that post, but I've read some of these before.

Kids aren't able to give consent.
Most kids who have sex with adults because they're morons later regret it, and plenty develop mental disorders.
The data are there. There's no secret society manipulating the facts to prevent you from fucking kids. Why would they even do that if it wasn't harmful? What would they stand to gain?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302055
Sexual liberty is dumb. Look at what it's done to marriage, health, diseases, and interpersonal relationships.

I just hope it cools down soon. The 1960s were like human society starting puberty. Now we're at that 15-16 age where we all fuck like rabbits and try to act all chill or deep about it. Hopefully we'll grow up within the next few decades.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302065
>Why would they even do that if it wasn't harmful? What would they stand to gain?

Why did people use to burn witches? Why do people still stone gays?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302061
>redditor
But reddit loves pedophilia.

Seriously, more pedophile apologists there than on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.]

irc.rizon.net
#4chan

@ALTERNATIVE: pedophilia is one of the things that i hand out permanent rangebans with no explanation for
@ALTERNATIVE: fucking kids is not ok
@ALTERNATIVE: we keep loli shit in /b/ for a reason

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302027
>And if you honestly believe that 100% of women go around fucking whoever they want then you're delusional.

Pfffthahahahahaha. Look at this normal.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302095

Other the goons, you're probably right. It's hard to tell though, since that site has upvotes to see how many people share an opinion, but for 4chan there's no such system.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302099

"Y-you're being rational?! NORMALSHIT! NORMALSHIT! I'M THE MAJORITY, REALLY GUYS!"

- one of two pedophiles

[Anonymous No.]

I'm disappointed that someone didn't post the: "It's okay for me to fuck children, because it's in our instincts" argument. I haven't been getting my fill of appeals to nature and biotruths lately.

[Anonymous No.]

Keep in mind that only the traumatized girls are reported and not the viceversa as there would be no problems at all if the sexual act is handled gently with care. You'll never have a proof on how those other girls are doing so this cannot be in any way objective.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302090
Religious prejudice?

Good thing the scientific community doesn't publish articles that contradict religion on a daily basis!

[Anonymous No.]

So, how many /jp/sies post on SRS?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302123

>so this cannot be in any way objective.

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

[Anonymous No.]

I don't know what turn this thread took, but in 6 years a friend and myself will be in the position of OP's pic.

I've already got a good $30,00+ saved for it and it's rising, he $25,000+

We've been saving up for the last few years to do an all out first class money out the ass trip to moonland where, assuming we are still virgins, we have pledged to lose our viginities on that trip and fuck many, many hot lunarians.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302129

I don't use reddit other than to sometimes look at /r/games, but I agree with the SRS mentality. People use 'humor' as a vehicle for being shit to huge groups of people way too often.

[Anonymous No.]

/jp/ used to be a place where we could post loli and take it easy

then the redditors invaded

[Anonymous No.]

None of you can prove that fucking kids is morally wrong.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302126
>Religious prejudice?

No, just prejudice in general. It doesn't have to be religious.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302138

Uh, no it wasn't. Loli had its own board right after 4chan was made, then it was deleted and confined to /b/. It's never been kosher to post it anywhere else. It still isn't.

http://www.4chan.org/rules

3. Do not post the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism, off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies, indecipherable text (example: "lol u tk him 2da bar|?"), anthropomorphic ("furry"), grotesque ("guro"), or >>>loli/shota pornography.<<<

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302136
>I don't use reddit other than to sometimes look at /r/games

Fuck off.

>>>/v/

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302149

Prejudice has to be irrational to be prejudice. Hating pedophiles is rational. They hurt children.

prej·u·dice   [prej-uh-dis] Show IPA noun, verb, prej·u·diced, prej·u·dic·ing.
noun
1.
an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302099
An extremely large portion of women do. But to say that the entire population of females does it with no exceptions just isn't realistic. Even if you have to look at extremely religious or ugly shut-in girls, there are still some, no matter how few, of them who values purity and want to save themselves. To say "Well why not have sex, it feels good so there's nothing wrong" doesn't work because it's impossible to know if the girl would want to save her virginity when she's older. By fucking her as a child would take away that option before she even grew up enough to form an opinion on it. To me, it seems unfair.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302158
>off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies, indecipherable text

Once you have been here for over a month, you will understand why you are retarded.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302098
19:52 -!- Irssi: Starting query in Rizon with ALTERNATIVE
19:53 <Archduke> CP thread on /jp/: >>9178706
19:53 <ALTERNATIVE> where's the cp
19:56 <ALTERNATIVE> if you're going to link to lolicon and call it child porn I am going to get annoyed
19:56 <ALTERNATIVE> just call it what it fucking is
19:56 <Archduke> It's child porn though.
19:56 <ALTERNATIVE> what, lolicon?
19:56 <Archduke> They're covered under the same US law.
19:57 <ALTERNATIVE> no, fuck you
19:57 <ALTERNATIVE> you will call it what it is
19:57 <ALTERNATIVE> it is against the rules either way
19:57 <ALTERNATIVE> but if you report it as child porn you are an idiot
19:57 <Archduke> I'll happily admit it's a SUBSET of child porn.
19:57 <Archduke> I mean, it's pornography of children.
19:57 <ALTERNATIVE> You will happily call it lolicon or nothing at all
19:59 <ALTERNATIVE> I don't care what your understanding of the laws are, on 4chan you will only report actual child porn as child porn
19:59 <ALTERNATIVE> lolicon is against the rules, but it does not warrent the same kind of ban as child porn
19:59 <Archduke> If you want to say photographic child porn, then that's fine.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302162

Nope. Gonna make me?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302173
19:59 <ALTERNATIVE> if you continue to report loli on the boards as illegal you will eventually be banned
20:00 <Archduke> Loli is illegal.
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> again, I don't care what your understanding of the laws are
20:00 <Archduke> At least, in the United States.
20:00 <Archduke> It's just as illegal as photographs of children naked or having sex.
20:00 <Archduke> They are covered by the same law.
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> again, I don't care what your understanding of the laws are
20:00 <Archduke> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A
20:00 <Archduke> It's not my understanding.
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> again, I don't care what your understanding of the laws are
20:00 <Archduke> This specifically mentions "cartoons".
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> I
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> don't
20:00 <ALTERNATIVE> care
20:01 <Archduke> Then why care about photographic child pornography?
20:01 <ALTERNATIVE> are you an idiot
20:01 <Archduke> Seriously, enlighten me.
20:01 <ALTERNATIVE> seriously, go away
20:02 <Archduke> But I want to know.

And that's how I got banned from #4chan

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302173

Uh, he's right. They have the 'report as child porn' option for a reason. It's because it's illegal, and has to be deleted urgently. Lolicon isn't illegal.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302170
>Hating pedophiles is rational. They hurt children.

Yeah, and I'm sure hundreds of years ago they said
>Burning witches is rational. They are evil.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302194

They said that, but they didn't have proof. We do.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302170

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302181
>ALTERNATIVE hasn't been demoted yet

Also, hi Archduke. I thought you stopped posting, why don't you go away like he says.

[Anonymous No.]

Lolikon hasn't been accepted on 4chan for over 8 years.

Even Shii, king of the pedos, assisted in bringing down image boards that contained lolikon:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050206093430/http://shii.org/overchan
>What were these again?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302208

Ugh, Shii. Fuck that dude. I remember that pretentious shit.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302181
Actually, it is your understanding. Rather, your lack of understanding.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302134
what country are you from? do you and your mate intend on living there, or just a lavish ballstothewalls trip ?

curious nigger here

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302170
> Prejudice has to be irrational to be prejudice.
Okay.

> Hating pedophiles is rational. They hurt children.
Hating people with mustaches is rational. They kill jews.

[Anonymous No.]

I never seen so much sage before.
Im bumping just to keep it from drowning

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302181

http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/ifissues/issuesrelatedlinks/cppacopacipa

It's one of those issues when the government can't make up its own mind. Supreme Court decision in 2002 basically says that loli is okay because no real child was harmed in its production.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302236
People are saging because they don't want their posts to bump the thread with /jp/-unrelated shit, idiot. /jp/ doesn't move so fast that threads need to be constantly bumped.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302234

This is a false comparison. Having a moustache does not cause you to have tendencies to hurt others. Being a pedophile means that you are actively sexually attracted to children, which increases your likelihood to hurt them.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302199
Studies that are conducted in a society that is extremely anti-pedophilia isn't proof.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302186
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A

This is the child pornography law for the United States. It was created after Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 was struck down.

The law specifically mentions cartoons:
> a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting

The law specifically mentions the depicted minor doesn't have to be real:
> Nonrequired Element of Offense.— It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.

The same law with the same offenses applies whether it's a photograph or a drawing. You may disagree with it personally, but this is a fact of United States law.
I tried to point this out to ALTERNATIVE, but he kept insisting there was some difference and he acted immaturely because of his own biases. That's quite a dangerous line of thinking since it could potentially put the site at risk.

>>9302216
It's pretty clear, see above.

>>9302238
The PROTECT Act was passed in 2003, actually in response to the case this page mentions. I don't deny it's a little hypocritical, but that doesn't change the fact that the current law clearly makes lolikon illegal. Specifically, it makes the transferral of lolikon illegal (including downloading/uploading) rather than possession. And yes, this includes to/from non-US servers.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302236
How new do you have to be. This isn't /b/.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302253

It is unless you can provide actual evidence that the studies are biased, and not simply evidence that it's possible that they are. Every piece of evidence on the planet has the possibility for bias. You have to point it out if you want to discredit it. Get to reading.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302250
> Having a moustache does not cause you to have tendencies to hurt others

Prove it. I'm waiting.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302134
Just noticed the typo...I meant I had $30,000.

>>9302217
US and we're doing the latter. I'd never actually fucking LIVE there.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302250
Hating taxi drivers is rational. They kill people in car accidents.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302236

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302265
Doesn't need proving. If you'd said something like, "Nazi officers harm Jews." then maybe it'd be a good comparison.

Though I object to >>9302170's use of the word "pedophiles". Very few pedophiles abuse children.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302265

I don't have to prove it, because it's easily demonstrable and because it's your assertion that it's so, not mine that it isn't. Having facial hair is completely unrelated to psychological tendencies. Unless you can provide overwhelming evidence to the contrary, your claim is bunk.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302265
Gandhi had a moustache.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302283

Yeah, okay. They have a tendency towards hurting children which is caused by their pedophilia. They don't do so because it's illegal, or possibly because they recognize their urges but morally object to doing it since it hurts children (these are the only acceptable sorts of pedophiles.)

[Anonymous No.]

Constanza.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302291
> They have a tendency towards hurting children which is caused by their pedophilia.
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302291
No, fuck you. I don't even disagree with your points about child sex. Pedophilia is a paraphilia. It means you're sexually attracted to prepubescent children. That's it. Not all heterosexuals are rapists, not all pedophiles are child molesters.

[Anonymous No.]

So, people accept that social stigmas can affect gender behavior, what people eat, how they dress, their sense of right and wrong etc etc.. but any notion of our societies view of pedophilia influencing the psyche of children is shunned.

Why are normals so stupid?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302303

Being sexually attracted to children means that you're more likely to have sex with them, which hurts them psychologically.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302310
> which hurts them psychologically.
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302307

It's not shunned. It's completely possible. There's no proof of it though.

>>9302314

see

>>9301830

[Anonymous No.]

Anyone else here getting a 403 when clicking on /jp/?

Please respond

[Anonymous No.]

This is the only thread I can be in as I keep getting 403 forbidden on every other board including going back to /jp/?

Am I banned and I need to change my IP or what?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302265
>>9302303
>>9302314

Fucking classical skeptics.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302319

You're either banned or it's a cache error. Try visiting www.4chan.org/banned

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302319
>>9302321
It's just the front page. Use the Catalog or archive or something to find threads.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302317
>It's not shunned.

Go write a book about how sex with children is alright, see what kind of response you get.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302321

Same here.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302328

Uh, yes, I would certainly get that response if I wrote a book about how 'sex with children is alright.' Good thing that's not what we're arguing about being shunned.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302307
Because we can't change our biology or how we've evolved.

One day we're going to be able to and there's going to be a shitstorm over political correctness.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302317
> Childhood sexual abuse was more frequent in women from disrupted homes as well as in those who had been exposed to inadequate parenting or physical abuse.
> disrupted
> inadequate
The abstract of the first article mentioned is filled with subjective terms such as these.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302332

What do you mean by this? Are you saying that pedophilia is ok because BIOTRUTHS, or something different? I may be misunderstanding.

>>9302334
If you read the whole article, you'll find that terms like 'disrupted homes' are actually defined strictly. Peer-reviewed papers are scanned for arbitrary definition.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302330
http://www.amazon.com/Trauma-Myth-Sexual-Children-Aftermath/dp/1458772241

>psychologist Susan Clancy reports on years of research and contends that it is not the abuse itself that causes trauma, but rather the narrative that is later imposed on the abuse experience.

Now take note of all the comments calling her a pedophile.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302334
That's pretty nitpicky. It's easy to quite objectively say whether a child has had adequate parenting. There's probably a whole sociology sector dedicated to that sort of thing, and it wouldn't surprise me if it was explained in the article proper.

People use short hand, grey area words to make texts more readable. More at 11.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302340
And where can I read the entire article?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302262
ILLEGAL IN THE US
I BET YOU WOULD CHOKE ON A KINDER EGG, BUT YOU CAN THANK YOUR LIFE FOR UNCLE SAM

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302343

You're actually right. The public has demonized pedophilia. I agree that this is stupid.

We're not the public, though. We never 'shunned' the idea of the societal reaction to childhood abuse being the cause for the psychological damage.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302344
> It's easy to quite objectively say whether a child has had adequate parenting.
Oh really?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302340
I'm saying child sex isn't okay because children and adults aren't compatible. This isn't some artificial, social stigma, this is a fact of how we're made. You'd tear that poor boy's anus asunder if you tried.

And yes, pedophilia is natural like every disorder. But it's not normal (traditional sense of the word) and as we've discussed, sex with children can cause serious problems.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302354

Hey, buddy: biotruths aren't acceptable on either side of the argument. Penises fit into child-sized mouths well enough. Biological incompatibility isn't an argument for pedophilia being immoral. I don't think the evidence currently points to child sex being moral, but don't do that.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302354
Bestiality is normal. Homosexuality is normal. Why can't pedophilia be normal? It is the same shit.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302358

Meant to say 'physiological incompatibility,' sorry

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302352
I'm just trying to explain why there probably aren't more studies on this subject.

Most people probably aren't willing to risk their careers by reaching conclusions that our society will react to so negatively.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302358
Well, let's say I'm talking about vaginal/anal intercourse. Maybe fellatio is all hunky-dory. Or maybe it always has negative psychological effects.

DO MORE RESEARCH, PSYCHOLOGY.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302364

Academic scientific studies aren't subject to public scrutiny. They're nothing like books, where people buy them based on how interested they are on the subject: universities and etc. buy them based on how well they think the experiment was done, how much it proves, how objectively it was carried out, etc.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302364
And this pisses me off. Regardless of what side you're on, I think most people here would agree the research should be done without fear of backlash.

It's like the whole Holocaust denial thing. I don't deny the Holocaust because I don't know anything about it. But historians should at least be allowed to investigate and publish controversial results without "omg UR A NAZI GB2JAIL".

All of this is fucking retarded and non-empirical.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302374

Yep. Demonization and taboo are fucking retarded. It's okay to hate something, but hate it based on evidence, not 'cause you're obligated to.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302371
>Academic scientific studies aren't subject to public scrutiny.

>TABLOID NEWS!
>Yesterday, Dr Piper at the Institute for Doing Science published an article saying that buggering kids is fine. Here are some other bits from the paper so you can put them on protest signs at your church rally tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.]

Friendly reminder: A large number of perpetrators of heinous acts of child molestation (forced/and or violent) aren't even pedophiles.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302389
This, pedophiles love children, and most would never hurt them.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302389
Then why would they do it?
Feels like a waste to abuse kids if you're not getting your rocks off with it.

Or is this like a "men who have sex with men" kind of deal?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302388

Maybe in rare cases like that where a specific study is picked up by a news agency, yeah. You have to admit that the effect is not nearly as dramatic as with books though. And it won't affect the study's sales.

[Anonymous No.]

If you're not raping your kids every night, you're exercising inadequate parenting.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302401

If you're attracted to children but consciously choose not to act on that urge, that's fantastic. You are the only good sort of pedophile. But you're not representative of the entire pedophilic community. Don't say things like "most would never hurt them" without proof.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302409
> You are the only good sort of pedophile.
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302397
A perpetrator of child sexual abuse is commonly assumed to be and referred to as a pedophile; however, there may be other motivations for the crime[50] (such as stress, marital problems, or the unavailability of an adult partner).[65] As child sexual abuse may or may not be an indicator that its perpetrator is a pedophile, offenders may be separated into two types: Exclusive (i.e., "true pedophiles") and non-exclusive (or, in some cases, "non-pedophilic"). According to a U.S. study on 2429 adult male sex offenders who were categorized as "pedophiles," only 7% identified themselves as exclusive; indicating that many or most child sexual abusers may fall into the non-exclusive category.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302398
It would affect the person, though. Even if his faculty are completely cool with it, he may be forced to resign or get harassed (or even attacked).

And these stories do happen. Search any news site for "study". You see "NEW STUDY CONFIRMS LINK BETWEEN EXISTENCE AND CANCER" all the time. And the studies that get stories are the most interesting ones. When you have hundreds of news organizations, all with science correspondents combing through the latest articles, some of them are going to pick it up. Especially tabloid and sensationalist networks like FOX News or The Daily Mail. Then it'll spread like wildfire.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302409
it would be impossible to get that proof. noone would take part in a survey that asks if they act on there urges towards children. and the only known pedophiles are the ones that do so its very biased

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301998
If you want the proof - here it is: check countries with low age of consent (Spain, Germany etc) ;) And guess what? Children there are not traumatized in any way more than in countries with high age of consent ;P Surprise, surprise.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9301666
Nope. 16 is legal in non-fucktard states.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302409
>Don't say things like "most would never hurt them" without proof.

Does this need proving?

There are far more pedophiles out of prison than in prison. Go to any pedo forum on Tor or I2P. Did all those people just get away with it or something?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302417
I rape 1000 children every day.
Now prove that I am not a good sort of pedophile.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302443

"most would never hurt them" is a far cry from "most have never hurt them"

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302460

But those are old pedofags. The newer generation are very kind.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302181
Why haven't you killed yourself yet?

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302460
Hurting is too much effort. It's easier to just fap to CP.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302460

I am not capable in hurting children nor would even have thought of such thing. Lolis are love.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302460
>>9302544

Indeed. Lolis are simply love.
And hurting someone you do love is beyond me.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302544
>>9302594

Hate to break up the upcoming circlejerk, but lolis don't exist in 3D.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302607
`Lolicon' translates to `pedophile'. Go back to /a/.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302630
I almost wrote "lovable lolis". Would that be better?

Real life children are nothing like the lolis in our comics. They're not cute or huggable. They're not even physically attractive.

The "lolis" >>9302544 and >>9302594 speak of only exist on your screen and in your mind.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302653
>The "lolis" >>9302544 and >>9302594 speak of only exist on your screen and in your mind.
I was talking about real loli.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302668
Well you're wrong. So terribly wrong.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302678

Same goes for you.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302350
I'll take my flamethrower over a chocolate-covered egg any day of the week.

[Anonymous No.]

>le 203 posts face

[Anonymous No.]

>>9302971
wepons or choglat

hard choice for amerigan :--DDD

[Anonymous No.]

Nice work janitor

[Anonymous No.]

>shit thread turns into pedophile apologists getting logic-stomped

Good.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303163
>pedophile apologists
Zorak pls go

[Anonymous No.]

I like 2d lolis, the only thing you can say against me is that I'm doing something illegal in some countries by viewing these pictures. That is it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303234

As long as you don't like real kids, you're golden.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303163
Its like I'm really on SA!

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303163
You know you lost the argument when you have to greentext that you won.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303321

Just showed up. Keep being mad bro.

[Anonymous No.]

Ephebophilia is natural and doesn't cause harm to children.

[Anonymous No.]

@alternative: pedophilia is a subset of pedophiles is because they made great decisions
's use it is cold") or huggable. they're consenting to. it's done without saying. seriously.
what you could potentially put them psychologically.
how interested they are you stopped posting, why africans damn love is pedo forum on /jp/?
> a specific study confirms link to have to know everything about sexual relationship, she doesn't work where we have sex is dumb. look at it, because it with your mind.
same law clearly makes lolikon hasn't been here for the rules, but toddler would take away from drowning
i really don't have an 80-second cooldown.
uh, he's right. the rest of them traumatized!!!1
>there's no way to teach them they recognize their careers by biotruths.

[Anonymous No.]

>>9303937
Markov chains are so wacky banana sporks mittens xD

[Anonymous No.]

1. how dis fred turn into pedo dicksuctin? :D
2. how iz it that any1 on jeepee cares bout dis moralfag pedo sheet?!O_O tott we arez better then dem christians XD was i rong??

[Anonymous No.]

Americans clap after 20 year olds are charged as pedos and statutory rapists for having a 16 year old girlfriend.