/lit/ - Literature

Don't-be-a-pedophile by Chris Hansen

>>13846592
Dolores wasn't a teenager when he fell in love with her. Actually I've just realised while writing this that Dolores is supposed to be an allusion to "dolorous" which has vastly lowered my evaluation of the book.

>>13846615
Hey nice! Good shit

>>13846592
Nice picture! Do you perchance know the artist?

>>13846615
>which has vastly lowered my evaluation of the book
what a fucking retard kill yourself pseud

>>13846592
my diary desu (work in progress)

>>13846592
Lolita

Crime and Punishment

>>13846659
You sound angry buddy. Cheap symbolism in character names is absolute cringe.

>>13846592
i capture the castle by dodie smith

>>13846592
>inb4 Lolita
Most of Nabakov's works have this at least as a side theme, but they're usually younger than 15

Anything besides Nabokov?

Stargirl - Spinelli
For Esme in love and squalor - Salinger
Silas Marner - Eliot
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie - Spark
Esme is a bit young though.

I like the idea of stargirl—any similar ones?

>>13847163
13 isn't young. That's peak prime.

>>13848707
kys unironically, pedophile scum

>>13848727
Hebe isn't pedo smooth brain.

>>13846592
Junichiro Tanizaki's <Naomi>
Marguerite Duras' <The Lover>
Penelope Fitzgerald's <The Blue Flower>

>>13848707
>11 year olds have a higher response than 30 year olds
I think this is bullshit.

>>13848811
more sexy 9 year olds than 50 year olds lol of course it's bullshit, literally pedo propaganda

>>13848811
>>13848828
Have you seen 11 year olds today? Also it's not what they said was sexy, but who they responded to physically.

>>13846592
Pride and Prejudice
Emma
Eleanor & Park
Turtles All the Way Down

Ugh 13 year olds are fucking disgusting. There's no physical way a sane human man can be attracted to a 13 year old, and if he is he should be put to death.

>>13848727
>>13848811
>>13848828
>>13848883
>>13848707
>yeah ill just copy a white strip over the age cases on the x-axis and make my own that serve my purposes

>>13846592
the little prince

>>13848923
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/behavior-therapy/vol/26/issue/4
I didn't edit it myself, i got it off this very site but I guess there's a chance someone else did. I tried to verify it, but it's source is behind a pay wall, if you want to buy it be my guest.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/behavior-therapy/vol/26/issue/4

I love little girls because they are innocent and pure. They have no concern for sex, but for love, and a relationship built on love will last far longer than any relationship built on marriage.

>>13848948
>built on marriage
built on lust*

It's literally impossible to be attracted to a girl below the legal age limit, and the only cure for men who are is a bullet to the brain (they aren't actually attracted to them, they're just attracted to the act of defiling something pure and causing harm).

>>13846708
Hardly cheap symbolism when the name has an obvious well-known meaning. It's not meant to be profound.

>>13848957
It’s never impossible to love. OP said “falling in love” not “having sexual attraction.”

>>13848904
i like how pedos always post child models to illustrate their point
i was looking at my middle school yearbook the other day and everyone looked like shit during puberty

All pedos deserve the gallows.

>>13848982
Compare those to a picture of them at 30 when they haven't done their make up and you'd pic the teen.

>>13848982
Personally I know a girl who shines among them all, all that I have seen of any age

>>13848707
I got global'd last time I posted that graph :--(

Further proof that no one's read past the first volume, it's clear that Nabokov got the memory scene from Lolita from here

>>13846592

Anne Frank pregnancy erotica

>>13849356
Proust gender switched the whole story though apart from the narrator

>>13848620
A lot of Frances Hodgson Burnett's ones would have similar themes ("wild" children teaching everyone else how to be civilised). I think there's a sequel to Stargirl but I haven't read it to see if it's as good
>>13848707
Sorry I only read charts in hardcopy.

>>13848778
>low IQ pedo can't tell the difference between colloquial meanings and formal meanings
All pdf files have the brains of children, unfriendly reminder

>>13848983
You find that attractive?

>>13848811
11 years old are on their way to their prime however they have started puberty and they haven't developed physical traits that signal fertility. If a man likes them then they might be mentally ill.
30 yrs old are way past their prime and even though some can look good, most really have aged like milk by this point. Unless you have been dating a 30 yrs old since her early 20's, you should just stay away because it makes no sense to feel attracted to a 30 yrs old either. If a man starts dating one in her 30s then he's probably a beta male.
The conclusion is that men who like either are bottom of the barrel and their opinion should be discarded.

OP said 14-16 not fucking 11. Pedos stop trying to make things about yourself

>>13846615
What a dumb reason to hate something