Research on lolicon("virtual child porn*graphy") and pedophilia.

[Anonymous No.14855208]

I'm looking for more research on the subject given that the belief that lolicons are child rapists is on the raise as of lately. I'd be quite grateful if provided with links of respectable papers.

So far I only got this, but I don't trust this source quite that much
>https://openjournals.maastrichtuniversity.nl/Marble/article/view/374

Additionally, you can discuss. What do you think? I personally believe that there is a correlation with pedophilia and lolicon, but I believe that child rape is more related to impulsive and sociopathic tendencies than it is to pedophilia.
I think pedophilia is an interesting topic that is not discussed enough. Here's some more stuff I've found on it.
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9368625/
>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27732028/
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8888370/
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8735730/
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8419289/

[Anonymous No.14855213]

Having spent a bit of time reading these, I've developed the concern that perhaps the way in which pedophiles are relentlessly stigmatized and treated by the pubilc as well as in media may contribute more to a greater chance of sexual offense (which ironically enough directly opposes the intended goal of protecing/saving children).

Another thing that I've become concerned of is the dilution and loss of meaning of the word, as well as a bunch of other related words(like pedosexual, pederast, or even offender).

I'll now look for excerpts that I fixated on as I was reading.

[Anonymous No.14855240]

>The public stigma associated with pedophilia, the sexual attraction to prepubescent children, is tremendous. Previous research indicates that undifferentiated media coverage plays an essential role in perpetuating the public stigma by falsely equating pedophilia and child sexual abuse (CSA) and thus may stop persons suffering from a pedophilic disorder from seeking professional help.

It's funny that woke lefties are starting to say we shouldn't "stigmatize' pedophiles, and there is also a whole "HIV decriminalization" movement, which is relatively mainstream actually, and it advocates for the removal of laws prohibiting the non-disclosure and transmission of HIV because they supposedly stigmatize the LGBT community. It's funny they're concerned about public stigma when it comes to pedos or people who don't disclose their STD status to their sex partners, but when it comes to antivaxxers they have no concerns about stigma or using legal force to ensure compliance with lockdowns or mask mandates.

[Anonymous No.14855247]

>>14855213
>Having spent a bit of time reading these, I've developed the concern that perhaps the way in which pedophiles are relentlessly stigmatized and treated by the pubilc as well as in media may contribute more to a greater chance of sexual offense (which ironically enough directly opposes the intended goal of protecing/saving children).
Catering to their delusions just makes them feel like wanting to fuck children isn't wrong. Shaming and punishing them keeps them down and that's a good thing.

[Anonymous No.14855251]

>>14855240
I find it mildly amusing that the very first person besides me to post in my thread immediately brings up politics. 2016 did a real number on this website.

Either way, I don't know how decriminalization of HIV non-disclosure could bring any societal benefit or reduction in statistics of death or traumatic events(in fact, it could increase these things).
>>14855247
It seemingly makes them more likely to not seek help and eventually go out of control and ultimately offend(sources are in the OP, but they aren't completely reliable so I'd like to hoard superior information). I'd like you to point me towards research that supports your views, because I fear that my ability to find reliable scientific research is limited.

[Anonymous No.14855256]

>>14855251
>I'd like you to point me towards research that supports your views, because I fear that my ability to find reliable scientific research is limited.
In what universe would making something socially acceptable reduce the rate of it happening?

[Anonymous No.14855259]

>>14855208

As someone who looked at loli doujin in the past, and as someone who saw alot of the real stuff way back before 2010 on 4chans /b/ board...and as someone who self reflects and self analyzes. I'd have to say that loli material, both the real stuff and drawn does spread desire, because it spreads awareness.

Look at regular pornography. If you had never looked at regular porn in your life, would you ever have even thought of, or considered engaging, in alot of the sexual acts you see on there? Facial cumshots, anal, getting a girl to drink your pee, bondage, footjobs etc etc. No, alot of those acts wouldn't have even crossed your mind...that is until it was shown to you.

Again lets use a similar example, horror movies. If you had never watched the hundreds or thousands of horror movies you saw...would you be as afraid that you're going to get axe murdered in the woods, late out at night on a camping trip? No, because the thought would never have even crossed your mind.

Do alot of people act on the porn they watch? Yes they do, given the opportunity. So what really is the cause of these deviant sexual acts manifesting into the physical? Answer: desire + opportunity.

If you leave your basement dwelling computer obsessed uncle, alone with your daughter to babysit, don't be surprised if something happens. You gave him provision/opportunity. If someone can get away with something without being caught, and they have the desire, there's a strong possibility it could happen

[Anonymous No.14855261]

>>14855256
Did you read the papers? you're making a mistake that is pointed out more than one time in a couple of these, which is that of mistaking pedophiles with offenders.
Child rape/molestation should never be made acceptable, for the same reasons thievery and murder should never be acceptable. However, this is not what this thread is about.

[Anonymous No.14855267]

>>14855261
These studies exist to justify and encourage pedophile acceptance. Do you think they would come to any other conclusion if they weren't using motivated reasoning?

Because if you tell people pedophilia isn't a disease, why would they ever get treatment?

[Anonymous No.14855275]

>>14855259

To add to this, from mentally investigating and self analyzing myself. It seems like the attraction itself stems from a severe lack of social opportunity and development.

A person who was never "touchy" growing up...who never hugged and kissed his cousins...played with his sisters, or rough played with his brothers. A person who never held a baby, never had a girlfriend and touched her, or was intimate with her...who never developed social maturity and comfort with the opposite sex...and with touch, emotions, self expression, feeling loved and loving back etc

This person is a more likely candidate to be interested in loli, because they're socially stunted. I mean look at Japan, they are a nation of socially stunted introverts...and this has manifested into being a nation of perverts.

Japanese people act one way externally, but hide their true intentions. They avoid "touch"...this level of social ineptitude can only breed loli lovers, because the fantasy of interacting with a loli, is a fantasy of power, a fantasy of not being judged, a fantasy that the other person is not socially aware and so you can have your way with them...it's a fantasy of power

[Anonymous No.14855277]

>>14855259
Studies made on agression-related sexual fantasies such as rape mildly support your experience and reasoning. Do you have more information on the subject?.

Now, focusing on the "uncle" example that you provided, would you say that in that case-scenario the uncle ends up raping more because of internet exposure to porn that gave him the idea, or because of poor impulse control, dark triad traits or simple poor mental faculties? it could additionally be a mixture of all elements. Regardless of the answer, what can realistically be done to diminish offence given that our current solutions are seemingly under effective and that the more proposed solutions of simply killing pedophiles are apparently not feasible due to growing human rights concerns and regulations?

[Anonymous No.14855300]

>>14855275
I'm all those things. I have 0 interest in loli. I don't care what the fucking "fantasy" is, flat-chested literal children thinking about homework and barbie dolls make my dick soft.

[Anonymous No.14855303]

>>14855277
>Regardless of the answer, what can realistically be done to diminish offence given that our current solutions are seemingly under effective and that the more proposed solutions of simply killing pedophiles are apparently not feasible due to growing human rights concerns and regulations?
We could always move the overton window back so that killing them is acceptable.

[Anonymous No.14855308]

>>14855208
Sexual degeneracy is all the same thing

[Anonymous No.14855315]

>>14855300
The irony is that regardless of how "legitimate" your paperwork is, understand that the sentiments of peasants will never have any bearing upon the fate of society. The irony is that pedophilia has been in sharp decline because of the increased promotion of transgenderism and interracial shit, and even though these people may still be pedophiles, they openly express a different predominant sexual deviance due to social pressure.

Pedophillia used to be a joke on 4chan because honestly nobody really gave a fuck. Nobody was upset about it until it became the target of the 2-minutes-hate on social media so the propagandists could compel the sexual deviants towards other fetishes.

[Anonymous No.14855316]

>>14855308
All of them should be illegal. Thank you for pointing that out.

[Anonymous No.14855321]

>>14855308
>Pedophillia used to be a joke on 4chan because honestly nobody really gave a fuck

Pic related demonstrates the effect that the increased propaganda attacking pedophillia has, and this is very much so in favor of the propagandists who want to seek conflict.

>Pedophiles look like normal people, usually
>This doesn't instantly outrage people as much as "different" people
>The propagandists rely on outrage to get political buy-in
>More exposure of visibly different people causes more instantaneous outrage, thus more buy-in
>This is the only reason why pedophilia is antagonized in the West right now
>It's solely to push people towards IR/Tranny shit for the sake of causing conflict among peasants

[Anonymous No.14855327]

>>14855208
https://archive.macleans.ca/article/2005/5/30/the-star-trek-connection
>THE STAR TREK CONNECTION
>A surprising number of child sex abusers appear to be Trekkies. Trying to figure out what that means, however, shows how little we really know about pedophiles

[Anonymous No.14855336]

>>14855315
Nothing to disagree with here. Some people are pedos, and most aren't. But the people blaming it on their mom not holding them enough are just full of shit. Either you aren't interested in girls lacking secondary sexual characteristics, or the part of your brain that figures out who you should fuck is "low IQ".

[Anonymous No.14855342]

>>14855277

>Studies made on agression-related sexual fantasies such as rape mildly support your experience and reasoning. Do you have more information on the subject?

Yes, there is a saying "the full soul loatheth an honeycomb, but to the hungry every bitter thing is sweet". A person who is starving is more likely to commit a crime to get food right? But a person who is stuffed and well fed is going to gag at the thought of eating more food. So there is a "need" there which is not being satiated, and perhaps is even being repressed...and so then it all comes out and manifests itself one day in an undesirable form

>would you say that in that case-scenario the uncle ends up raping more because of internet exposure to porn that gave him the idea, or because of poor impulse control, dark triad traits or simple poor mental faculties?

The awareness itself of what's possible definitely plays the primary contributing factor in the crime. You can relate this to free-will in general...if you don't know what's possible, you will continue in your routine set of behaviors, until something comes along.

So If I show you a commercial of some delicious steak slathered in butter and herbs, and I'm taking a bite and my mouth is salivating all over the place...that is a temptation. Before this ad you never knew steak could be that delicious, and it's the same concept with pornography. The impulse control thing depends on opportunity, but a lower IQ person probably has less impulse control, or a person on drugs

[Anonymous No.14855355]

>>14855316
>All of them should be illegal.

I mean, there's no point in policing this shit at all because the sexual degeneracy shit is just a symptom of the disease that is sexual liberation. Promoting sexual hedonism does nothing but build tolerance to sex.

I was born in the 90s and as an 11 year old I was already watching bestiality, dudes cutting their dicks off, and lesbian S&M porn as if it were normal. The more you "loosen the butthole" of sexual liberation, the more shit you get all over the place. The more you allow people to stretch that butthole, the looser it gets. It's the samepsychological tolerance as drug abuse.

The only functional degree of prosocial sexuality is the complete abolition of all sexual freedom. Freedom is solely the capacity to make mistakes and deviate from the optimum, and that is exactly what happens when the degenerates were given the freedom to promote their antisocial lifestyle.

There's no point in "White knighting" to "protect the kids" any more than there is in slapping the needle out of the arm of some junkie with collapsed veins dying on the street. .

The kids used to be way sluttier because they were raised on shit like Britney Spears, who was on basic network television, on MTV, and kids would just all watch this girl dance with her titties out and covered in foam, and they believed this was the ideal woman.

The tolerance phenomenon occurred and even this level of normal yet overt sexuality lost its grasp on the children as they were then exposed to more antisocial forms of sexuality like homosexuality, interracial, and transgenderism, all of which will have a much higher interest in curious people than the typical vanilla shit.

That's why I never got into hetero shit as a kid, just fucked up shit, just looking at "normal sex" and I felt no connection to that act, since I started on the harder horse porn, watching some people get fucked by a horses, I couldn't get "high" from softer "drugs".

[Anonymous No.14855360]

>>14855300

I guarantee if you were a fed or something, and it was your job to browse through real loli for evidence...you would turn into a pedo. A boner would burst out of your jeans one day with the force of 1000 suns. Don't act so superior

[Anonymous No.14855371]

>>14855342
Well, it is true and backed by research that being a pedophile is a risk factor for future offence.
In a population of pedophiles and a same-sized population of normal people, the pedophile population will have a greater chance of eventually offending. This is backed by data.
But this makes me wonder
>can a person become a pedophile by interacting with suggestive media?
>what do we do with the non-offending pedophiles?
>how do we diminish the chances of first or repeated offence in pedophilic populations?

last question is the one that gets tricky, because social stigmatization seems to not work and even make the problem worse for reasons that aren't entirely understood, but at the same time the data is insufficient, so the "more stigmatization reduces offence" hypothesis could ultimately still be proven right(thus retroactively proving current data wrong) if more time and resources are spent for more, better research. What do you think?

[Anonymous No.14855374]

>>14855336
>the part of your brain that figures out who you should fuck is "low IQ".

It's not about "intelligence", the most intelligent people are generally pedophiles for multiple reasons. There's thrill of crime, since vanilla is easy and boring. There's market-value, which is always higher on virgins. There's a sense of power and supremacy, of exclucivity. There's a lot of social and psychological factors that go into pedophilia.

There are others such as being deprived of childhood romance/sex/affection, and that would lead people to feel "left behind" sexually. There's just sexual sadism. There's the need to be "in control" which you don't have when a woman with rights and intelligence is with you. There's a romantic/emotional attraction to innocence, or a disgust with the immoral ways of the adults.

Just like with transgenderism, the fetish generally acts to serve out a fantasy, or an unmet desire, and often it serves to fill many of these unmet desires. This is why this group of people "sexual degenerates" is so easily influenced, because all you have to do is convince very desperate and discontented people that "X sexual fetish will meet Y unmet desire", which is why so many transgenders just go completely overboard in blind faith, because without some sort of Deus Ex Machina to save their dysfunctional social and sex lives, they will continue to suffer from their social and sexual failures, and they're desperate enough to put faith even in incredibly irrational ideas because they have no other alternative.

[Anonymous No.14855381]

OP post
>I'm looking for more research on the subject
and then retarded masturbators with guilty consciences are emotionally triggered to start spouting about their all-knowing expertise on the topic which are really all just blatantly constructed self serving conjecture, none of which is backed by any research whatsoever.
nobody replies with any actual research whatsoever beyond those acquired while masturbating to pornography.
this is how irrational and completely controlled by emotional triggers the masturbators are, they are literally and fundamentally incapable of rationality, instead everything is a emotional pretense driven by their shameful masturbatory lifestyle.

[Anonymous No.14855382]

>>14855374

I'm describing people who are "psychological pedophiles" here, who have some predominant psychological sexual attraction to children. I would still argue that most child sexual abuse is "animalistic" child sexual abuse, in that it is animalistic people with low inteligence having sex with children for the same reason that a dog will have sex with a child, without really producing any sort of meaningful psychological aversion to the act.

Those people are probably the most common, but in terms of true pedophiles who are psychologically exclusively limited to being sexually attracted to children and unattracted to adults, it is very similiar to the unmeetable desire being meet with profound fantasy, just like transgenderism. I doubt these people really have access to children, and that's why I'd say most child sexual abuse isn't actually a pedophilic crime, just an animalistic and opportunistic one.

As for me, I'm an "ideological pedophile" in the sense that I hate people, I believe they are worthy of suffering, child sexual abuse infuriates the everyman, and thus, as a means to the end of torturing man by his own imperfections, I support the proliferation of child sexual abuse. The men who have unleashed endless sexual degeneracy upon the world deserve nothing less than to watch their children be raped, as he who lives by the sword must die by the sword. This would be just desserts in my eyes, though this hatred is independent of any real sexual gratification, it is simple hatred and sadism, it's not genuine pedophilia.

[Anonymous No.14855385]

>>14855374
Not literal intelligence, brainlet. You just got some bad genes that either directly or indirectly influenced your brain to misclassify girls who can't bear you children and are still to young give you a preview of whether they have good genes as sexually desirable.

It's really that simple. If you're not into fucking kids, no "deprivation" is going to make you prefer them to (post)pubescent females. No fantasy of virginity, innocence, sadism, whatever, requires a 9-year-old.

[Anonymous No.14855386]

>>14855381

There are numerous functional economic advantages to the sexualization of children, which I support merely on grounds of basic capitalism, but the people are so far removed from sanity that trying to support functional arguments is like trying to preach about the benefits of good diet and exercise to some heroin junkie dying on the street. Clearly, despite the advice being sound, it is of no value to this man and will no way prevent the conseqeucnes of his poor decision making

It's a shame the gestapo burned all of my treatieses, but when the man refuses to listen to reason, to the point of going so far as to burn down the house of reason in indignation, it is very hard to justify investing time, effort, and energy into helping him understand the difference between rational decision making and folly.

[Anonymous No.14855397]

>>14855385
>misclassify girls who can't bear you children (yet)

They will very rapidly be able to bear you children, so this isn't an argument unless you believe humans have 0 capacity to plan into the future.


>are still to young give you a preview of whether they have good genes as sexually desirable.

That's a fucking joke. That's hilarious. You could give me an hour in a classroom full of 6 year olds and I could tell you with 95% certainty which of those children have prosocial and beneficial traits, a predisposition to health, and a predisposition to intelligence.

I would be confident in euthanizing the majority of those 6 year olds solely on grounds that I can accurately judge the social, economic, and sexual value of those children to the point of telling which will be detrimental to society and which will be beneficial to society.

Either you've spent 0 time with children, or you are completely blind to the inescapably palpable metrics of quality, both beneficial and detrimental, that are endlessly palpable within children.

> If you're not into fucking kids, no "deprivation" is going to make you prefer them

It's not a "deprivation", it's the fact that these people are psychologically stunted to the point of sexually having the mind of a child, for whatever reason. Basically a lack of social and sexual interaction has caused "malnourishment" of the mind to the point where it is functionally at the level of a prepubescent child.

[Anonymous No.14855414]

>>14855208
There was this guy who sat at home and beat of to shota for 3 months and published a paper about it.

https://youtube.com/shorts/Tc0tI4b8GcI?feature=share

He claims that it wasn't pedophilia since it was just about re-living your childhood. I call bs on that. The whole paper felt like he was just trying to find "non depraved" reason as to why jerking of to shota was okay. He also claimed that he never jerked of to it before, even thou he made a documentary about it. Thats bs.

[Anonymous No.14855415]

>>14855397
>, it's the fact that these people are psychologically stunted to the point of sexually having the mind of a child

This also is why people who are sexually abused as children often go on to repeat the act on their own kids, because due to their sexual experience, their mind infers that "sexual matuirty" is 6-years-old or whatever and now they feel that this is reasonable, acceptable, and often times enjoyable, since many people who were sexually abused without traumatic intervention by the legal system truly believed that the sexual abuser "loved them" or was just "having fun", or other innocuous things like that. This is the reason why children get sexually abused so easily,because they genuinely think the act is enjoyable, fun, or just another form of social touching like kissing and hugging.

For victims of sexual abuse, this is because generally, the life of an animla is defined as "grow->sex->die", so by sexually abusing the child at the age of six, the psychological growth stops, and the sexual part of the brain starts to develop instead. The body responds to the sexual abuse and just says "Looks like it's time for sex now, I don't need to grow anymore". It's just a biological reaction, and I'm sure you would get the same sort of results if you sexually abused animals, seeing their development rapidly shift from one of growth to one of sex, and then seeing the same precocious sexual behaviors in the abused animals that you do in humans.

[Anonymous No.14855416]

>>14855381

>Additionally, you can discuss. What do you think?

The OP said we can discuss the issue in general.

>>14855371

>how do we diminish the chances of first or repeated offence in pedophilic populations?

Keep an eye on your kids. Don't provide any opportunity for your kid to be alone with someone you don't trust...primarily men. Be distrustful of socially inept people. Scrub pornography from the internet

>stigmatization seems to not work and even make the problem worse for reasons that aren't entirely understood

It's easy to understand, it's the forbidden fruit analogy. Because it's taboo that makes it "hotter". It's a relative, psychological, emotive concept. It's like trying to understand why someone would cut off his enemies head and stick it on a pike as a trophy

>so the "more stigmatization reduces offence" hypothesis could ultimately still be proven right (thus retroactively proving current data wrong) if more time and resources are spent for more, better research. What do you think?

Yes, stigmatization and punishment will continue to work to keep people away. You aren't going to stop everybody though, that's just how things are. The dumb horny Indian dudes are always going to be around on Omegle, and will always drive out to me a 10 year old girl...it doesn't matter what preventative measures you use..the sex drive in some races is absolute

[Anonymous No.14855418]

>>14855397
>They will very rapidly be able to bear you children, so this isn't an argument unless you believe humans have 0 capacity to plan into the future.
At which point you are no longer attracted to them since they're no longer lolis.
>That's a fucking joke. That's hilarious. You could give me an hour in a classroom full of 6 year olds and I could tell you with 95% certainty which of those children have prosocial and beneficial traits, a predisposition to health, and a predisposition to intelligence.
Yeah, because that's what gets men hard, "a predisposition to health and intelligence".
>It's not a "deprivation", it's the fact that these people are psychologically stunted to the point of sexually having the mind of a child, for whatever reason. Basically a lack of social and sexual interaction has caused "malnourishment" of the mind to the point where it is functionally at the level of a prepubescent child.
Prepubescent kids don't have a sexuality. My dick didn't even get hard at 10. I love big tits but when I was 11, I embarrassingly argued (LARPIng on forums as a grown up) that breasts are just sacks of fat for feeding babies and it's gross to be attracted to them.

[Anonymous No.14855425]

>>14855415

>according to the CDC PIAAC
>62% of American adults have less mental capacity than an 11 year old
>30% of American adults have less mental capacity than a 9 year old
>only 13% of America is black

Humans are such animalistic creatures that just walking the streets it's like witnessing giant 9-year-olds wandering around and fucking each other. Clearly they're mentally incapable of providing valid consent to sex any more than a 9 year old,, but people pretend that these are "functional psychologically autonomous adults", which is hardly true at all. They're little more than children, and this is demonstrated in both their lifestyle and behaviors.

This is 62% of American adults, mind you. The majority of married couples in the USA, provided that sexual partners match intelligence, are psychologically no more mentally capable than 11-year-olds or 9-year olds fucking each other. Humans are animals, and clearly no animal has needed any degree of intelligence to successfully pursue sex, but this ideological notion of "capacity to consent to sex" is fucking farcical, because according to the CDC, 88% of American adults lack the mental capacity to provide valid consent to sex.

Regardless.... I'm sure most of you here just feel "guilty" due to being pedophiles. Guilt and shame are the reasons that your people are too cowardly to to out and euthanize the people who are detriimental to society.

You feel "guilt" when you would walk into a classroom full of children and euthanize half of them for having undesriable traits. "Guilt" is the reason you have 2,000,000 antisocial criminals who are incarcerated rather than killed. "Guilt" is the reason the detrimental humans continue to bilght your society because euthanizing them would make allegedly prosocial people feel "guilty".

If you feel "guilt" for anything, you suffer from a disease that is far more detrimental than even the most profoundly deranged and mentally ill person who sexually abuses children.

[Anonymous No.14855441]

>>14855418
>Prepubescent kids don't have a sexuality.

People have varying degrees of sexuality. Some children are more sexual than others. Girls also sexually mature much faster than men. I don't know why you had no interest in sexuality as a child, other than perhaps some form of mental disorder.

https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/preschool/Pages/Sexual-Behaviors-Young-Children.aspx

Even as a child, 6 years old, I enjoyed thoughts of nudity with the opposite gender, and though I associated those with marriage for whatever reason, they were wholesome, but still pseudo-sexual despite myself never having been sexually abused to my knowledge.

I remember both a nude heterosexual marriage dream around the age of 7, as well as a homosexual shower dream around the age of 8, despite having little to no sexual exposure, the "sex acts" consisted of hugging, but there was still that natural inclination unto those type of thoughts.

Even if it isn't a raw libidinous attraction to the visual of breasts, kids will generally have a lot of interest in pseudo-sexual activity like hugging, kissing, and whatever else is normalized with them. It's more of a desire for intimacy, love, and relationship, and this borders upon sexuality. The sexuality of children really isn't "I like tits and ass and fuck meaty bitches because I'm a big man".

[Anonymous No.14855461]

>>14855208
>I believe that child rape is more related to impulsive and sociopathic tendencies than it is to pedophilia.
a lot of people (most?) that rape children arent actually pedophiles, theyre more like "opportunistic sexual predators", where they want to fuck someone, dont have any problem raping, and children are easy targets.

[Anonymous No.14855482]

>>14855355
>watching some people get fucked by a horses, I couldn't get "high" from softer "drugs"
this
grew up on cannibalcupcake and other bitches from the forum and "normal" porn does absolutely nothing to me

[Anonymous No.14855485]

>>14855441
That's just curiosity. I also wanted to know what girls have down there. I even licked a 6-year-old's pussy at 7, but all it felt like like was gross-tasting skin. I was sexually "abused" though, and I put it in quotes because it literally never bothered me since it meant nothing to me.

Really dude, it's just you and others like you. I have also watched a ton of porn. Still don't feel any desire to cum on a woman's face, or interest in bondage, or double/triple/whatever penetration, or to suck a man's dick, or whatever the fuck else people claim you'll develop a fetish for when vanilla porn stops doing it for you. It has, by the way, diminished its allure to me, but despite my terminally single status, it has never gone beyond what I initially wanted from real women.

I'm not saying everyone is like me, but I am saying that not being into lolis is as simple as not being attracted to kids.

[Anonymous No.14855487]

What the fuck is wrong with you people. Is this all one anon?

[Anonymous No.14855523]

>>14855487
what's the issue? that nobody is reading the OP links?

[Anonymous No.14855526]

>>14855523
People are sharing a lot of really insane schizo fantasies in this thread.

[Anonymous No.14855544]

>>14855213
>>14855461
This.
>>14855267
What's the point of even reading the papers in the first place if you're only going to accept the ones that say what you want to believe?
>>14855385
How do you feel about MILFs?

[Anonymous No.14855559]

>>14855544
>How do you feel about MILFs?
Don't know. I'm into MILF porn but IRL I'm more attracted to young women. I think it's because American porn has certain types of women. Like, Euro porn has girls like Anissa Kate and Valentina Nappi, who had a proper woman's body even as teens, while American porn makes you choose between Piper Perri type child-like actresses if you're looking for teens/20s girls or attractive 30s/40s women with boob jobs.

[Anonymous No.14855568]

>>14855544
>What's the point of even reading the papers in the first place if you're only going to accept the ones that say what you want to believe?
I would ask the same of you. You're not reading studies or making real-world observations on the depravity of pedophilia, you just want to defend it. It's not worthwhile to read cherry-picked data produced by pedophiles who want their paraphilia to be socially acceptable. They want to diddle kids and I'd rather they didn't, that's all there is to it.

[Anonymous No.14855573]

I think we should talk about what race is more likely to indulge in pedophilia also. The two races off the top of my head immediately are:

1. Whites
2. Indians

Why do white people and Indians love diddling kids so much?

Lets also talk about what race of children are the most desirable when it comes to pedophilia:

First place: whites
Last place: blacks

[Anonymous No.14855578]

>>14855568
If you think the data is cherry picked, then show us more data. So far you've only been acting angry and paranoid without really providing anything. (Not that anon, by the way)

[Anonymous No.14855580]

>>14855573
Don't you racists ever get tired of this? Even if you find real differences between races, the punchline is always racism. It yields no additional knowledge.

[Anonymous No.14855582]

>>14855526
In case you hadn't noticed, the homosexual pedophiles who masturbate to children's cartoons are also massive exhibitionists. they can't just quietly masturbate to children's cartoons, they feel uncontrollably driven to spam their paraphilic infantilist pornography all over the internet, but especially in inappropriate locations where they know that it will be unwelcome enough to generate attention.

[Anonymous No.14855584]

>>14855573
>The two races off the top of my head immediately are:
>1. Whites
>2. Indians
Probably because for Muslims and Africans, sexually abusing children is not "pedophilia" but the default way of life.

[Anonymous No.14855586]

>>14855580

Dude it isn't racist...have you seen how horny Indians are on the internet?

And all of the sexually perverse crimes, like pedophilia seem to be committed by white people. All the "stuff" you found on the darkweb in the past was all white people

[Anonymous No.14855588]

>>14855584

Hey bro, every race has a weakness...and for whites it just happens to be methamphetamine and pedophilia

[Anonymous No.14855590]

>>14855586
Blacks just don't think it's wrong so they don't report each other.

[Anonymous No.14855593]

>>14855580
Some people in this website aren't willing to talk about anything unless they somehow worm race into the topic. Nothing to be done about it, you can't get them to engage with a topic unless race is related or forced to be related, and since 2016 they're the most common kind of user in this entire website. If you were interested in actual on topic and good faith discussion, then consider this thread over.

[Anonymous No.14855603]

>>14855593

Wow, butthurt. You mock abos in Australia for having low IQ, but can't even handle a light jab on the shoulder saying whites may be more predisposed to pedophilic/sexually deviant tendencies (due to their higher IQ/greater mental capacity no doubt). In some ways it could almost be looked at as a compliment. Boo hoo

[Anonymous No.14855607]

>>14855603
>You mock abos in Australia
No I don't. I don't even think of them at all. Who do you think I am?. This thread is about a certain topic. Race is a different topic, one that is constantly polluting every single board on this website no matter how extraordinarily unrelated, and no matter what a thread is about, as soon as anybody mentions race, the thread is pretty much over and it becomes everything the entire thread is about. How could that not bother me? Now this thread is no longer about paedophilia and the influence of fiction and stigmatization on paedophiles, but about paedophilia and race. Just like every other thread in this website has to be "[Topic] + race". It gets boring when you're not severely mentally ill.

[Anonymous No.14855619]

>>14855586
OK, and what are you going to do with these findings? Not even going to argue about social, cultural, technological and incidental factors. Let's say you're 100% right and race is the only thing that explains differentials in pedophilia between races. Of what interest is this to anyone other than a race realist masturbator?
>>14855593
I just don't understand how they aren't sick of it. It's like they are permanently stuck in teenage rebellion against the big liberal dad in their head.

[Anonymous No.14855630]

>>14855619

>Of what interest is this to anyone other than a race realist masturbator?

Race and culture are heavily integrated with each other, so perhaps to STOP pedophilia in the future, or to implement preventative measures...you could look at general tendencies of the offending race. So for example, whites tend to be very individualistic, other than for example Greeks, they stick together and are heavily family orientated.

Indians and their cultural and moral background imposes no strong restriction or public shaming on sexual deviancy, let alone defecating on the streets.

So perhaps in both of these instances, we could try and offshoot genetic predispositions via culture

[Anonymous No.14855643]

>>14855630

Furthermore, we can know that pedophiles in general are attracted the most to white children, because they look like little angels/cupids...and therefore be able to intercept them. Racial data is extremely useful.

[Anonymous No.14855648]

>>14855643
>because they look like little angels/cupids
That's a weirdly specific thing to say. How would you know that?

[Anonymous No.14855649]

>>14855526
this is my first post in the thread, but I have a question for you. Do you think these fantasies only exist after they're expressed? are you upset to know that people are strange and harbor strange ideas? Would it not be so if you hadn't read the thread? I'm not meaning to be condescending or seemingly rhetorical, these are genuine concerns of mine. Do you believe they shouldn't express them in any format and let them fester? If they simply ignored them for long enough would they go away? I don't have an answer for that

[Anonymous No.14855652]

>>14855208
So-called "pedophilia" has been normal accepted behavior for most of human history.
Honestly, the only good thing about the transgender movement is that they seem willing to tackle this fake "taboo".

[Anonymous No.14855655]

>>14855648

Because the white race is gorgeous

[Anonymous No.14855656]

>>14855649
>Do you believe they shouldn't express them in any format and let them fester?
I think it's a good thing that pedophiles are expressing themselves online, because it makes it easier for the government to identify them and round them up.

However, I also think that they should be mercilessly bullied instead of receiving a warm reception and academic debate. There is simply nothing productive to say to someone who wants to molest children.

[Anonymous No.14855662]

>>14855656
Mercilessly bullying them may be very satisfactory to most people but it's proven to be an inefficient way to keep them under control and instead an efficient way to get them to offend. In other words, anybody who cares more about kids than about catharsis should look for a more functional solution to this issue.

[Anonymous No.14855664]

>>14855414
Conservatives imploding over a guy fapping to shota was quite a sight to behold.
This is the same crowd who wanted to ban Doom and other violent video games after the Columbine shooting. Some people just can't be happy unless they have a flavor-of-the-month moral panic to worry about.

[Anonymous No.14855667]

>>14855656
Are you familiar with the idea of intrusive thoughts? do you believe that phenomena does not exist? Can you claim responsibility for every single fragment of your consciousness since you became sentient? I'm seriously not being mocking - now a person with battling obsessive compulsions that seemingly come of their own accord and having a lot of self loathing over it is somewhat different than those who propagate their fantasies as something worthwhile, but I do wonder about having the social capacity to let people publicly air out undesirable manifestations of their subjective experience, declare that they don't want them to continue, and find a way to reorient their awareness

[Anonymous No.14855670]

>>14855648

Cupids and angels are modeled after white people

[Anonymous No.14855672]

>>14855662
>it's proven to be an inefficient way to keep them under control
There's not a lot of pedophilia here compared to in places where it's destigmatized, such as in the Islamic world. When Muslims enter the West they offend at staggering rates.

[Anonymous No.14855676]

>>14855672
They're fucking 14-year-old sluts because in the non-cucked parts of the world they haven't yet trained their men to earnestly believe that a little bitch in make-up twerking her ass and wearing low cut tops isn't begging for dick.

[Anonymous No.14855684]

>>14855259
>If you had never looked at regular porn in your life, would you ever have even thought of, or considered engaging, in alot of the sexual acts you see on there? Facial cumshots, anal, getting a girl to drink your pee, bondage, footjobs etc etc. No, alot of those acts wouldn't have even crossed your mind...that is until it was shown to you.
You're full of shit. I used to be into anal, foot fetish, and pissing before I ever watched porn. I hadn't gotten an internet connection until late adolescence.
>If you had never watched the hundreds or thousands of horror movies you saw...would you be as afraid that you're going to get axe murdered in the woods, late out at night on a camping trip? No, because the thought would never have even crossed your mind.
Adult men are not afraid of that shit, and children have always been afraid of the dark and they could conjure up all kinds of monsters even without being exposed to any horror movie. Lovecraft used to make up a lot of monsters in his imagination when he was a kid.
>If you leave your basement dwelling computer obsessed uncle, alone with your daughter to babysit, don't be surprised if something happens
I'm a basement-dwelling uncle and I have had plenty of chances to be alone with little girls. Nothing ever happened because I can distinguish reality from fiction and I wouldn't want to risk jail-time only to get my dick wet anyway. Moreover, I'm not really into rape not even in fiction. I am not obsessed with lolicon in particular but I do read lolicon manga among other things, and I only like the stories where the sex is consensual (insofar as a child can "consent", since legally speaking they allegedly can't, even though they "consent" to puberty blockers and HRT). Stories that involve lolibabas (adult women who look like little girls) are even better since children are pretty retarded so it's better to have a character who has more of an adult personality even though she looks like a loli.

[Anonymous No.14855685]

>>14855573
Isn't it documented that a startling amount of sub saharan African men literally rape infants and toddlers as an aids cure? It is not pleasant to type that out, but I thought you might want to reconsider your headcanon

[Anonymous No.14855692]

>>14855416
>Scrub pornography from the internet
The idea you can somehow prevent sex crimes by trying to gatekeep access to pornographic images and videos is ludicrous.
You have a weird notion that you have to prevent people from knowing what is "possible" in order to prevent them from engaging in that behavior since allegedly they can't do something unless they have been told by someone else that it is possible. People have their own instincts (just like animals) and they can experiment on their own (both in real life and thought experiments in their heads). Your proposal to curtail access to information in the attempt of preventing people from learning things that in your opinion they should not know is incredibly naive. How do you think human beings managed to reproduce when there was no internet porn to show them how sex works? People figure things out for themselves, and trying to keep them ignorant will only lead to more harm since they will have to touch the fire to learn that it burns.

[Anonymous No.14855695]

>>14855584
>for Muslims and Africans
>Islam is a race
Yeah, besides that retarded statement, you're mostly correct.

[Anonymous No.14855696]

>>14855684
>You're full of shit. I used to be into anal, foot fetish, and pissing before I ever watched porn. I hadn't gotten an internet connection until late adolescence.

Wow anon, because your singular case is different than the vast majority, my opinion has become invalid.

>Adult men are not afraid of that shit

It's an obvious and common example, there are many forms of horror anon. Psychological or existential stuff related to psychedelics, paranoia, solipsism, etc might be more suitable to an adult, basically "mindfuck" films that cause you to question reality. It doesn't matter what it is, it's making you more aware of things in a possibly detrimental way

>I'm a basement-dwelling uncle and I have had plenty of chances to be alone with little girls

You just happen to hit all the marks in one go eh?

[Anonymous No.14855697]

>>14855586
>like pedophilia seem to be committed by white people
Do Jews count as white though?
Jeffrey Epstein was a Jew.
Dan Schneider too.

[Anonymous No.14855699]

>>14855692

>The idea you can somehow prevent sex crimes by trying to gatekeep access to pornographic images and videos is ludicrous

And yet Google is doing this, this very moment, by deleting all alt-right, jew hating and conspiratorial media off the face of the internet. Would you look at that.

[Anonymous No.14855700]

>>14855696
>Wow anon, because your singular case is different than the vast majority, my opinion has become invalid.
You can fuck off with your broad generalizations.
You're like a /pol/tard who will treat any given nigger as a criminal just because black people on average commit more crimes.

[Anonymous No.14855704]

>>14855700

[Anonymous No.14855708]

>>14855699
Twitter and Facebook tried to ban discussion of the New York Post's Hunter Biden's laptop story, but that didn't prevent the story from reaching my ears, and eventually it amplified the story thanks to the controversy.
Censorship always runs the risk of triggering a Streisand Effect.

[Anonymous No.14855718]

>>14855685
they clearly watch too much wataten and made in abyss

[Anonymous No.14855726]

>>14855718

Literally every pedo image I saw on 4chan before 2010 on /b/ had a white dude in it. All the videos on the tor network across various sites back then all had white dudes and some Indians. Sometimes some Muslims. Every time I hear about some pedophilic case it's always some white guy being mentioned

You can't tell me that's a coincidence.

[Anonymous No.14855748]

>>14855726
Are you seriously this dense? Are you unaware how rare the internet was in most of the globe back then and even today? I don't often like to type this way but you are suffering from some seriously incomplete information, confirmation bias, and just general lack of deep reflection. It has been acknowledged to the point that it's a cultural artifact of sub saharan African folklore/magic that raping infants and toddlers is an aids cure. This is not some ludicrous isolated incident, but something that even bleeding heart NGOs and their own governments have had to recognize. Something tells me that there wasn't a lot of internet in Kinshasa in 2010. I'm not even so much caring about the content of your argument as to how stupidly you've arrived at your conclusion "oh wow I saw like 6-7 examples of something I bet that that tacit rule I'm developing counts forever every single time", it's primitive and you should feel silly

[Anonymous No.14855753]

>>14855748

Hey, at least they are doing it because of their ooga booga shit. They're not doing it because they're deviant freaks.

[Anonymous No.14855782]

>>14855753
>it's part of their culture and we must respect it!
Cultural practices aren't born in a vacuum. They are mental gymnastics to justify all kinds of retarded behaviors.

[Anonymous No.14855821]

>>14855782

Yes, and Indians bathe in cow piss and eat their feces because they want to do it, not for religious reasons