what about pyro mains

ha ha funny comparing an extremely damaging mental illness to a class in a video game nice one :) :) :)

I've never been more disgusted with a screenshot in my life

this is why im into vanilla

what i've learned today in streaming school today is:

you can have childporn filenames on ur desktop and get shitloads of free publicity

also how is being a pedop a mental illness and being gay not?

If youre referring to it as a mental illness, you should have some degree of sympathy for someone without control.

Either way I agree that it's ridiculous, given that his computer hasn't been searched yet, he has a wife and kid.

also im not joking please write me a real nerdessay about this because i find it fascinating
finding pedophilia morally or psychologically wrong without finding it wrong for being gay seems really hard w/o bringing up the ability to consent, and consent is hard as fuck to define. u'd need like a test of mental competence to really define when someone is emotionally capable of fucking, especially since modern laws are more based on the emotional and mental realm, since human beings can be physically developing well into their twenties, and i doubt u'd want to call ppl fucking 21 yr olds pedops either

:/

i could emphasize with pedophiles who would never act on it and wish they weren't one,
but people watching CP, or even abusing children..... no words

Being gay does not cause harm to others and for the most part does not cause excessive suffering. Being a pedophile does.

are you suggesting that every pedophile is responsible for the abuse and filming of children for porn?

No but dealing with the urges associated with pedophilia will make your life a lot more difficult than those associated with being gay.

If you lived in Russia being gay would be a mental disorder, as the definition is based on how it impacts your life.

Elliott the argument against pedophillia is that it is theoretically impossible to give consent if your brain is not fully developed (though one would argue you should wait until 25 in that case) however as we picked the arbitrary age of 18 in America to give people "adult responsibilities" it would be hard to argue that you are unable to consent at that age, people will be attracted to what they are however unconsented sex is not okay. Now if you want to blame lawmakers for a rather arbitrary age then that is completely your choice, however you are trying to strawman a bait really hard off of what one person said (who has like 5000 minus frags by now probably)

nothing like a good ol' sexuality thread boys

I think the comparison he was trying to draw was that between a willing individual (homosexual/ underage), vs a non consenting one.

However, the way society views consent has been measured in terms of age and development for a while now. The age of consent has risen significantly, I'm assuming in concordance with human life expectancy. This isn't condoning pedophilia, but his point is valid. (i.e. a 25 year old lady, and a 16 year old boy have sex - I mean I would.)

If he is doing these actions which are, jerking off to children, and NOT a thought, what is going to stop him if he gets greedy and decides he wants to do this to his own child and more than likely ruin somebody elses childhood. Humans are unpredictable as a species and you have to control it before it happens. If it was only rumors that he was a pedophile, I would agree with you. But the proof is right there. He likes children and it needs to be dealt with before somebody gets hurt. I would love for him to keep his child but not everything is peachy and okay until they commit the act.

im into animal dick but u guys dont see me fucking them do u

actually molesting children is completely different from masturbating to them, lot's of people have fucked up fetishes (and imo pedophilia is a fetish), but don't act on them. not everyone into BDSM or Scat actually does it lol

should i fat shame my robust friend

.

please, im not ready for this thread to go to shit

Consent would be the intrinsic part of it. Just like animals can not consent, children are incapable of giving consent. There are some questionable areas when you start talking in the teens, as all people mature at different times, but in general adulthood is fairly cemented around 16 (the majority of the us has some caveats about the legality of sex with a minor around 16) and, since there isn't a way to really tell when a person is an adult, legally, we just say an average age of around 18 is acceptable for people to have legal control of themselves.
If you're seriously thinking that mental capacities aren't insanely limited for a child (lolicon and similar things depict people prepubescence or in early pubescence), maybe you shouldn't be around them for a couple more decades.

This is a blatant lie, or the most sophomoric shit I've ever heard.

Legally: 1) n. a voluntary agreement to another's proposition.
Literally: noun 1.permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.

It is saying "yes" with no caveats. While yes, with some situations this gets lost in translation between adults, it is insanely rare that a child would agree to the act on it's own volition.

can we talk about how great NTR is tho

I can't believe I'm justifying not raping kids through a nerdessay on a video game forum but since you asked, I'll oblige.

First off, children can't consent to sexual activity. A lot of reasons they can't consent to sexual activity are the same reasons why kids can't sign contracts, why child labor is illegal, and why there's an age restriction on alcohol and driving. Laws are morally arbitrary, so let's get to the reason why these laws are in place.

-Compliance isn't consent. Children are socialized to think that adults know what's best for them. However many reservations a kid might have about getting raped, more often than not they'll blindly trust the adult who tries to harm them because they blindly trust adults on a daily basis. This is also the reason why Romeo & Juliet clauses exist. It's much easier for an older person to take advantage of a younger person. Furthermore, this is the reason why teachers could be fired for being in a relationship with an 18 year old student. The teacher(adult) is in a position of authority over the student(child). In fact, most children are abused at the hands of someone close to them, such as a guardian or family friend. (http://www.childrefuge.org/child-molestation/intra-familial-molestation.html)
-Scientifically, their brains aren't fully developed yet. Up until a certain point in brain development, kids are unable to see the consequences of their actions. This is also why you would sentence a minor differently than a legal adult.
(http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/i/i_09/i_09_p/i_09_p_dev/i_09_p_dev.html)

In a nutshell, sexual relationships between children and adults are exploitative.

I think that the point of major contention would be whether children can consent or not, but if that's not enough, here's a couple reasons why people shouldn't fuck kids.

Legally: Kids can't consent. You can't legally fuck a kid for the same reason you can't fuck a dog, or ya know, rape someone. Because it's rape. If you disagree with this you're a dangerous person and should probably castrate yourself asap.

Ethically: Pedophilia has psychological repurcussions for the victim. Again, pedophilia is rape and rape fucks someone up in the head. It's morally reprehensible to psychologically damage someone for life so you can get off. Furthermore, pedophiles groom kids to normalize abusive relationships. Abusive relationships are bad for reasons I shouldn't have to explain.

This is different from a consenting homosexual relationship between two adults. The key word is consenting. Provided all parties consent, homosexual relationships are no different than heterosexual relationships.

i was sorta trying to give an example of people not acting on preferences, sorry

well, then, the answer to that is that animals have no definite way of giving consent. so from a legal standpoint, all sex with animals is rape, and im pretty sure its illegal anyway. not sure about the second part though.

the problem w/ that is that all the harm for the pedophlie is societally inflicted. By that logic, being gay was a mental illness at certain points in history

@figsy

all of ur consent thing relies on the assumption that children are NEVER mentally capable of future mindedness, which isn't necessarily true. I understand blanket banning it for the sake of the 99.99% of children who aren't smart tho, that's a swell move tbh

"Legally"

ur assuming that pedophilia is rape, which isn't fair because rape is morally reprehensible because of autonomy and shit whereas pedophilia is a separate issue imo

"Again, pedophilia is rape and rape fucks someone up in the head."

if it weren't for this logical leap wasn't here, I'd agree. raping children is bad i agree tho

ultimately, my beef with antipedophilia arguments is they either assume children can't consent (possible I guess, but has severe implications when u have to define the ability to consent. I can sentence a 15 year old to life in prison for rape/murder/arson/terrorism or whatev, but he cant consent to fuc a 20 year old?) or that all relationships that are pedophillic in nature are exploitative in that they FORCE children to fuck, which is probably true tbh, but there's no caveat of the law or in anyones mind that accounts for this.

basically i want an argument that ENDS with pedophilia being awful, rather than starting with the assumption of its shittiness
idk sorry

LEGAL PSA:

I don't care about whatever debate is going on in this thread. I will say: do not, do NOT, DO NOT even THINK about viewing illegal pornography from the internet. Just don't.

The way the law treats this stuff is very archaic. There is little distinction between "possession" and "intent," legally--meaning, rarely is there a difference between direct download from an FTP server and simply having the stuff in your internet cache files because you clicked a flashing banner ad.

If convicted, you are looking at years in prison, even for a first offence. That is for "possession" of CP -- "distribution" is worse. It is also a felony and will go on your sexual record. It happens to people who are viewing other types of pornography (people addicted to pornography can "stumble on" CP, it then shows up in their internet files and they wind up convicted for possession). It happens to people downloading pornography (CP labeled as something else, the download is canceled, they are convicted for possession based on limewire's "temp downloads" folder).

Offenders can be convicted and sentenced to prison time without any prior criminal record. You are more likely to be convicted if you are a man.

Viewing CP is awful, pedophilia is an awful mental illness. I believe people who are caught with CP should receive mental help in a secured environment where they cannot harm children. The law (esp. in California) is fucked up, and doesn't really follow reality in a lot of ways. But it is NOT worth it at all to be caught up in this stuff.

If you are viewing pornography that is not certified 18+, you are risking a LOT. Most people do not realize how screwed up the law is with regards to this.

/PSA from someone who has seen/worked with the inside of the legal system in this area. I am not a lawyer. (California, but other states are similar from what I understand)

you may now continue comparing maining pyro to child abuse. :D

You're missing that pedophilia is being attracted to children, not acting on that attraction, which is kind of a key distinction considering the former is what this entire thread has been about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law_in_the_United_States
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/sex13.htm

In addtion, 11 states have no laws against this, and Alabama is in the process of passing one as of 2014.

On topic: Yeah, CP is fucked up.