Out of curiousity, which do you think is the lowest way to please yourself sexually?

I'm sharply divided between beastality, pedophilia and necrophilia in being the worst form.

Thoughts/Feelings on this?

Bestiality is worse.

Necrophilia all the way. It's fucking vile.
I didn't used to think so until my buddy who went to mortuary school broke down just how quickly a corpse starts to break down and decay.

Ephebophilia>zoophilia>pedophilia>necrophilia
Gross...

I'd feel more guilty fucking a little kid than an animal or a corpse. And I'd feel more grossed out fucking a corpse than an animal.

So I guess bestiality would be the most doable for me out of the three.

As for the hardest, I don't know. Probably a corpse.

So...

Bestiality > Pedophilia > Necrophilia

Bestiality

Oh fuck, after thinking about it and actually imagining myself doing it, I'd have to actually say that bestiality would be worse than pedophilia. As long as the girl is at least 10 years old.

Under 10 and I'd probably go for an animal.

Fuck, lol, what a question...

Pedophilia. Because your fucking up the little kid for life.

If your fucking a dead person that's not going to fuck them over. Their already fucking dead.

If your fucking an animal? Well hey they need loving too.

I care more about a little kids mindset then I do a rotting corpse or some fucking pet.

Necrophilia and then Pedophilia are the worst in my eyes.

Oh wait... I was thinking in terms of which one I would least want to do.

But I guess if we're just talking in terms of morality here, then pedophilia is definitely the worst.

Between bestiality and necrophilia, that all depends on how you feel the dead should be treated, and on how you feel animals should be treated. Different people will have different views on each issue.

Pedophilia. Because your fucking up the little kid for life.

If your fucking a dead person that's not going to fuck them over. Their already fucking dead.


Very true, however bear in mind that pedophilia and necrophilia are not mutully exclusive.
I still think someone who fucks dead kids is worse than someone who just fucks kids.

i'd say pedophilia is the least appaling to me, probably because you're fucking a HUMAN BEING rather than an animal or a dead corpse.


Sick freaks.

Appealing?

or

Appalling?

That is one significant typo!

I think the OP should have been more specific as to which one we think is morally wrong, as opposed to which one we think is more gross.

Before you go getting emotional, Cheeba, you should realize that we are saying it'd be grosser to fuck a corpse/animal, but it would be fucked up morally to fuck a kid.

There is nothing immoral about fucking a corpse. Gross yes, but immoral no.

There is nothing immoral about fucking an animal if the animal suffers no harm. We're quite happy to geld horses etc.

There IS definitely something immoral about paedophilia.

*goes back to fucking a dead foal*....I like to cover all options.

umm well if I had to choose,
like if someone put a gun to my head and was like "either you fuck this loli, fuck this dog, or fuck this 3 day old corpse or I'll shoot you in the fuckin head"
I think I'd pick the loli......


*hides behind couch awaiting flames*

umm well if I had to choose,
like if someone put a gun to my head and was like "wither you fuck this loli, fuck this dog, or fuck this 3 day old corpse or I'll shoot you in the fuckin head"
I think I'd pick the loli......


*hides behind couch awaiting flames*

Well if I was held at gun point, I'd go with the loli too probably.

But I think the question isn't about which one you'd least like to do, but rather, which one you find to be the most morally repulsive.

There can be quite a difference there.

Well if I was held at gun point, I'd go with the loli too probably.

But I think the question isn't about which one you'd least like to do, but rather, which one you find to be the most morally repulsive.

There can be quite a difference there.

well that would be a corpse, naturally.
I mean I eat animals, I might as well get to know one intimately.
but with a corpse, it's like fucking a rotting putrid sack of meat.

I think the OP should have been more specific as to which one we think is morally wrong, as opposed to which one we think is more gross.

Before you go getting emotional, Cheeba, you should realize that we are saying it'd be grosser to fuck a corpse/animal, but it would be fucked up morally to fuck a kid.

But he's not asking which is one is the most immoral, he's asking which is worse to have sex with from your OWN perspective. Im not advocating pedophilia at all, i'm just saying it would be more pleasing for me and everyone else here to fuck a child rather than an animal or a dead corpse. No one here would want a decayed anus or one that's from another species, it just doesn't feel as good on tEh penis (i'm only assuming that lol).

which do you think is the lowest way to please yourself sexually?

I'm pretty sure that implies morality and not enjoyability.

In terms of morality, I think it's more "moral" to fuck a corpse than it is to fuck an animal, which is, in turn, more moral than fucking a loli.

In terms of which would be more pleasurable, it'd be the exact opposite: loli, animal, corpse.

Funny how it works out like that...

Bestiality being the worst, then pedophilia, then necrophilia. Under certain circumstances, though. If the kid's like 0-8, that's pretty damn low.

Fucking dead baby seals is pretty low.

You make me laugh. :D

pedo>beast>necro


it takes pedophelia to a different level onc shes like 11 or 12 around there

What do you mean? 11 and 12 still = pedophile.

Typically:

13 - 18 is Ephebophile.

~3 - 12 = Pedophile.

The one that makes me the most nauseous to think about it by far pedophelia. Pedophiles should fucking HANG. Then necrophelia comes in second, that's fucking wrong, and I guess if you're not hurting the animal i don't have too much against beastiality, though I personally could never be sexual with an animal.

This depends, what animal is it? Is it a male or female animal?

Well, I was under the impression that this would be an animal of your choosing.

So for me, it would be female, naturally.

As for which species... Haven't quite decided yet.

Maybe a sheep..?

I wanna fuck a dead puppy now

Well, I was under the impression that this would be an animal of your choosing.

So for me, it would be female, naturally.

As for which species... Haven't quite decided yet.

Maybe a sheep..?

The Scottish Highlands: Where the men are men and the sheep are nervous.

The Scottish Highlands: Where the men are men and the sheep are nervous.

Lulz.

It;s not something that appeals to me, but I am surprised at the people saying necrophilia is the worst. Even if it grosses you out the most, Paedophilia ruins the life of the other person. Paedophilia is easily the worst of those crimes.

I don't think that anyone in this thread said that necrophilia would be the worst morally.

necrophilic pedophilia?

Its puppy love!

i agree on your first two points

necrophilia is harmless as long as you are not murdering people to have sex with them

there is little practical difference between sex with a corpse and sex with a real doll

beastiality too is perfectly acceptable as long as the animal appears to be consenting and suffers no harm

animals come equipped with a full set of animal impulses and desires and little else and if somebody wishes to take a loving relationship with an animal to a mutually enjoyable sexual level then there is nothing wrong with that in my eyes although i would not do it personally

nonconsensual sex with an animal is of course wrong though

however

and i believe this may generate some disagreement but i would ask that everybody approach these points with an open mind

i believe that paedophilia in certain situations can also be perfectly acceptable and morally just

infants and young children follow the pleasure principle and are guided by the id with the ego and superego being barely influential in their thinking especially before the age of 6 or 7

sexual activity can be pleasurable for a child and there is a wealth of biological and physiological evidence for that

there are even some members here who have mentioned beginning to masturbate around the age of 3 (mostly female members) such as silkysmooth (who is not here any more) and i think sick_boy and if there was a truly caring adult or adolescent that wished to generate pleasure for the child then they would be more than capable of this and the child would be more than capable of appreciating it

children actively seek out pleasure unmitigated by moral constraints and a consenting and non harmful sexual relationship with an elder would be just that

there are two primary objections people have to what might be called 'consensual paedophilia'

the first objection is that a child is too young to give informed consent and the second objection is that even if the child consents at the time then they will almost inevitably suffer severe mental damage and trauma later in life as they realise what they have done

(i shall address the second point first)

children suffer mental trauma from these events as they gain an awareness of what has happened in a social context because our society considers the practice of paedophilia repulsive and stigmatises it to a very great degree

there comes with a history of paedophilia an extremely powerful sense of guilt and shame and revulsion which is resultant from societal attitudes towards the practice

it is this guilt and shame and revulsion that causes the trauma in the person with the history of paedophilia

were the practice socially accepted none of this would be generated in the person and they would happily accept the fact of their history

the first point is more complex and delves into philosophical meaning

i personally believe that a person is capable of giving informed consent throughout their life at any point as consent is merely saying what you want to do

being unaware of the future consequences or moral standing of paedophilia (which are what people say infants or children are too young to be informed about) just goes back to my first point

throughout our lives we make decisions we later regret or consent to things we later wish to take back but this does not mean we did not make informed decisions or give informed consent

it just means that circumstances around us change and the circumstances surrounding an adolescent with a paedophilic relationship in their past are those moral and societal circumstances i have addressed already

informed consent cannot be arbitrarily assigned to a particular age and anybody is capable of knowing what they want

that is why i consider a consensual and non harmful paedophilic relationship perfectly acceptable

however i find any adult who harms a child or forces himself on them sexually or does anything sexual with them against their consent morally reprehensible and monstrous

the majority of reported paedophilic behaviour is like this although the actual incidence of consensual and non harmful paedophilic behaviour is much higher than reported as to report a young child in a happy sexual relationship is completely socially taboo

furthermore many people who harm children in obtaining their sexual gratification do so due to the stigma and taboo and social constraints surrounding their activities which leave them little other choice

please keep an open mind

i agree on your first two points

necrophilia is harmless as long as you are not murdering people to have sex with them

there is little practical difference between sex with a corpse and sex with a real doll

beastiality too is perfectly acceptable as long as the animal appears to be consenting and suffers no harm

animals come equipped with a full set of animal impulses and desires and little else and if somebody wishes to take a loving relationship with an animal to a mutually enjoyable sexual level then there is nothing wrong with that in my eyes although i would not do it personally

nonconsensual sex with an animal is of course wrong though

however

and i believe this may generate some disagreement but i would ask that everybody approach these points with an open mind

i believe that paedophilia in certain situations can also be perfectly acceptable and morally just

infants and young children follow the pleasure principle and are guided by the id with the ego and superego being barely influential in their thinking especially before the age of 6 or 7

sexual activity can be pleasurable for a child and there is a wealth of biological and physiological evidence for that

there are even some members here who have mentioned beginning to masturbate around the age of 3 (mostly female members) such as silkysmooth (who is not here any more) and i think sick_boy and if there was a truly caring adult or adolescent that wished to generate pleasure for the child then they would be more than capable of this and the child would be more than capable of appreciating it

children actively seek out pleasure unmitigated by moral constraints and a consenting and non harmful sexual relationship with an elder would be just that

there are two primary objections people have to what might be called 'consensual paedophilia'

the first objection is that a child is too young to give informed consent and the second objection is that even if the child consents at the time then they will almost inevitably suffer severe mental damage and trauma later in life as they realise what they have done

(i shall address the second point first)

children suffer mental trauma from these events as they gain an awareness of what has happened in a social context because our society considers the practice of paedophilia repulsive and stigmatises it to a very great degree

there comes with a history of paedophilia an extremely powerful sense of guilt and shame and revulsion which is resultant from societal attitudes towards the practice

it is this guilt and shame and revulsion that causes the trauma in the person with the history of paedophilia

were the practice socially accepted none of this would be generated in the person and they would happily accept the fact of their history

the first point is more complex and delves into philosophical meaning

i personally believe that a person is capable of giving informed consent throughout their life at any point as consent is merely saying what you want to do

being unaware of the future consequences or moral standing of paedophilia (which are what people say infants or children are too young to be informed about) just goes back to my first point

throughout our lives we make decisions we later regret or consent to things we later wish to take back but this does not mean we did not make informed decisions or give informed consent

it just means that circumstances around us change and the circumstances surrounding an adolescent with a paedophilic relationship in their past are those moral and societal circumstances i have addressed already

informed consent cannot be arbitrarily assigned to a particular age and anybody is capable of knowing what they want

that is why i consider a consensual and non harmful paedophilic relationship perfectly acceptable

however i find any adult who harms a child or forces himself on them sexually or does anything sexual with them against their consent morally reprehensible and monstrous

the majority of reported paedophilic behaviour is like this although the actual incidence of consensual and non harmful paedophilic behaviour is much higher than reported as to report a young child in a happy sexual relationship is completely socially taboo

furthermore many people who harm children in obtaining their sexual gratification do so due to the stigma and taboo and social constraints surrounding their activities which leave them little other choice

please keep an open mind

Sometimes I wish we still had rep. +50 imaginary rep points.

Sometimes I wish we still had rep. +50 imaginary rep points.Doubled.

I never really thought about it like that, Ro......, and while I'm not sure yet whether I agree, it has given me something to think about.

depends on several things. Pedophilia with female? Or a boy. Gay pedophilia is pretty bad, but necrophilia would be better as long as: it was with a girl, the girl was hot, and not stiff yet. so depending on those factors. beastality is usually going to be the worst, but not always. pedophilia with a boy is (i dont know, on the same level as an animal), and necrophilia if it's stiff/rotten is (not sure) but probably the worst.

If you disregard the moral aspect of the question, then everyone here would most definitely fuck a child rather than a corpse or an animal.


Let's not forget that pedophilia has been around since the time of the Romans, while necrophilia and beastiality have, well.... not really been around at all.

while necrophilia and beastiality have, well.... not really been around at all.

As far as we know...

What do you mean? 11 and 12 still = pedophile.

Typically:

13 - 18 is Ephebophile.

~3 - 12 = Pedophile.

ohhh then pedo is MUCH worse than ephobophile is

Wrong on both counts.

Beastiality has been around since (and probably before) animals have been domesticated. There is a lot of greek and roman culture that points to this. Thinking that humans were any different in kinks and perversity a couple thousand years ago makes no sense. Pedophilia, like necrophilia and beastiality has been around since human beings. Its not a disease, its a behavior. It didnt just come from nowhere. All in all that was a really terrible post.

I didn't say anything of the sort. My main argument was that pedophilia was more ACCEPTED than necro and beastiality, not practiced.

What a terrible post.

beastiality.

i agree on your first two points

necrophilia is harmless as long as you are not murdering people to have sex with them

there is little practical difference between sex with a corpse and sex with a real doll

beastiality too is perfectly acceptable as long as the animal appears to be consenting and suffers no harm

animals come equipped with a full set of animal impulses and desires and little else and if somebody wishes to take a loving relationship with an animal to a mutually enjoyable sexual level then there is nothing wrong with that in my eyes although i would not do it personally

nonconsensual sex with an animal is of course wrong though

however

and i believe this may generate some disagreement but i would ask that everybody approach these points with an open mind

i believe that paedophilia in certain situations can also be perfectly acceptable and morally just

infants and young children follow the pleasure principle and are guided by the id with the ego and superego being barely influential in their thinking especially before the age of 6 or 7

sexual activity can be pleasurable for a child and there is a wealth of biological and physiological evidence for that

there are even some members here who have mentioned beginning to masturbate around the age of 3 (mostly female members) such as silkysmooth (who is not here any more) and i think sick_boy and if there was a truly caring adult or adolescent that wished to generate pleasure for the child then they would be more than capable of this and the child would be more than capable of appreciating it

children actively seek out pleasure unmitigated by moral constraints and a consenting and non harmful sexual relationship with an elder would be just that

there are two primary objections people have to what might be called 'consensual paedophilia'

the first objection is that a child is too young to give informed consent and the second objection is that even if the child consents at the time then they will almost inevitably suffer severe mental damage and trauma later in life as they realise what they have done

(i shall address the second point first)

children suffer mental trauma from these events as they gain an awareness of what has happened in a social context because our society considers the practice of paedophilia repulsive and stigmatises it to a very great degree

there comes with a history of paedophilia an extremely powerful sense of guilt and shame and revulsion which is resultant from societal attitudes towards the practice

it is this guilt and shame and revulsion that causes the trauma in the person with the history of paedophilia

were the practice socially accepted none of this would be generated in the person and they would happily accept the fact of their history

the first point is more complex and delves into philosophical meaning

i personally believe that a person is capable of giving informed consent throughout their life at any point as consent is merely saying what you want to do

being unaware of the future consequences or moral standing of paedophilia (which are what people say infants or children are too young to be informed about) just goes back to my first point

throughout our lives we make decisions we later regret or consent to things we later wish to take back but this does not mean we did not make informed decisions or give informed consent

it just means that circumstances around us change and the circumstances surrounding an adolescent with a paedophilic relationship in their past are those moral and societal circumstances i have addressed already

informed consent cannot be arbitrarily assigned to a particular age and anybody is capable of knowing what they want

that is why i consider a consensual and non harmful paedophilic relationship perfectly acceptable

however i find any adult who harms a child or forces himself on them sexually or does anything sexual with them against their consent morally reprehensible and monstrous

the majority of reported paedophilic behaviour is like this although the actual incidence of consensual and non harmful paedophilic behaviour is much higher than reported as to report a young child in a happy sexual relationship is completely socially taboo

furthermore many people who harm children in obtaining their sexual gratification do so due to the stigma and taboo and social constraints surrounding their activities which leave them little other choice

please keep an open mind

Fucking kids is wrong you sick fuck.

Fucking animals and dead people is wrong, you sick fuck.

Everybody needs to chill out, and just realize that were only talking about good things here, for example if you want peanut butter and chocolate and you can have a reeses or a sidekick, it doesn't matter what you have because your getting rid of your craving, I give thumbs up all around

Fucking kids is wrong you sick fuck.

At least he had a logical, well thought out post.

While yours obviously took no thought whatsoever.

So far, pedophilia FTW.