What is totse's opinion on pedophilia?

Looking at little boy/girl porno, admiring the nubile young body of a 12 year old...

sick or misunderstood or sick? Put them in jail or what?

Inb4Joe

&t isn't going to have one unified opinion. It depends if you're just "admiring" or if you go out and rape some kid.

I think the age of consent should be removed, parents should educate their own kids about the dangers of the world and we shouldn't need laws to tell us how old we have to be before we can do something. Especially when some kids hit puberty at 12 and others at 18. How can you say it's okay to fuck a 16 year old who hasn't hit puberty, but not okay to fuck a 15 year old who has?

But of course, it's about how many rotations of the earth you've lived for, not when your body has developed properly or when you choose to.

Very well put.

QFT and +1

Very well put. That's the basic dilemma. Physical age vs. mental age/common sense. However, what we do now works pretty well for the most part. Stupid 25 year olds and genius 12 year olds are outsiders in statistics.

let's narrow it down to pre-12 year olds then
what now

If there is grass on the field, play ball.
If not, then roll it over and play in the mud.

Pre-12? I don't see why so I think it's strange. Not fucked up as long as you don't rape some kid, Just different.

Sex is sex no matter what your age. It can be positive or negative, and age has nothing to do with possible harmful affects on your psychological state. I don't think most kids are actually raped, but are rather willing participants with adults because they want to learn and experience. Really, I couldn't see any harm at all being done to a child as long as they're willing, but actually forcefully raping a child, just like an adult, will affect the person negatively. Most likely these laws are just another paranoid creation of the religious right. I myself don't see any point or inclination in touching children, but once they become fertile, things change, even when their only 12-14.

Really, pedophilia laws are ineffective for the most part since the laws are broken behind closed doors and children rarely tell. Most young children don't even know that these things are illegal. And once they know what it is and that its illegal, they are often seen as rebellious and trying to get even with their parents for something. They have to prove someone broke this law without reasonable doubt, and kids getting back at their parents is reasonable doubt. Usually, the only time someone gets caught is when another adult finds out some how. This usually doesn't happen since pedophiles know that their doing illegal shit and conceal it just like drug dealers do. Sure, a couple of them get caught every year, but there are millions of pedophiles in North America. Even child porn is a very hard thing to crack down on, especially here in Canada where our privacy laws make it illegal for ISPs to release web use history to the cops without a warrant. To get a warrant they need evidence. Since your web history is the evidence, they're essentially fucked. Only if someone discovers videos, DVDs, or shit on your PC do any charges get laid. Sure, they spend millions a year to crack down on Child porn rings, but for every one they bust, 100 more are created.

I think the only way to deal with this shit is to watch your kids around adults, and provide counseling to children that need it.

What is totse's opinion on pedophilia?

I, for one, support our new pedophilic overlords. Usually, with illegal arms shipments.

~sigh~ In fact, what really irks me... we all know that the "pedophile panic" is a distraction campaign (http://www.richardwebster.net/speakofthedevil.html) to advance the theofascist promotion (http://www.creationists.org/corporalpunishment.html) and legalization of the 'family values' of intrafamilial violence, including sexual violence towards children and youth (http://www.protect.org/california/pc1203_066Explanation.html) ... which is why the campaign revolves entirely around the myth of "stranger danger (http://www.thesafeside.com/)" while almost 85% of violence against children and youth comes from the family (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm99/cpt3.htm), with aforementioned state sanction (http://www.protect.org/california/pc1203_066Explanation.html)...

...but what I don't understand? Not everyone is in on this fucked up conspiracy to genocide some queers as distraction so people can beat and rape their kids... why the fuck can't a runaway stay at a domestic violence shelter??!?! I mean, seriously... forty fucking years of fake-down posturing, surely someone would've had the bright idea that "gee, I wonder if not forcing them back to the beatings and rape they fled would do anything??" I mean... seriously... WTF, dude??

But, uhh... "pedophiles?" Yeah. I, for one, support the full liberation and equality of persons of paederotic status, including the same rights to mutual sexual expression within their orientation as everyone else, and probably more importantly, the same right to have a voice and participate equally in the social and political process. While we're at it? I also support the aboltiion of the fucking illegal concentration camps (http://www.guidemag.com/magcontent/invokemagcontent.cfm?ID=D9323C6C-8FB8-47D2-A0FC1238E3F73B6A), and a lot of other things...

...but, yeah... pedophilia? All for it. Rock on.

Probably a lot men take advantage of young girls naivety, and basically just fuck them without explaining to them what's happening to them. I am sure that can be scary and traumatizing.

I would bet that "inter-generational affection" wouldn't fuck up young girls so much if someone took the time to explain sex to them.

Wrong. That's all.

That would be Outliers.

let's narrow it down to pre-12 year olds then
what now

If we are to follow the guidelines of mother nature, what purpose would you have being sexually interested in someone who can't have children? Homosexuality and Pedophilia if they are genetic traits would of died off in mother nature. However, seeing as how we want to prolong life as long as possible, you are going to see a lot of anomolies in the genetic code on a more regular basis.

Some attractions to children are learned, some might actually be a preference in sexuality. Who knows, maybe a pedophile will put a book out explaining how it came about in his life. I definitely wouldn't mind having a one on one conversation with JoePedo, just to see how inevitably he would squirm.

That would be Outliers.



If we are to follow the guidelines of mother nature, what purpose would you have being sexually interested in someone who can't have children? Homosexuality and Pedophilia if they are genetic traits would of died off in mother nature. However, seeing as how we want to prolong life as long as possible, you are going to see a lot of anomolies in the genetic code on a more regular basis.

Some attractions to children are learned, some might actually be a preference in sexuality. Who knows, maybe a pedophile will put a book out explaining how it came about in his life. I definitely wouldn't mind having a one on one conversation with JoePedo, just to see how inevitably he would squirm.

Actually, there is a place for pedophilia and homosexuality in nature. With homosexuality, it could be used by a pack of men that had no women to establish a pecking order, and to reduce the impact of sexual frustration, just like in prison. Pedophilia could technically be a natural instrument in grooming a young person to be a future mate, or to prepare them later with experience. Even when you're a child you feel pleasure from rubbing your penis or clit. If you know anyone with small children, you know that boys always have their hands down their pants and girls are always humping things, sometimes your leg. Your instincts of what the opposite sex is for exist long before puberty too.

Rape is fucking wrong.

But I think by the time the person wants to start experimenting there is nothing wrong

Actually, there is a place for pedophilia and homosexuality in nature. With homosexuality, it could be used by a pack of men that had no women to establish a pecking order, and to reduce the impact of sexual frustration, just like in prison. Pedophilia could technically be a natural instrument in grooming a young person to be a future mate, or to prepare them later with experience. Even when you're a child you feel pleasure from rubbing your penis or clit. If you know anyone with small children, you know that boys always have their hands down their pants and girls are always humping things, sometimes your leg. Your instincts of what the opposite sex is for exist long before puberty too.

What you fail to realize is that animals do not procreate for "pleasure". There is no reason to prep a mate for having children, because she already knows how to have children...it's called instincts. Also, the connotations around a little boy touching his penis, and a little girl rubbing her vagina are not sexual. An adult without a sense of boundaries is what makes it sexual.

As for homosexuality in nature, please tell me how any species could survive for more than it's life cycle with only males? Keep in mind we are not talking about small organisms, or bacteria.

I think it is wrong to take advantage of someone who is vulnerable, whether it be the disabled, the poor, or children or anyone else.

And using a child (not someone underage, someone who is pre-pubescent) who is unable to understand what they're consenting to for sexual gratification is taking advantage.

In my humble opinion, it's not even a question of sexuality, it's a question of human decency.

And using a child (not someone underage, someone who is pre-pubescent) who is unable to understand what they're consenting to for sexual gratification is taking advantage.

I agree with this, however the boundaries are being lowered more and more with more sex in the media and, basically, every day life.

When I was little, most kids still believed that babies came from the stork or a cabbage patch...And sex was filthy dirty and nobody should do it because it's bad.
With more liberal views in the world these days, kids are learning about sex earlier, growing up quicker and realising that sex is actually quite an enjoyable passtime.
And it's just that that will render our morals obsolete with time.

I agree with this, however the boundaries are being lowered more and more with more sex in the media and, basically, every day life.

When I was little, most kids still believed that babies came from the stork or a cabbage patch...And sex was filthy dirty and nobody should do it because it's bad.
With more liberal views in the world these days, kids are learning about sex earlier, growing up quicker and realising that sex is actually quite an enjoyable passtime.
And it's just that that will render our morals obsolete with time.

Not really, because when have you seen experimentation starting to take place? That is actually deemed sexual? Probably around the middle school age, and normally if you would address the issues of sex earlier and actually talk to kids, they might not feel such a need to jump into a world that is more for the mature. So middle school is around age 12, the time that girls start to hit puberty. It only makes perfect sense that they would start liking boys and wanting to experiment. When I was in middle school most of the girls were the ones who initiated sexual encounters. Even more revealing is the fact that women mature emotionally more rapidly than men. Which is why they are ready to dive into sex earlier, at least that is what I think.

Not until somebody is half way fully developed is my view.

You can't have sex with a kid who is less than twelve.

They aren't right to make their own decisions and their body probably isn't ready.

Denmark has age of consent at 15 and teenage pregnancies aren't that common

Wrong. That's all.

Yeah, this.

innocence = ignorance

Pedophilia laws are being made by mothers who want to control their children and keep them from growing up and threatening their control over the household.

So somebody who wants to fuck teenagers has to kill them, since it's easier to get away with murder than it is to get away with "intergenerational love", and the consequences are similar.

So Mom would rather see her girl die than get laid. Simple fact.

I think you are ignorant, and have no room to comment.

Not really, because when have you seen experimentation starting to take place? That is actually deemed sexual? Probably around the middle school age, and normally if you would address the issues of sex earlier and actually talk to kids, they might not feel such a need to jump into a world that is more for the mature. So middle school is around age 12, the time that girls start to hit puberty. It only makes perfect sense that they would start liking boys and wanting to experiment. When I was in middle school most of the girls were the ones who initiated sexual encounters. Even more revealing is the fact that women mature emotionally more rapidly than men. Which is why they are ready to dive into sex earlier, at least that is what I think.

Middle school is way off man. I remember exhibiting sexual behavior when I was about 4-5 years old. This girl and I used to give each other oral every time we were together, and I knew what I was doing. I am considered gifted though, so maybe it's not the same, but I never met another kid who didn't want to know about sex. Once word got around that I knew about it, everyone was asking me. This lasted until one kid told his parents out of excitement. They were very religious and I was traumatized by the results. Parents should be teaching their kids about sex, not storks, and why kids should wait until their bodies are mature. People should also not use pet words like fanny, cunny, etc... instead of Vagina, and peter, pee pee, etc... instead of Penis. Avoid the trauma people. It's always the sheltered kids that bad shit happens to most of the time.

Middle school is way off man. I remember exhibiting sexual behavior when I was about 4-5 years old. This girl and I used to give each other oral every time we were together, and I knew what I was doing. I am considered gifted though, so maybe it's not the same, but I never met another kid who didn't want to know about sex. Once word got around that I knew about it, everyone was asking me. This lasted until one kid told his parents out of excitement. They were very religious and I was traumatized by the results. Parents should be teaching their kids about sex, not storks, and why kids should wait until their bodies are mature. People should also not use pet words like fanny, cunny, etc... instead of Vagina, and peter, pee pee, etc... instead of Penis. Avoid the trauma people. It's always the sheltered kids that bad shit happens to most of the time.

I already said that I promote the education of sex. First of all have you ever even met a 4 year old? Giving oral and knowing what you were doing? Mind explaining at 4-5 years of age how you instinctively "knew" what you were doing? Have you even seen 5 year old kids interact? Probably not, because you would realize how ridiculous your claims sound.

...

Hey carbon? Can I pee in your butt?

So Mom would rather see her girl die than get laid. Simple fact.

This. So much this.

Stick to chicks your own age fellas unless you want to live in jail getting your asshole demolished by Lee-Roy.

Hey carbon? Can I pee in your butt?

Enjoy seeing men bend over as well as little children? Funny, I would wager though the children are the only ones that get your dick wet, probably because they don't make fun of your inadequacies. ;P

Not really, because when have you seen experimentation starting to take place? That is actually deemed sexual? Probably around the middle school age, and normally if you would address the issues of sex earlier and actually talk to kids, they might not feel such a need to jump into a world that is more for the mature. So middle school is around age 12, the time that girls start to hit puberty. It only makes perfect sense that they would start liking boys and wanting to experiment. When I was in middle school most of the girls were the ones who initiated sexual encounters. Even more revealing is the fact that women mature emotionally more rapidly than men. Which is why they are ready to dive into sex earlier, at least that is what I think.

Good point.

But I have heard things about girls and boys younger than that going for it earlier.

It sorta worries me because one of these days, I'll have kids to look after (I hope). I don't want to have to worry about sex and stuff before the usual experimentation age is reached.

However it seems like one of those "damned if ya do, damned if ya don't" situations...
Teach kids about sex earlier and they may get the urge to try it out earlier because they knw what it is...Don't teach them and they'll be ignorant to the problems that come with sex these days.

First off, as been said, rape is horrible. I HATE rape with so much furry. It's both physical and mental abuse to the extreme no matter what age you are.

Personally I think if, at any age, a girl has hit puberty and wants to have sex (not experimentation-like things) already knowing what it is (not their soon-to-be partner "teaching" them) then they should be able to fuck whoever they want (as long as they fit the same criteria). For fucks sake it's natural.
For boys, pretty much the same thing but I think for quite a few more guys then girls, they are ready physically but not mentally. You have to know for yourself if your ready or not and that might take extremely different lengths of time in both guys from other guys and girls from other girls.
I think there is a certain level of maturity that is necessary but we have no way of measuring it so it has to be up to the individual.

Hell, I remember wanting to fuck when I was 4 or 5 playing "house" and "doctor" I just didn't know how, if I did I bet I would have tried. That doesn't mean I was ready for it though in maturity, I didn't have what I would call the proper emotions or maturity for it, I only had the urges, the feelings. I'm not saying it would have fucked me up, but who knows and I'm fucked up anyways.

I think since girls are generally "ready" before guys that's part of the reason they look to older boys-men for sex and why guys sometimes look for younger girls as they are looking for them. It works perfectly when both parties have made their intentions clear and are mature. No fuck n' runs with younger girls generally, a guy would have to be ready for a longer relationship. A younger "mature" girl could most definitely not be ready for that kind of pain and it could hurt their mind when it wouldn't have if they had a relationship afterwards.

Now in terms of Pedophilia:

I think Nepiophilia is a sign of some kind of mental illness but who knows, I may be wrong. Though I find it beyond disgusting.

I think Ephebophilia which many call pedophilia is PERFECTLY normal and natural and as long as the girl/guy fits my above "criteria" then it's fine to have sex with them if they are wanting to have sex with you. I see nothing wring with this.

With Pedophilia I can only see it as acceptable (to me at least) in terms of actually having sex when the girl/boy again fits into my "criteria" and that would pretty much require them to be of an age closer to an Ephebophile's interest. So generally Pedophilia in my opinion should be withheld to pictures, stories your imagination and such things that will have no direct effect on the child as at that age I believe they can not rationally be considered ready to have sex making sex with them rape. I have no issues with people who want to look at pictures of kids or read fantasy stories about them even though I don't know what causes it, IMO it could be like being gay, bi or straight, just another preference however an unfortunate one due to the fact that they shouldn't (again my opinion) follow through with their fantasies. Another thing that worries me is the porn, to have it means someone made it. What mental or even physical damage has been done to these children. I would rather the porn be some kind of loli or 3d animation as that would have NO contact with children. Sorry Pedo's, I don't have an issue with you, but I do want to protect children from mental damage as I've met too many girls (older now) who were victims to such things. It's not pretty (even if they are :P).
EDIT: Yes I know that pedophilia is pre-pubescent but there are some cases where a really young kid does hit puberty, and puberty seems to be hitting faster and faster these days, so there could be some cases that met my "criteria" for it to be ok.

I'm pretty open minded but when it comes between someones preference and someones health I choose health.

Dude we are on so much the same level.. both with our passionate hate of rape and I was just about to post the same definitions as well.

I HATE rape with so much furry.

I have to say, I lol'd at the two "r"s.

I already said that I promote the education of sex. First of all have you ever even met a 4 year old? Giving oral and knowing what you were doing? Mind explaining at 4-5 years of age how you instinctively "knew" what you were doing? Have you even seen 5 year old kids interact? Probably not, because you would realize how ridiculous your claims sound.

They're not ridiculous, I was a gifted child. I was very clever, and I observed adult behavior extremely well. From watching National Geographic I learned about mating, and pieced it together we must do the same. After that, I was getting girls to show me their pussies. While I was touching one girl I noticed her reacting to a sensation, so I did it again. Then I thought, what happens if I lick it. She really liked it, and then I was like, "try it on me." That's when I realized this touching was very pleasurable. Pretty simple really.

Pedophilia and rape aren't the problem, violence is. Pedophilia is completely harmless unless it's violent. Rape is just a word to describe the nature of a violent act. Whether you hit someone with your fist, or use your dick, you are violating a person. If it isn't violent, it's just sex. Maybe we shouldn't even give a fuck about pedophilia, and actually just target violence, which we should no matter what it's nature is. To throw all pedos into the violent category is misguided and stupid. We are only discriminating against pedos and gays because we hate the things we hate in ourselves. We're all trying to live a bullshit ideal and we all know it, and any person who tries and disrupt this reality we've created, we criminalize their activities. Really, people who hate these people are the ones in the wrong.

I myself used to hate Gay men, and I use to think pedos were the biggest scum to walk the earth. However, this attitude was just a belief in a reality that was false. I have realized I have emotions for all humans, sexual and otherwise. We all think we can be better than human but we can't, it's not possible. We hate those who remind us that we are human. When you really love someone, you want to express your love to them, and they might be either sex and any age. Are whole world is imploding because we are forgetting our focus, which should be co-existing. We have to love each other to co-exist, and not quash others in this activity. Honestly, if you are in a situation of trust with a child, they want to experience everything that you can offer, and they probably won't be traumatized by your actions. If you love another man or woman, you'll most likely try and engage in a higher connection that is sex. My fiance has even told me that my love for her and achieving this higher connection is what got her life back on track. So many women see what I have done for her and actually ask me to do the same for them. They just want to feel love. All the self-absorbed greatness that we all seem to think we are a part of can't even come close to love. I love my fiance's little brother and sisters. Not sexually, but I love spending time with them and bringing that light to their eyes when they see me walk through the door. It's the greatest feeling in the world and nothing else even matters to me anymore.

In our current society and culture, yeah, I'd have to say pedophilia is damaging to a child, but it's not the act, it's that we call them victims and make them feel like outcasts.

Sorry for taking everyone out of their comfort zone, but I felt it needed to be said.

Good point.

But I have heard things about girls and boys younger than that going for it earlier.

It sorta worries me because one of these days, I'll have kids to look after (I hope). I don't want to have to worry about sex and stuff before the usual experimentation age is reached.

However it seems like one of those "damned if ya do, damned if ya don't" situations...
Teach kids about sex earlier and they may get the urge to try it out earlier because they knw what it is...Don't teach them and they'll be ignorant to the problems that come with sex these days.

I mean hell, I never even got any sex education classes. I mean, just by putting one class in towards the 5th grade would probably do wonders. Start teaching earlier about STD's, pros and cons, and maybe a kid will realize earlier that sex is something to be cherished, and something they should wait on. Who knows though, not doing anything isn't helping the situation.

They're not ridiculous, I was a gifted child. I was very clever, and I observed adult behavior extremely well. From watching National Geographic I learned about mating, and pieced it together we must do the same. After that, I was getting girls to show me their pussies. While I was touching one girl I noticed her reacting to a sensation, so I did it again. Then I thought, what happens if I lick it. She really liked it, and then I was like, "try it on me." That's when I realized this touching was very pleasurable. Pretty simple really.

While you are trying to brag, you undoubtedly proved my point. As a child it was through the observation of ADULTS did you only know what sex was, and your break down of your exposure as a child only further exemplifies you not "knowing" what the fuck was going on. Oh, and I highly doubt at 4 you saw the grand scheme of things.

CarbonB, I've learned to ignore easeoflife. I suggest you spare yourself the effort/futile attempts at logic and do the same.

He's smarter than you and I, you see.
He's got it all figured out.

I have to say, I lol'd at the two "r"s.

Holy shit I lol'd so hard when I saw this!
I read my post like 2-3 times to make sure there were no really stupid misspellings. lol fuck, can't believe I missed that.
I'm leaving it as is, funnier that way.

lol wtf is wrong with you easeoflife22?
I didn't lump all pedophiles into some violent group. I said if they haven't hit puberty and aren't mature enough to consent to sex, it's rape.
That there would pretty much be the definition of rape.
Sex without consent.
I didn't say anyone was violent and I even said I have no issue or anything against pedophiles. I have an issue with the mental/physical damage that may occur as a result of fucking a human body that isn't developed enough to actually do that yet and a mind that doesn't understand what they are doing.

they haven't hit puberty and aren't mature enough to consent to sex, it's rape.
That there would pretty much be the definition of rape.
Sex without consent.
I didn't say anyone was violent and I even said I have no issue or anything against pedophiles. I have an issue with the mental/physical damage that may occur as a result of fucking a human body that isn't developed enough to actually do that yet and a mind that doesn't understand what they are doing.

I agree with you 100%. Very logical and reasonable and whatnot. No matter how much a child emulates adults, they are not physically or emotionally ready or able to consent to sex until they stop being children.

Anything argument with that is just semantics.

Looking out for me? I knew I liked women for a reason....

I agree with you 100%. Very logical and reasonable and whatnot. No matter how much a child emulates adults, they are not physically or emotionally ready or able to consent to sex until they stop being children.

Anything argument with that is just semantics.

:P

As a biomechanism, pedophilia doesn't seem to work right? It's non-sociable (radically deviant) and unproductive for the species, so is a pedophile mentally disturbed?

I would say yes, and the same could be applied to homosexuality.

Possibly, but who isn't a little fucked up in the head.
I'm not saying it is, it's just possible and I've heard it said many times, not that that makes it true.

I really don't care either way, my opinions still stand.

What if an adult brain was transplanted into a child's body? Is it okay then?

Because I'm just going to go ahead and assume that's what every kid in the playground has.

Looking out for me? I knew I liked women for a reason....



:P

You would :P at my late night grammar error.
*is embarassed*

Lol, fucked up!

You would :P at my late night grammar error.
*is embarassed*

Embarrassed? Well then let me shield you from the prying eyes... :-D

Are whole world is imploding because we are forgetting our focus, which should be co-existing.

Namaste.

I myself used to hate Gay men, and I use to think pedos were the biggest scum to walk the earth.

Incidentally... feel like giving the exit interview?

As a biomechanism, pedophilia doesn't seem to work right? It's non-sociable (radically deviant) and unproductive for the species

I really doubt you can establish any of that.

What if an adult brain was transplanted into a child's body? Is it okay then?

Because I'm just going to go ahead and assume that's what every kid in the playground has.

I'm going to take it a step further. Have you ever talked to a pregnant woman? The anthropomorphicization of household appliances and other inanimate objects and the tendancy to nurture them, the obsessive-compulsive fixation with any negative news story going so far as to result in CEVs for several hours, etc... flat-out 5150.

Heterosexual men are rapists. The mental extremities of pregnancy are just a slight increase in the hormonal fluctuations which define womanhood, biologically - and having sex with a person being too chemically impared to be able to consent is the definition of rape.

The children on the playground you mention, however, do not have these hormonal fluctuations. lolis3x is the only sexual orientation and activity which does not violate humane and normative sexual ethics.

So... have fun. 'n if you see a heterosexual male who is not a virgin - save a woman, shoot them.

I'm going to take it a step further. Have you ever talked to a pregnant woman? The anthropomorphicization of household appliances and other inanimate objects and the tendancy to nurture them, the obsessive-compulsive fixation with any negative news story going so far as to result in CEVs for several hours, etc... flat-out 5150.

Heterosexual men are rapists. The mental extremities of pregnancy are just a slight increase in the hormonal fluctuations which define womanhood, biologically - and having sex with a person being too chemically impared to be able to consent is the definition of rape.

The children on the playground you mention, however, do not have these hormonal fluctuations. lolis3x is the only sexual orientation and activity which does not violate humane and normative sexual ethics.

So... have fun. 'n if you see a heterosexual male who is not a virgin - save a woman, shoot them.

Yes, let's claim that hormone fluctuations make it impossible for a woman to decide if she wants to fuck........IDIOT! Stop breaking down the biological, we are discussing the mental and emotional capacities of children. Something that isn't so readily available in a Biology book. Asshole.

Generally your pretty logical but uh, even if the kids had adult brains if they were pre-pubescent their bodies would physically not be ready for sex therefore damaging/hurting them.


The children on the playground you mention, however, do not have these hormonal fluctuations.

Um so if they are getting older and aren't going to be hurt then they are probably close to/ going through puberty...

So yes, yes they are having hormonal fluctuations and changes.

I agree with CarbonB here... I think you are over-rationalizing a bit by calling all heterosexual men rapists, mainly since not all people (women, in this case) are mastered by hormonal fluctuations.

And as for my question on whether or not pedophilia is a feasible biomechanism, I am merely asking if it is, well, feasible.

I really don't see any way it could benefit the human species at this point in time because (1) it doesn't propagate the species (no reproduction, genetic mixing etc), (2) it seems to cause psychological instability within a child and therefore debase conventional social structure, and (3) it is unanimously condemned by modern society, therefore leaving no benefit for the pedophile, except for personal pleasure.

More justification FOR pedophilia from a biomechanical standpoint would be helpful, but as CarbonB pointed out, it seems that (2) contains the most essence.

Generally your pretty logical but uh...

In logic, there are two types of ad hominem. The fallacious sort is to poison the well with the red herring of irrelevant allegations about your opponent's personal life... but the non-fallacious variety is to utilize the opposing argument to different ends.

At the risk of being a facetious ass - I don't believe my version, but it does have far more tangible grounding than that which it cloned. ;)

if they were pre-pubescent their bodies would physically not be ready for sex therefore damaging/hurting them.

I... challenge you to prove that myth on the basis of tangible biology, honestly. Not because it's actually relevant (as I'll note in a second)... but, well... because it's a commonly asserted myth, but an ungrounded one.

It's also irrelevant through a very simple and easy chain of observation. Damage causes pain. Pain causes objection. Ergo, damage outside of forcible rape is improbable or impossible no matter what the physicalities. 'n that's not really that hard to figure out - at least, if one is viewing "children" as living beings, rather than abstract, nonexistent pawns in a game of social control. "If it hurts, people will want to stop doing it" is about the most basic of biological impetus, going down to the level of microscopic life, and the willingness of people to assume that "children" will not have at least the mental faculties of a fucking amoeba if such dehumanization will help advance their doctrine of social control has always rather astounded me...

...but despite the fact that it's irrelevant - torture tending to put itself rapidly into the realm of "nonconsensual" everywhere and across every species outside ketch's "gentleman's club" in the basement dungeon - it's still a blind assertion which I've never seen its proponents try to validate with anything tangible.

I think you are over-rationalizing a bit by calling all heterosexual men rapists

Oh, like I said above... I don't believe the argument. I just know it to be better-founded than the inverse argument it rearranges.

More justification FOR pedophilia from a biomechanical standpoint would be helpful

While the molecular-psychiatric understanding of its evolution would probably be the most pertinent to your request, it's a much simpler thought-exercise than that, so I'll start with the very basics...

Case one :

Uncle bob, the ignorant caveman, loves nothing but playing with the children of his small tribe of ignorant cavepersons. It's his only joy in life, and brings him great happiness, and the children love playing with him, and so, usually, at any given time, uncle bob and the children are playing with each other.

One day, uncle bob and the children are playing about a mile from the villiage, when a lion creeps up. What happens?

Case two :

Uncle bob, the ignorant caveman, loves nothing but trying unsuccessfully to get pussy from the women of his small tribe of ignorant cavepersons. It's his only joy in life, and brings him great happiness, so, usually, at any given time, uncle bob is off trying to unsuccessfully get pussy from whatever cavewoman of his tribe had the misfortune to become the recipient of his attempts.

One day, while uncle bob is in the villiage, and the children are playing about a mile from the villiage, when a lion creeps up. What happens?

it seems to cause psychological instability within a child

I would question this as any sort of given.

To be sure, it's the only discourse allowed by a financial industry which bases itself on "recovered memories" and rumors of "satanic cult activity," but a coerced propagandist dialogue does not in any way stand a valid substitute for or form of scruitiny of the question. More to the point - from a scientific perspective - is the fact that refusing or even suppressing variable isolation is the exact opposite of proper scrutiny of the data.

One of the most glaring examples of this grotesque coercion and manipulation of the dialogue is [url=http://www.totse.com/community/showpost.php?p=10011604&postcount=37]a few posts back[/quote], where Suicide Mouse (don't mean to pick on you, you just have the dumb luck to be the person who said it) tried to coerce and manufacture the uniformity of experience between a person who asked someone to lick them where they peed, and had that person do so, and a person who was forcibly beaten and raped nightly by a family member in a grotesquely disfunctional environment.

From the perspective of gnosis, it is scientifically abhorrent to consider these datapoints to be considered to have identical variables... and from the human perspective, it is demeaning and dehumanizing to try to tell those who had either experience that their experiences are the same, and it is inconscionable to deny a person the right to their own experience - as forms the inhumane basis for the discourse of the regieme. Their experiences are their own; only they can interpret their own experience, and the only experience they have a right to interpret is theirs.

For alternate perspectives which completely contradict your adoption of party assertion, you need not look any farther than earlier in this thread, where people share their own experiences, and assert them to be quite different from your assertion about their experiences.

For other experiences which were not retroactively fictionalized, sterilized, and homogenized to suit the interests of the power structure...

http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/experie.htm
http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/experie2.htm
http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/experie3.htm
http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/experie4.htm
http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/experie5.htm

...women's studies has had a long interest in defictionalizing the discourse on female sexuality.

Nothing about human experience is homogenous. Count on it. 'n when someone tries to claim that it is - know that they are lying.

I find you as well as your arguments very interesting and always worth reading.

I do think that in your two cases about cavemen you only really proved that adults should keep a closer eye on children. Or at least that's what I got from it, though I did catch what you were getting at.

Sarcasm is for the minds of children. Don't worry, mommy will protect from the world CarbonB

What about the thousands of years before it was made a crime and practiced by everyone. Greece, which we base our political systems and many other cultural ideas practiced Gay pedophilia and used it to unite the people of Greece. They were generally pedophiles all around.
Social acceptability relies completely on the beliefs of a society, but most of our beliefs are based on an illusionary being in the sky, which is fucking stupid. I have pretty much no respect for a bunch of idiots who believe in imaginary beings.

Really, only within the last few hundred years was pedophilia even illegal or frowned upon. In the 1800s, it was legal to prostitute a 9 year old.

This thread is nothing more than a perfect example of idealism determining what is write and wrong. I think anyone who thinks they should get to determine when someone is capable of understanding something is a self-righteous asshole. I wanted to learn when I was young, nobody pushed me, and despite whether I picked it up from adults or not, I understood what was going on. The only thing that hurt me were people who treated me differently because I didn't fit your bullshit ideals.

I think I'll just do whatever I want because most people are just plain stupid

In the 1800s, it was legal to prostitute a 9 year old.

Throughout the 1970s, it was legal to watch kiddie porn while fucking a second grader.

While frighteningly successful in erasing history, this shit is very recent.

Throughout the 1970s, it was legal to watch kiddie porn while fucking a second grader.

While frighteningly successful in erasing history, this shit is very recent.

Well aren't you just pestered you weren't born just a little bit earlier? I am beginning to get the feeling you are Indian. Anyone here ever seen "To catch a Predator"? I swear, a lot of those guys on that show were Indian. I mean, it only makes sense, especially with JoePedo's obvious interest in biology and chemistry. Hmmmm, any confirmation Pedo?

I am beginning to get the feeling you are Indian.

...and we'll kill your bitch ass and reclaim our stolen land, white boy.

I think I'll just do whatever I want because most people are just plain stupid
That's the TOTSE motto, boyo. Go with it.

lol filling the generation gap... with cock

I have nothing useful to contribute

Under 12; to me morally is just wrong. They're still kids. They've still got innocence, and I feel like that innocence is something they will keep their whole life.

Once it's over 14, let em do whatever/whomever they like.

...and we'll kill your bitch ass and reclaim our stolen land, white boy.

No, not Native American. Indian, like from India...

I she's prepubescent and her body isn't ready for sex, you'll be doing things to her that she won't understand and will probably be scared of. <- I think that's the bottom line.


But society and life fucks with peoples minds. People get completely lonely/horny and just want some kind of contact, or a million other reasons. I say pedos should be helped in a hospital, not jailed and beaten.