Can I marry lolis in a lefty utopia?(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Can I marry lolis in a lefty utopia?
No, you'll be shot you disgusting pedofile
Ancapism is a safer choice, you'll be even able to purchase and rape them to death if you wish!
I feel like under Socialism the progress towards a pedo-sexual accepting society would speed up quite a lot.
I'm not sure if this is true but I heard age of consent laws were only really implemented to stop child prostitution, and at the very least you cannot deny in the grand scheme of things it actually had not been that long at all since the stigma around child sexuality arose - it could very well be down to a by-product of capitalist politics.
I do wanna point out one thing though, the way pedo's are treated today is pretty much the same way homosexuals were treated 50 years ago.
Think about that.
Don't worry OP, mental health treatment in a socialist society will cure you of your condition.
I wonder if it will cure homosex too.
No community will ever accept pedophilia.
Even though there have been many in history that have?
Sure, why not?
Although homosex doesn't impose itself on the unwilling.
It is in the self-interest of the child to oppose paedophilia.
It's common knowledge that child marriage happened frequently even in the medieval times.
Pedofilia is basicly a fetish to torture children. Homophobia was irrational because it didn't hurt the people involved as long as both had sex volentarely. Pedophilia is 99.999% of the time just rape.
Yeah, because that worked so well when they tried it on homosexuals.
How can you be so sure? There is nothing contradicting the possibility of certain young kids willing to engage in sex
What if it's consensual then?
The point is that it child sexuality that happened in society and was accepted, not that it was property.
The child had no say in the matter. They were literally property of their father. This is basic stuff.
god you people are delusional
Because pedophilia is a sexual orientation…
Why do nonces always cry muh morals when told they'll be shot? Do they seriously expect an appeal to nihilism to be a convincing argument not to shoot them?
Yes, so? Again the point is that this was once accepted in society, so saying there is no chance it will never be accepted again is absurd. It very well may never be accepted again, but if it happened before it can happen again.
Saying a child cannot consent is still working within the logic of the age of consent laws that are being proposed to be removed.
It was accepted by that society as an exchange of property, not "child sexuality." Under socialism oppressive institutions like that will be abolished. Pedophilia is an abuse of natural hierarchy (age and often family) and will likewise be eliminated.
Its just disheartening to see Holla Forums act all spooked and moralistic on the issue, it must the the influx from reddit and Holla Forums. I'm not even into 3d kids, just stop spooking yourselves.
Of course, if the child consents then who else has a say in the matter? Age is a meaningless.
So, it was acceptable to exchange children as property, with the expectation of them at some point engaging in sexual activity?
And in the same breath
By who? Didn't you just say socialism would eliminate all oppressive institutions? r/leftypol/ was a mistake.
Well then maybe that's where the line should be drawn, but are you telling me a 14 or 12 yr old has 0 knowledge of sex, while a 16 or 18 yr old does?
So saying "I consent" is unlockable only after 15 rotations of the Earth around the Sun? Wew
Don't fret, I'll be very gentle and slow.
You only need to read the first pages of the Ego and It's Own to see that Stirner was against pedos, if you can understand what he's talking about of course.
Sup Holla Forums
Oh. The child on the thread looks to be around 6 years old. I thought you ment kids bellow 14 years or something like that. While yes, at the age of 13-14 I'd say a teenager could consent, it becomes more of a moral question as to where before it was a question about rape.
No. You can, however, spend the rest of your life in a gulag.
Ever consider that you don't have a special understanding of stirner's texts, and that you're just an idiot whose read stirner, not understood it, and come up with your own meaning to his words that fits your world view?
No, it's more to do with you all being greasy fucks and a tumor on any community you get your molesty hands on. Case in point that after trying to appropriate leftist concepts to let you operate under, you then resort to gaslighting immediately after you realize it won't work.
I dont really know the exact age at which children start to understand the gravity behind sex. Obviously a 3 yr old would not, but it's possible that a 9 yr old could. There's been no research of any kind into this field though, there's a lot we could figure out if there wasn't so much stigma for basically no reason.
Yeah it's not like 99% of all cases of pedofilia sex is rape. Sure, no reason at all.
You realise out casting thoes people who cant even help the sexuality their born with in the first place from society only pushes them further to rape anyway though, right?
If you really base all your utopia on "consent" you are better off at /liberty/.
Besides that it's the basis of every possible legal system that children can not give consent. Go fuck yourself
So either we let them rape children or we will cast them out and they will still rape children? Doesn't seem to be much of a choice.
Gee I wonder which poster has better reading comprehension.
No, the main propaganda of the day was that it didn't give girls a chance to become educated and therefore free. Boys of course, could continue working in the mines at age 8.
This is the common right-wing propaganda that says all acceptance of gender and whatnot is a slippery slope into kiddy rape land. I don't think it's true because kids aren't going to lobby themselves as sexual.
This. All the arguments posted here in favor of pedos have also been used to promote wage labor as well. "Consent" is worthless when there are power disparities.
Actually most of the 'pedo' arrests are people having sex with 'minors' aka anyone below the age of 18. This is generally a person who is of the age, 17, or 16, and fully mentally capable of understanding sex. Kiddy fiddlers are not as common at the media says.
Gee really FLIPPED that one on me, I'm totally lost for words, blown out of the water, up the river without a paddle, I concede this one reddit!
I was talking about kiddy fiddlers tho
Source? Also how can you say this and at the same time claim children can't consent whatsoever? I'm pretty sure you're just making shit up on behalf of the children.
No, we create a society in which
1. they are not out cast to society and end up more likely to actually forcibly rape children
2. where they have the ability to have legitimate consensual sex with children.
The second would take a shit tonne of work and probably would be impossible without a complete social revolution, but still.
Oh yeah I could see that, hard to really tell whos saying what when a lot of people are spergs who consider sex under 18 as 'pedophilia'. Really though its ridiculous how high the age of consent is. Fuck kiddy fiddlers though, they're messed up in the head. There should be a minimum age. That said, I'm a liar if I say I've never seen a hot 15 year old.
I would be a lot more inclined to believe you had read anything you're claiming to know about if you had a better grasp on English than a teenager.
Greasy as fuck fam, we know your game.
I know your game too, but you seem unaware, you see user, there's no upvotes on Holla Forums.
Children can not give consent
How fucking dense do you have to be to grasp such a basic concept?
Saying a child cannot consent is still working within the logic of the age of consent laws that are being proposed to be removed.
No, it's an idea inherent to every law system, predating consent laws.
Back to librecha- haha oh wait you faggots burn everywhere to the ground, too bad bucko!
How can I claim children who have no idea what sex is can't consent to it? It's like making up a word and then asking if people want to do that word. If they say yes, you kill them. Children can't grasp what sex is because children are not sexual. They have no biological need to be sexual.
Almost all times children consent to sex with an adult they become traumatized for life
Except R-Libertarians, where contracts can be signed by babies.
I agree /upvote how do I do this again??????
Holla Forums is wierd : / xD
fuck off retard
The age of consent is pretty low in Sweden where I live. I think it is alright because everyone above the age of 16 has matured sexually and know what sex is. I think 15 or 14 year olds are a bit too young as a lot of people around that age are not at all sexually matured and very childlike.
It hurts, doesn't it friendo? :v]
That's bullshit tho. Kids play with their genitals from age zero.
Playing devil's advocate here, children don't need to consent. They do not consent to shots, to birth, or to the food they are fed. Further, pedos would say that children DO have the biological desire for sex, that its innate, and healthy. Also, the question remains, would childhood sex lead to trauma if there was no societal stigma?
Children play with literally every fucking part of their bodies. Have you ever seen a 2 year old ejaculate? No. Because they are not sexually mature.
kys sick filth
For fucks sake, it's on the first pages, man.
The guy is literary talking about how a child is still understanding how the world works. and discovering the self. For Stirner, a child don't have a whole sense of self, so it cant give consent for sex. It's oppression. If you can't understand something so simple, something that is at the base of the whole book, then you're fucked in the mind. And try to talk back without "reddit" ad hominem shit.
Morality is stupid. Stop being stupid and outraged. It has literally never made the pedos go away.
Most children who are raped at a young age become so traumatized their brain erases the memory. I don't think social stigma would force the brain to erase memories because they are too traumatic.
All arguments against adult-child relationships stem from the notion that sex is a corrupting and/or harmful force. Outside of conservative circles, this notion only persists in discussions regarding this one subject.
If this is the case, should a strong athletic person be disallowed from being in a relationship with a handicapped, physically and/or mentally, person? I doubt any of you actually consider that viable.
There are more riskful activities that, if someone disallowed a child from doing them, others would find its guardians abusive. The "kids don't know the risk" argument is only applied in terms of sex because people view it as an evil thing.
The correct term should be that all adult-child relationships are treated as rape under the law. That is specifically, those under le magic number.
This is why you shouldn't skip sex ed.
In a society where traditionnal adult authority is abolished in favor of socialized education, that is, in a society where adults don't have as much of an implicit advantage upon teenagers, I'd advocate an age of consent as low as 13/14. But nowadays, I even think 16 (the age in most countries, the age in my country) is a bit low.
These were my two cents. Anyway, in both cases, if you fuck anyone below 13 you should be shot. Sorry m8 but you are evil.
I'm studying advanced biology. A 3 year old is not sexually mature you fucking degenerate
I fapped long before I was able to produce my first load. Probably the weakest argument I have ever seen against adult-child relationships.
My argument was that you need to be sexually mature to consent to sex.
I hope your anus gets ruined in prison shower rape you pedo fuck
Your argument is shit. It's the brain and not the genitals that make the decisions.
Most sports activities have potential to get a child into a fatal accident. Passive activities like playing video games also carry health risks. Read the first link for more.
Bro I'd consent to that.
Yes but thoes are not emotional risks.
Morality, stupidity and outrage has never gotten rid of pedos, true. That's what gulags are for.
Yeah, I've had more than one gf who became sexually aware below the age of 9, in one case 5.
You can have all of the appropriate biological faculties for something and even enjoy sexual activity, when you engage in sexual activity with someone else it's a different story. You can get a disease, pregnant, physically damaged, you won't be aware of exactly what this means for your future developments to view your own parent/adult guardian as a sexual partner. It's like engaging in a contract with retards, they don't understand and have no interest in the fine print.
SJW retards usually end up convincing their opponents they are somehow moral, because you rely on stupid reactionary arguments and refuse to engage in the details that make you feel mentally inferior or morally icky.
The only reason one has to take such a risk is because sex is taboo. If you fugged someone and was then taken away by the government and was told over and over again that you were being manipulated and exploited for sex, and that you are a victim, disregarding any deep connections you may have had, how the fuck would you feel?
But why would I not relish the opportunity to kill someone that unironically uses the term SJW in the current year plus two?
That's a good point I hadn't considered that a lot of scarring probably comes from society's perception of sex.
Are you an SJW? do people call you that? Is that why you dislike the use of the acronym? Do you need a safe space?
Why is your entire political view either some form of angsty whining or death threats and how do you believe a stable society can be formed with these two traits. 1000 words or more, cite your sources.
if you don't think communists and atheist should appropriate religous vocabulary you have no ideas of how language works. Nobody cares if "bad" isn't a taboo word for you but the strongest "evil" is because it has religious connotations.
haha you already have 14…. heeeeellll
Since some here are still not understanding what consent means, I run it down for you.
Consent is based on a declaration of intention. Not what you SAY is important but what you INTENT. Basically when I tell you something in an alien language and you consent but it turns out something different than you thought it would be, you didn't consent in the first place. There was no contract.
And children can't consent to sexuality because their drive hasn't developed yet. They haven't reached puberty. Their declaration of intention is worthless and not legit. They are biologically required to have a legal guardian.
Kids masturbate. Your argument is invalid.
You seem triggered. You're the ones whose worldview revolves around finding a way to fiddle with children. I'm quite happy to throw you under the bus as it would get me quite a lot of support, it's quite simple really.
You're just falling for the "sexual relations are a big deal" spook. That's why you see sex as somehow being oppressive to a child. It's no more oppressive than giving them the decision to get ice cream or not.
i don't know what you interpreted of my joke, but really if people came to south america there is a big chance they'll throw the consent discution through the moral window
Honestly, you can really tell how sheltered antis were as kids. That or they are suppressing any sexual thoughts they had before puberty.
Wrong poster, stop hyperventilating and write that essay.
So you were boned as a kid?
Not an argument.
Not my point, that's what this post actually said.
Honestly, you can really tell how sheltered antis were as kids.
poster is implying that they consented to sex before puberty
and I don't understand your message either haha
do you mean that there is a lot of non-consensual sex with minors in south america ? Because yeah, I guess, probably. But you don't know how much there is here in europe within families. Really. Really.
Also to clarify, I wasn't postively, but negatively impressed of how low your age of consent was (I statistically assumed brazil haha).
That's very true dear, a statement is not an argument. very good sweety.
Yeah, I spent most of my nights thinking of sex with big tittied girls but if it actually happened I totally wouldn't have done it because I wouldn't have a clue what was going on!
even so if you're over 25 and still want to fuck a 16 year old thats pretty fucking weird
The spooks are fucking real.
that doesn't mean they can consent retard i masturbated as a 9 year old i didn't have any fucking idea what i was doing. masturbation doesn't equal drive. kill yourself
How do you jack off without sex drive anyway?
that's the same as saying a drunk person or a retard enjoys sex so that means they're consenting. are you actually this retarded? why are you trying so hard to justify child abuse?
But if they enjoy it, there's literally no problem. A problem only arises when the spook of "sex is a magical event of monumental importance that robs and individual of thier sacred purity, and so should only be engaged in by two adult romantic partners" comes into play.
you're so dense, the point is you don't KNOW if they enjoyed it because they're incapable of expressing their true feeling. if you rape someone and they tell you they enjoy it that doesn't mean they consented it means they're scared you'll kill them if they say know, if you fuck a drunk person and they seem like they enjoyed it that doesn't really matter cos for all you know they could be blacked out
*if they say no
Kids are more capable of expressing themselves than adults if you think about it. Children aren't that stupid.
i'll concede that say, two children, two retards, or two drunk people having a sexual experience together isn't really rape cos they both don't know what they're doing.
oh jesus christ next thing i know you'll be saying you're really just a child on the inside man just fuck off all i can hope at this point is that you're memeing
You're not asking them to deconstruct a fucking Beethoven piece.
I ain't memeing, you are.
that has nothing to do with anything, it's about brain development and decision making
so how do you know kids are so capable of expressing themselves? cos of their fucking fingerpaintings? cos they ramble about useless shit? kids are stupid and annoying
WHAT THE FUCK THIS IS AN OUTRAGE FUCKING BEAST
So a child can't make a decision about anything ever?
no, not a useful or good one
You're just imposing your shit opinions and morality on the child then. If anything you're the abuser.
Lmao, if you don't give a child the ability to make decisions they'll stay a child forever.
ok lads i took the bait, you got me
it was fun posting. have a nice evenin
not an argument
Kids can't consent.
Consent to what? Anything? Ever?
So children should never be given the ability to make decisions?
If they never become adults, no.
This is a spooky. A man cant be slave of ideas or their feelings. True liberation of man is when he can make a decision to himself, not to a ideology or instincts.
It's not of my self interest if having sex with a child will only give me instinctive satisfaction. I'm not an animal, but a man of reason with a sense of self, ego. The true egoist don't free himself of ideas to enslave himself to external things.
How having sex with a kid would enhance my "own" if it's only a little satisfaction from sexual instincts?
How having a child, a person without the understanding of the world of an adult, to be my partner would enhance my "own?
To me, I, having sex with a child would accomplish nothing to my self interest.
And to the child, the little animal who still is developing his sense of self, how having sex with an adult would benefit his ego? How the fuck having sex, instinctive thing, would help the child discover her self, discover her reason, her ego? Nothing.
To the self, having sex just to have sex would accomplish nothing. The true egoist man can't be enslaved by instincts.
This particular factoid seems to originate, or at least gained most of its popularity, during the satanist scare in America.
But trauma, not only for this but in general, doesn't work like that. On the contrary the insistence on this by interrogators following the time's fashion lead to false memories and confessions.
OTOH the fetish of liking impaled pedos should become acceptable soon.
We're gonna make ALL the taboos accepted, son ;)
For what purpose? To live like bonobos?
Lmao who cares about all that shit nigga
benis in loli = gratification
So you're a little animal. You could be my pet.
If you want, an animal who knows how to enjoy himself, at least.
You could've written the exact same diatribe about sex between adults. "sex doesn't promote intellectual or emotional growth". So what?
So you really want to live like an animal. Just a slave to pleasure.
Sex is just a little thing to an egoist man. You should search for better things to enhance your own.
haha and you people feel like you're defending children
what kind of hell would be the life of a child following your opinions ? Would you say handicapped person (who can be way dumber than children) should never make decisions on their own either ? This is like 19th century eugenics…
What, like watching anime you fucking faggot
In my ideal society we would never have to deal with handicapped people reaching the age of consent.
Yes, if the anime is really good to the self interest.
this despise for sex and pleasure you have and this disgusting use of "animal" as an insults is really reminding me of humanist moralists. Humans are animal too, and every single of their animal trait is transfigurated by their uniquely complex socialisation. Animal traits aren't inferior to human ones, because they can't be distinguished within a human being. Sexuality and food is as "cultural" as philosophy, except that it is also biologically wired in us in such a way that it makes it uniquely more meaningful in every cultural context. There is no human society without sexuality, no human sexuality without food ; there are societies without stupid stirner's book.
Your feeling of superiority are shit man. Look at your feet, it's all flesh and bones. Read Marx. Human beings are rising from the ground, not falling from the sky. You don't need to tear out your heart because it's an organ in order to read a fucking book.
i puked a little reading ur messages
Well fucking 8-year-olds is good for my self-interest.
great lapsus I made there
How fucking dumb are you ? Are you denying that sexuality or eating food are biologically wired in us and reading books isn't ? Or are you denying that they are also codified culturally ?
You're just memeing this is ridiculous.
It is in my interest to pursue pleasure.
I don't deny that is sex is a necessity to our species, but this necessity is enough to justify sex without purpose with little children? How?
And how this pleasure would enhance your sense of self? The ego? Your own?
I don't know, I don't care. I just pursue what pleases me. May I ask how watching moeshit cartoons enhance your sense of 'self? The ego? Your own?'
Pleasure is the terminal value. Everything else derives its worth in relation to it.
So I will be a slave to pleasure and your pet if that will give me a steady supply of lolis.
Usually being a slave means that you're exploiting me with the explicit aim of denying me pleasure, but if you're willing to provide for me you can mince words however you like.
So you live only to please the animal side of your brain, it's not the real self interest. And you don't even try to understand for what you are searching for. You're no the egoistical man of Stirner, so stop using him or the "spooks" memes. Can't play the game.
So you really are dumb. Sex isn't a necessity for the specie, THIS is what you fucking call a spook. This is the very definition of a spook ; the specie isn't a person, it's an artificial concept to which you sacrifice a will. I don't even like stirner but fuuuuck you are dumb. Fuck the specie, why should I do anything for "the specie" ? I don't care about reproducing the specie. The world would be a lot better if people had less children.
No, sex is wired in us because our brains are affected by chemicals that make us want it, and because it is pleasurable. And it is culturally codified. It is a cultural constant within all societies because sexual drive is natural, not because everyone is saying to himself "I must preserve the specie". The functionning of species as a product evolution is only mecanistic, it doesn't mean anything for its individual members especially with the amount of cultural objectives they can choose that put them out largely of natural selection.
You really are a puritan christian. Fuck reproduction, sexual acts are motivated by pleasure first and foremost.
What's the ego, beyond your desire?
There is no "animal side of the brain". You cannot separate the two. Sexuality is culturally codified so it's as much an animal as a human thing.
No, I just enjoy sex. I partake in fedora shit too, it's almost as if you can do both.
You didn't answer my question, by the way. I'm really interested in how watching moeshit cartoons enhances your sense of 'ego, self and own'.
Who cares if is a human or animal thing, living for it is a spooky.