Is the growing Lolita Complex a symptom of late stage capitalism? Or are all men just pedophiles?

Is the growing Lolita Complex a symptom of late stage capitalism? Or are all men just pedophiles?

Other urls found in this thread:

apa.org/monitor/2010/05/weird.aspx
lmgtfy.com/?q=boy adopted gay couple
ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/45135
researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/309021300_An_Internet_Study_of_Men_Sexually_Attracted_to_Children_Sexual_Attraction_Patterns/links/58038c6c08ae6c2449f94c7e/An-Internet-Study-of-Men-Sexually-Attracted-to-Children-Sexual-Attraction-Patterns.pdf
summit.sfu.ca/item/13798#310
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Causes
youtube.com/watch?v=d7Jh3N7ENZI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Rind#Life_and_career
frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS02E3
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
yellodyno.com/html/child_molester_stats.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right
rt.com/uk/248305-dna-rapist-gene-scientists/).
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I blame the ancaps

The growing pedophilism is due to cultural marxists pushing the legalization of it. It's fucking disgusting and if you think it has anything to do with capitalism you are fucking retarded.

lolitas being used to sell products is because of capitalism

but the older woman complex is a result of capitalism. Most women use to have children starting around 15.

They don't now because porky tells them to go to school, work on your career and then hate yourself at 35 when you don't fulfill your biological imperative

...

pedophilia is pure unfiltered ancap, sorry buddy

You do realize it's legal to rape children in Judaism, don't you?

When the bait is this bad I am certain we have shills on the board.


What about lower class women who are very sexually active and tend to have underage pregnancies?

Recc me some pro-pedophile or Pedo Positive leftist thinkers lads.

nothing is ever 100% when dealing with people that is an exception not the rule. Also underage pregnancies are typically unwanted/accidents. They're not try to create families they are just having sex.

Also sex is a huge selling point and the lower class get hit the hardest with it.
However liking girls that are post puberty is by definition not pedophilia.

14 year olds are prettier than 41 year olds

Lolita complex is the natural human state. Idk when MILF and granny worship became mainstream, but I think it's probably a result of Puritanism (sex is only for procreation between to married adults, only missionary position allowed, and being aroused during sex is a sin. Having a boner at any time is a sin, so try to keep the copulation to 30 seconds or less.)

Here's a recommendation:
Kill yourself.

Pedophiles are objectively marginalized. People just don't care because pedophilia gets such a knee-jerk reaction with everyone. They shouldn't be allowed to fuck kids but just because someone is sexually attracted to kids doesn't mean they'll molest them. Let them participate in society, just keep them away from kids.

...

Also, I think most pedophiles would normally be attracted to teens and preteens, but the taboo factor shifts them into liking little kids

Pedophiles can't control their urges. If you want them around kids you are just as bad as them for enabling the sick fucks.

*hebephile

but Children have a right to express themselves sexually, brah. Ageism=No Chill

Don't let the closetfags fool you.

What part of "keep them away from the kids" is not clear?


Not how it works. The age group they're attracted to is fairly fixed. Someone who wants to bang a 16 year old isn't going to shift into wanting to bang a 6 year old.

Reminder: the original Lolita, Dolores, was 12 years old. Lolicon doesn't mean little 4 year olds

Pedophile = attracted to prepubescent
Hebephile = attracted to pubescent
Ephebophile = attracted to postpubescent

Just to explain what these words mean.

That is about the most optimal situation there is: fap to eight-year olds at home, never actually have to deal with the little shits.

You said let them participate in society. We can't allow that if we want to protect children. Pedophiles have to be completely removed form society otherwise children will still be hurt.

How? There are plenty of places where children aren't.

You don't get to speak for all pedophiles. Who do you think you are, Muhammad?

Sage bait threads.

...

These sexy beasts. That is basically it though although I suspect my psychoanalysis college teacher might be into it.

It's because Western society is losing cohesion through a lack of common values. All sides are to blame. They refuse to do what's right because it might upset someone, which is exactly why we can't have nice things.

I'm a man and I fap to granny porn only.

Its not bait, I'm generally curious as to how capitalism is attempting to use sexualised minors.

It's obviously neither.

What we're seeing is being highlighted because for a long time we've been shifting this stuff more and more into taboo. Different people have different tastes - but to be clear, ephebophilia is vastly more common than pedophilia or even hebephilia, with true pedophiles pretty consistently being an extraordinarily small minority.

Even in a bait thread, that's a whopper.

In carefully crafted and provocative instagram photos. Tits don't make you of legal age stop falling for this bullshit.

Fine, Stallman then.

Psychoanalysis is like astrology for french pedophiles

Maybe it's that more and more working women are opting out of marriage which leaves older working class men to be shit out of luck if they want a partner. I don't think this is a direct result of porky's subliminal quackery, more so than it's just a response to the institution of marriage failing across Western society.

Children are bourgeois

Not hard to see why tbh

If you're attracted to developed tits and not prepubescent tits, you aren't a pedophile, tho.

They do make you pubescent, though, which rule out pedophilia.

This insistence on definitions is fascinating

This.

Remember the frankfurt school resolved to erode the "capitalist" west from the inside out by destroying society.

Oh, now doesn't that sound familiar?

Tell me more.

Goddamnit, Holla Forums.

Remember when Barack "Herod the Greta" Obama ordered the deaths of all white male babies when he took office? Too bad the average person didn't read Adorno otherwise they would know this would happen.

Im not from pol/ but what are you mad at exactly?

What are you talking about man, that's clearly Frank Furtschool.

It's a shame they didn't succeed tbh :^)


Are you being ironic or whatever? It's one thing to not want to associate with anti-semites and people who outright reject you for being a homosexual, and another thing to say that other forms of oppression are more important than the oppression of the proles.

It's because it matters retard.
The problem is the minute you bring it up you'll just get the "What are you, a pedophile?" garbage. Why not just declare all depressed people psychotic, hell schizos too why not, they are all just crazy right?

As someone with a brain this triggers me because it's just plain incorrect.

Too many retards on this planet, to have an objective conversation about it, which is why our laws that cover it are so shit. If you left it up to average people to discuss no one under 30 would be allowed to have sex for fear of being thrown in jail because "some people are mentally children in their 20s".

If you want protection, for children or anything else, you draw a line and if someone crosses it you bash their head in. You don't just say "the line is wherever I say it is because fuck you" and then start hitting people you don't like.

and it's yet another thing to pull a 180 and start shilling for neoliberalism

This is true though. We have a whole generation like that and it will only get worse with the next generation. The average 18 year old today is still a teenager especially when compared to the previous generations.

This is a pro-ephebo piece rather than pro-pedo, but read about the Rind study. American sexual taboos are completely unjustifiable and based on nothing but unsubstantiated hysteria, just like every other American moral panic, and Bruce Rind and his team proved it beyond any doubt. That's why the US government came down on him hard. Busybodies love censorship and can't stand the idea of anyone challenging their stupidity. This mentality has even infested people who are otherwise rational and progressive.

Yes, it is true and its tragic but it has nothing to do with abusing children. If people don't grow up then it is their problem.

After 18 it's your fault if you fuck your life up.

But if you saw a headline that said
How would this make you feel about the state of humanity?

...

Yeah, compared with boomers being a teenager is extremely mature.

Is it? Considering that socialism is probably the most deliberately mis-defined ideology in the mainstream press, you'd think socialists would care about definitions a little more. Guess not, though.

Any line drawn is going to be arbitrary user, whether it's onset of puberty or an age limit you're always going to get someone that thinks otherwise

Gee user, it's almost as if the study might've excluded a cohort of the population that went off the rails after being sexually abused and didn't make it into some university study by two social scientists too lazy/cheap to interview people that weren't university students

Then why are self-proclaimed hebes the ones who act like they are on the autism spectrum?

To be honest I get what you are saying, but its kind of not what the topic was supposed to be about. I'll throw in my two cents though.

Hebephilia if anything is even more disturbing. The fusion of a young child and a fertile young woman creates a weird alien like creature. Holding these women up as a standard of fertility is fetishitic.

Most hebephiles only really like them when they are 13-14 even though the definition extends to girls as young as 11. Are they really an oppressed minority at that point or have a proven mental illness, or do they just want to get their dick wet?

If you focus on just parts of her body (like tits and ass) then you have pretty much stripped away any chance of having a meaningful relationship with the person, sexual or otherwise.

Why are you so mad? Just relax.

So human nature amright?

Pedos, "pedos", ephebes, etc. are useful tools for the ruling class in the same way homosexuality used to be. You employ people in the bureaucracy who have that kind of baggage so you can hold it over them and keep them in line. The thing with ephebophilia is that it's extremely common so if you can spook people into believing that 16 year old girls turning you on means you're a pedo, you can exert that much more control over them.

Because those are actual pedos and they think kids covered by ephebe are way too old for them to even feign attraction.

That pro-pedophile "study" is complete trash.


If the 29 year old was truly a victim of a 30 year old pedophile, I don't see any problem there.


Yeah so my point is that wanting to have sex with underdeveloped 18 year olds should not be allowed.


Many kids under 20 still live their parents. That's nothing like it was back in the boomer's days.

First off, the Rind study actually made the distinction between forcible rape and consensual relationships with an underage person. By doing this the rate of psychological harm dropped to virtually zero. Second, why would college students feel any differently about being genuinely abused than anyone else?

Separating from your family has nothing to do with maturity. This is a bourgeois meme used to sell houses (read: mortgages). Get off this board you fucking retard.

If pedophilia is mental illness then homosexuality is also a mental illness.

Don't compare pedophiles with gays you fucking asshole.


wtf does this even mean

If that was true, why did the government have to get involved? Why couldn't it simply be handled internally by the psychological community? Hmm, it's almost as if a political agenda is being pushed.

It's not like you actually bothered to read the thing, though. And if the Rind study is trash, then there isn't yet a word that accurately describes what pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo all your fake moral panic promoting studies are.

I wasn't, you troglodyte. Society's attitude toward something isn't the same as the thing itself.

Exactly what it says, idiot. Sexually aware, post-pubescent individuals are fully capable of consent. They have all required information to be able to consent through both sex education and this thing called the internet.

apa.org/monitor/2010/05/weird.aspx

tl;dr Since it's cheap/easy to just interview/study college students, an incredible amount of research in psychology, social science, etc is based on a tiny subset of the population that is neither representative of humanity as a whole, nor even the inhabitants of the country involved.

Would you draw conclusions about human behaviour from 500 or so Harvard undergrads?

back in the boomer days you didn't have to be a chink working for pennies to get a factory job and that factory job could pay for your living expenses.
Today an entry level job like that would barely cover rent alone.

Children have an inalienable right to express their sexuality with whomsoever they wish. To argue otherwise is nothing but blatant ageist bigotry. And if anything, pedophiles are even more oppressed than gays, rejected even by their own queer brothers and sisters. Pedophiles and Child Lovers are probably the most oppressed minority in America today

Hell, if they self proclaim anything like that then they probably are.


okay in order.
Most people are are "hebephiles" are just normal people who like anything that look attractive, age comes second in most people's minds. People mature at different rates, and people like different things, ass guy tits guy etc, so some people might like those features even on a 30 year old woman.

They are not an oppressed anything, the people you are referring to are drama queens and/or retards. They almost definitely want to get their dick wet somehow, just like literally every man on the planet who has a dick. I doubt they'd really care if it was with the aforementioned 30 year old or a mature looking 14 year old, that's just how most guys are.

That argument can be flipped on you easily, don't use it.

There are a lot of retards though, most of India for example shits in streets, le meme I know, but still.

Basically, yes. Humans are just weird, for those with definition of what "normal" is anyway.

You do know that "underage" varies by location right? In one state of the US you could have a consensual (including legally) relationship, but if you go to another state the age of consent increases and they're now below it. You do understand that consent isn't something people magically become capable of the day they hit an arbitrary number idiosyncratic to where they live, right?

It is.
I have a few homo relatives, trust me, it is.
The alternative is that it is a choice.

Nothing. Consent is a spook.

You mean the same people who said violent video games would turn kids into school shooters?


Would you draw conclusions about the mental competence of every teenager in the world based on 500 or so teenagers? That's what most of your side's studies do, except replace 500 with 100 or less. You also fail to use control groups of adults, which would doubtlessly show the same flaws you attribute to teens.

The government got involved because the study is literally saying there is nothing wrong with pedophilia, which is demonstrably false and pushing an agenda to rape children. I'm an anarchist, but the government did the right thing there.


Still, don't put pedophile and gays in the same sentence.


[citation badly needed]


Fucking stop comparing sick pedo fucks who want to harm children to gays I'm going to have a fucking aneurysm.


It's not arbitrary, it is rooted in science.

Unless a time machine was involved I do.
For a child it's a problem, for a 29 year old adult it's a lesson in accountability.
I never said anything about rape btw.

For the most part it's quite untrue.
If you are a "mental child," then you aren't going to be very interested in fucking. I can tell you there's a difference in desire which is affected by hormones, as I have been both a child and an adolescent and adult.

As for this generation - this is largely economic and cultural. Combination of coddling/overprotecting, class, and recession. Being paranoid that your sexually mature kid might be fucking - this fear does not facilitate growth.

Except pedophilia is a medical classification, and applying it in ways that have nothing to do with its medical definition makes you as credible as someone who conflates every disease for AIDs. "It's all arbitrary" is a bad approach if you think science is a good thing.

This so fucking much.

I hit working age at exactly the recession, and blue collar work was long fucked over by then. I bare some blame, but I really and truly don't believe it was wholly my fault I didn't get labor experience at a young age in jobs that didn't exist and weren't fucking hiring.

This is as stupid as saying that heterosexuals can't control their urges. Yes rapes happen. No, that doesn't prove that the majority of people are destined to be rapists.


Some percentage of children will develop pedophilic feelings when they reach puberty. Do we just mark them down as "acceptable losses"?

We used to be fed propaganda about faggots being suck fucks that want to harm children, now the faggots are being fed propganda about pedos being sick fucks that want to harm children and they eat it right up despite the same line of shit being used against them in the not too distant past.

...

You're a liberal, my dude.

Eat me, you retard.

What do you think is required for a person to be capable of consent, exactly, because so far it seems like it's "be older than X" where X is a number that varies by law across the planet.

No it is not.

Gee, it's almost as if most people are total fucking retards who lack even a modest ability to think about people other than themselves.

Let me show you something.
lmgtfy.com/?q=boy adopted gay couple

Now imagine instead of just liking men, they like children. All of them.

How many pages of those results would you want?

Probably more stupid, tbh. Heterosexual males represent a vastly larger threat of rape and violence than pedophiles do. They almost certainly commit more child abuse than actual pedophiles, too.

If there is one thing that can be said to be a universal human nature it is that people don't fucking learn from history. Every liberation movement ultimately turns into a force to oppress others and maintain the status quo.

Why are you picking on men? Women abuse children far more often.

Except for the fact that a majority of pedophiles would gladly rape children if no one knew about it.

Yes.


The propaganda against gays was extremely false. Putting out "propaganda" that pedophiles like rape children is true.


When their brains have fully developed (usually at the age of 25) and they are capable of understanding the consequences of having sex.

Well, that's a huge [citation needed].

There's only one of us who is happy to throw children under the metaphorical bus in pursuit of their own ideological ends.

I've seen someone cite a study that said that before - I believe it was dodgy, and probably didn't account for differences in how often these people were around children to begin with. Perhaps I'm wrong.

But I can pick on men all day. Without men, the world would be a very boring place, with probably a lot less development. But we'd also cut rape and murder way the fuck down. Part of it's culture (and part of ancient culture defined our current physical state), but a lot of it is just the amount of hormones men have coursing through them at any given moment. They have a higher inclination towards brutal violence.

Cool. How are we to determine which kiddos need to die?

Where are you getting this idea if not the propaganda itself? You sound like a bible thumper at this point, fag.

Are you literally advocating for the age of consent being 25?

Not really, you legalize pedos and you're throwing them under a combine harvester instead.

You only think that way because you were born after the propaganda stopped being made, why exactly do you think all the old fucks had to die before faggots could make any progress on gay marriage?

Wrong. That link of thinking is on par with feminist bullshit like "toxic masculinity makes it so men like raping women so all men should be emasculated"

You're doing it wrong.

Again with the wrong definitions, too.


Here's my citation: Literally every country where the age of consent is lower than 18 and massive amounts of traumatized teens are not present. Your "theories" are not borne out by empirical evidence.


You don't understand a goddamn thing about science, you pseudointellectual twat. You have shit sample sizes, shit methodology, shit everything. You're in no position to condescend to anyone.

Anyway, I might as well throw some real research into this discussion, not that anyone will bother reading it:

ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/45135
researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/309021300_An_Internet_Study_of_Men_Sexually_Attracted_to_Children_Sexual_Attraction_Patterns/links/58038c6c08ae6c2449f94c7e/An-Internet-Study-of-Men-Sexually-Attracted-to-Children-Sexual-Attraction-Patterns.pdf
summit.sfu.ca/item/13798#310

THEN GOD IS 7

Yeah, we're not faggots.

We're on an imageboard, there's a high chance he's just retarded.

This. Also there are numerous numerous reasons why sex with minors is risky as it affects their mental health.

False equivalence.


Let me get this straight.

Pedophilia is basically the same thing as homosexuality. But unlike homosexuality pedophiles wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity either in secret or if the age of consent was lowered.

How do you figure that? What statistics are you working off that demonstrate that pedophiles resist their urges? I want to treat them as people to but you are making it pretty hard with all this NAMBLA shit.

How the hell were they not v&

What does this mean?
I'm not suggesting making it legal to fuck kids. I'm suggesting that maybe writing pedos off as inherently evil as soon as they hit puberty isn't the best idea for the health of our society. I'd guess that upwards of 90% of pedophile-perpetrated child abuses could be prevented simply by taking basic measures to reduce the alienation that pedophiles experience.

You were saying straight men abuse children more than pedos, which is true but definitely doesn't account for how often those groups are around children. Fuck off with this "oh hey we should be careful with statistics" the moment someone brings up women instead of men.

That's a complete misunderstanding of how testosterone and other androgens work. Go spew your race sex realist bullshit somewhere else.

Nice ad hominem friendo - now, which person involved in the Rind study published articles in a journal defending pedophilia?


t. "I didn't read the link". Hilariously enough the only response that Rind et al had to the accusations I mentioned is that there was "no proof" that university students weren't representative of the wider population, when now thanks to people like Jonathan Haidt we do know that for example the moral views of university students tend to be considerably different than when compared to other sections of the population

I somewhat misunderstood your post.
I half agree, we should write them off as mentally ill though.

Special pleading. More commonly known as hypocrisy.


You have absolutely no evidence to support that statement. If what you say was true, most of the world would be traumatized because sex between adults and teens is legal in most of the world.

Besides, what do you think the consequences are anyway? Not one of you has ever outlined that.

Being attracted to kids isn't a crime. Molesting them is. There's a huge difference, and if you don't recognize it then you clearly don't give a shit about kids and just want to use pedos as an issue you can rant about to feel better about yourself.

this is a good idea imo. sexual freedom 4 everyone, and yes, that includes kids.

Is there any religion that explicitly forbids it though?

If we don't expect gay people to repress their urges, why do we expect pedophiles to repress theirs?

Okay, next question: what do you mean by mentally ill and what would you do to them as a result of that?

I certainly agree that pedophilia can't be "cured". If you throw them in asylums the only result will be that they will continue to keep their attraction a secret, feel intense alienation, and some percentage will snap and either hurt kids or try to get revenge on society.

Dude, I never said it was a crime.

But the minute you fess up to this sort of thing your gonna have every alphabet agency scouring your history to try and nail you with an easy prosecution. And they will probably find something, everyone is a criminal if you look hard enough.

It's just reality.

The reaction to rape tends to be pretty consistent across the world. When you say that college students have some magical quality that makes them less prone to be traumatized by it, you're making a claim that goes against all previous observation. That's an extraordinary claim and you need extraordinary evidence for it. As it stands, not only do you lack extraordinary evidence, you lack evidence of any kind.

By using science. We know pedos are more likely to be left handed and other identifiers.


Because society was spooked. Society is not spooked on pedophiles being rapists.


Upwards of 90% of pedophile-perpetrated child abuses could be prevented if we just killed the fucks.


It should be.

t. "My one study proves my point"

Your bait is weak as shit.

...

That is some pretty Holla Forums-tier science right there.

The same thing we do with every mental illness, study and develop treatment. We don't have one yet because we haven't studied anything.
We just send them to jail most of the time and write them off as you said, and it's been proven that the minute they get out they don't change so obviously it's not something you can just "stop" doing.

...

Jesus Christ, you're claiming that you base your views on science, but not only do you not know (or care about) scientific definitions of sexual attraction, you don't even know the names of the fallacies you're accusing people of. You're just spewing random buzzwords you heard on Reddit to try to sound smart. That won't work here, though. People here have the knowledge and critical thinking skill to debunk you.

Are you fucking kidding me? Pedophiles are the witches of the 21st century where in the 20th century they weren't even seen as a problem.

Except it's not.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Causes


Prove to me pedos don't rape children. I'll wait.

We can see from propaganda that is still being made by various Christian "science" resources and ministries that the "evidence" that demonstrates homosexuality is bad is completely laughable.

Meanwhile we have numerous people who have come forward and suffer from a range of social and mental problems because of abuse at a young age.

I'm not how keeping the age of consent at 18 benefits the (porkies/jews/irish) that would have to overemphasis or fabricate these "incidents".

And they are. I'm sure I could find evidence through a quick google search but you will just call it propaganda anyway.

Prove to me men don't rape women, I'll wait.

No, they literally couldn't. Pedophiles aren't born with a big "I'm a pedophile" sign on their forehead. It would only drive them underground further and increase the incidence of mental health problems among an already unstable population. If anything I expect you'd see more child abuse.


Gay cure therapy has been proven to not work. All the evidence (see ) suggests that pedophilia is psychologically very similar to homosexuality.

It's like you don't enjoy fun.

Not like it matters, anyway. One correct study is better than 1000 false ones.

Still, I never said therapy, I said treatment.
That can be anything from eating McDonald every day to a bullet in the back of the head.

kek, that's rich coming from "people associated with this organisation published one thing, therefore everything else published by this organisation is tainted by association"

Fun fact:

NAMBLA participated in some '70s Pride Parades. NAMBLA themselves were imbeciles - when they started out, they had mostly pederasts (in the classical sense, more-or-less, being a mix of hebephiles and ephebophiles) but they chose the "pedophile" identity and in doing so invited the guys in who were actually attracted to 8-year-olds. Those people were a minority even within this fringe group, and they fucked up extra hard by allowing them in.

Sorry - was I wrong?


Sex isn't a social construct in the way race is, though. It's kind of ever-present and doesn't blur at birth so much.

Is all gay sex rape to you?

False equivalence. Anytime a pedo has sex with child it is rape.


Why is this a problem exactly?

I mean, these can also be found a lot amongst non-pedo populations, correlation doesn't mean causation and all that.

...

No, I'm saying it's stupid to pretend that pedophiles aren't eventually going to act out on their urges when given the opportunity because the pedophiles themselves insist that they wouldn't

This was already explained to you earlier. It's for the sake of creating a boogeyman. It's exceedingly easy to fabricate these incidents by gaslighting and treating legitimate relationships as harmful, kind of like the Obama administration decided to classify all 16+ males in certain Middle Eastern regions as terrorists to say they weren't killing civilians. And it's fucking amazing how you can say that there isn't an overemphasis on cases for your side when you said you wanted to censor anyone who showed you cases that prove the opposite. If I hadn't seen so many people who unironically believe the doublethink you're spewing I'd call you a troll.

Better safe than sorry.

Keep the thread going just to piss >>1511865 off.

Wrong. Statutory rape is the equivalent of a woman regretting sex she had after the fact and that being considered rape.
If you think one is rape and not the other than you're simply a hypocrite because both of those can start out as consensual sex and later be classified as rape for no apparent reason.
And thats not even going into the countries where what you consider children in your country are considered consenting adults in theirs.

You have to draw a line somewhere dude, we can't control where other people draw theirs.

That's not an argument or a solid basis for any legal system.

You have to be trolling now. Who believes that people should be prosecuted for something they might do in the future?

You don't get to say this when there is actual, documented evidence of censorship happening. Also, the tinfoil hat meme wore off at about the time Wikileaks became famous.


It's true that just because they were wrong about video games doesn't make them wrong about this. The evidence is what makes them wrong about this. I said what I said about video games to prove their motivations, which are to create boogeymen for the corporate government elites.


What if your enemies decide they've had enough of your censorious bullshit and kill you instead?

But your line is the objectively right line and everyone else is wrong, correct?

I'm reposting it when it does.

...

Ephebophobes.

So draw it in a place consistent with biological fact.

If it is as something as monstrous as raping children, I am for it.


We have more people on our side. Pedos can't kill us all.

Are ephebophiles massive faggots too? I thought it was just the hebes.

No, it's just the one we made based on what seemed right.
If you think it should be moved then present a good case instead of "but in Islam and African shitholes it's closer!".

Give us a reason.

How many layers of neoliberalism are you on, my dude?

Nigga I'm all for prosecuting pedos but you can't prosecute somebody for something they haven't done.

But most pedophiles probably never actually do that. I'd wager most people who have a fetish for death never fuck an actual corpse, either.

I think that if child fucking were legal, pedophiles would have an opportunity to fuck children.

However, they're operating in a very different field from homosexuals, and most pedophiles probably know this. They may try to equate the two, but in a homosexual relationship both partners can pursue eachother and flirt in more-or-less the same way. In a pedophillic relationship, initiation and arousal are almost exclusively one-sided. Even if it were legal, it would be a real chore.

Now, if I had kids would I trust a known pedophile alone with them? Of course I fucking wouldn't, they're my kids. But if it was just some freak living alone and being open about their attraction to children, it'd be a bit different. I wouldn't expect them to commit an act of violence just 'cuz they were a foot from my kid for five minutes.

No you don't. If you had actually read this thread you'd know that most of the world has the age of consent set lower than 18. You're drastically outnumbered, and more to the point, the rest of the world is sick of you forcing your spooks on them.

I don't want to say this is what Nazis said about Jews, but…this is what Nazis said about Jews.


Just kill yourselves. We're tired of your shit. If you fuck with us we'll fucking end you.

Couldnt this actually work tho? I mean we need some modifications but

You have to recognize that you simply can't impose a treatment on a population of people who are living undetected among you. Any treatment must be appealing to them, otherwise they simply won't come forward and you'll be back to square one.

Honestly I don't think people quite understand how much the feeling of alienation fucks with your head. It varies from person to person, but in my experience it is completely eats away any desire to be a good or productive member of society. You start to think that the average person on the street probably deserves to be fed into a wood-chipper. Nobody is born evil, but I can see how this kind of corrosive alienation could easily drive people to just give up on ethics entirely.

The entire premise of the current approach to tackling child abuse is the assumption that it's possible to threaten hyper-alienated suicidal people into being benevolent and ethical, while simultaneously declaring that they're evil regardless of what they do. It's insane.

Clearly. But don't underestimate mine.

Yes, that's why Bruce Rind was expelled from academia and became a social pariah

What "seemed right"?
Instead of just asserting that your line is the proper one and telling me I have to prove you wrong why don't you actually prove that the line you've drawn is actually based in any fact whatsoever and not the reality of the situation which is that the age of consent in the U.S originated by jealous feminists that wanted men to fuck their aging asses instead of young prime age girls that men naturally lust after?

Then what do you propose?

How about because the current US law goes against freedom? How about because it sets a terrible precedent? If you think some people are entitled to decide what freedoms you're allowed to have, you've opened the gates to tyranny. Then again, your side wants to kill people for thoughtcrime, so that's probably perfectly okay with you.

No. The coil converts kinetic energy into electrical energy. The lump of metal would lose energy and slow down over time.
Technically it is slowed down because the power generated in the coil creates a magnetic field which acts against the motion of the mass.

For what purpose? You can distrust everything the government does, but they normally do it for some reason or to fulfil some purpose. Bombing sand people has a number of different benefits. Spooking people with pedophilia doesn't from what I can tell. If anything it shakes our perceptions on how responsible we think politicians and the church are.

I think it could be overemphasised but I'm asking what purpose does it serve.

I didn't say that though.

Don't say you are sick of people on the internet can't have a conversation about this when you are refusing to read what I wrote.

Enough to know that people will get fed up with pedos like you and send you to an early grave.


A child who is raped experiences hurt beyond belief. It irreversibly fucks up their life and effectively makes their life worthless. I'd rather make some potential pedo adults life worthless by throwing him in jail than an innocent child being hurt.


The average pedo has raped multiple children.


Except we do have more people on our side. Look at all the people cheering on #Pedogate. We are exposing pedo rapists like you and there is nothing you can do about it.

What "we?" The hebes who made their whitebread fetish into an identity?

Gender roles like "males are more violent" are absolutely social constructs, and the material traits common to males and females all vary wildly between individuals

this game was sick, on the topic

youtube.com/watch?v=d7Jh3N7ENZI

Correct. The US government put political pressure on academia to do so. Question: How many of those politicians who voted to condemn his study do you think actually read it?

I think you're thinking the average child molester.

There's a really important difference.

But the distinction between "pedophiles that are attracted to children" and "pedophiles that molest children" is entirely arbitrary, and this push towards accepting pedophilia purely "so we can treat it" is a pretty disingenuous attempt to normalise the act of pedophilia.

Its clearly apparent from the posts of people like the guy ITT using Rind et al that those advocating for pedophile acceptance to ensure we can treat them don't actually have too many hang-ups about the actual act of pedophilia itself

"He then attended Temple University, earning a master's degree, followed by a Ph.D. in psychology in 1990. His dissertation examined factors in the persuasiveness of advertising.[3] Rind taught courses at Temple until 2007."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Rind#Life_and_career

Doesn't sound like the career of a person expelled from the academy for heresy

Trust me fam I know first hand how victims of sexual crimes lead out their lives first person.
But the thing is, the whole point of prosecuting someone for a crime is punishment for something they ==fucking did==.
"There's a possibility it will happen in the future" just means it hasn't fucking happened, period.
That's the whole fucking point of criminal law.

Literally just treat them like human beings. When some 16 year old discovers he has an attraction to 6 year olds, he needs to feel safe coming forward and seeking therapy. He needs to be told by society that it is possible for him to live a good life where he doesn't cause harm and in return receives all of the rights of any other person. In the most basic terms that kid needs to feel that he has hope.

The worst thing you can possibly do to prevent murders is to convince a bunch of teenagers that they are inevitably destined to murder people and there's nothing they can do to stop it. Look up the nocebo effect.

Gravity attracts things to the center of mass (ie. the center of the Earth)… not up and down.

That's why when you jump in a hole you fall down. Though I'm not sure why I need to explain this to an adult.

I don't think even the edgiest teens have homicidal urges quite as strong as pedophiles have sexual urges towards children though

In theory a mass dropped inside a straight tube under perfect vacuum would oscillate indefinitely. It's like a spring or a pendulum. The force acts towards a central point, but the system keeps overshooting because it has kinetic energy.

To criminalize something extremely common, thereby making pretty much everyone a criminal and giving the government the power to silence dissent with their boogeyman. This is a very easy concept. You're either being disingenuous or you have less intellectual development than a teen and should therefore have your consent rights revoked.


We don't have IDs here, so it's hard to tell who said what. Someone on your side did say that, though. What do you have to say about that?

Teens are not children. Learn biology. All sex with teens isn't rape and it doesn't fuck their lives up, except through what people like you do to make it into a heinous crime.


Either you can't do math or are just completely delusional. This reinforces what I said earlier about your lack of understanding of what an acceptable sample size is.

I had never heard of that before. It looks funny.

You don't know what pedophilia is, you dumbfuck. Stop embarrassing yourself.

The difference between physical attraction and force fucking is arbitrary?

I don't know if that would work like that… There needs to be something for the object to be attracted towards (ie a center of mass inside the tube) for that to happen and of course it would just crash into the central object. Right? The tube can't just somehow have gravity in it.

I'd rather kill them for real crime anarchist.

Yeah, but males are absolutely more violent. Not every male is more violent than every female, but the male brain is totally hardwired to be more inclined to blow shit up and rape people with your dick. Culture makes it worse, but the two feed into eachother and compound.

It's not even slightly arbitrary.


But pedophilia isn't an act - it's a disorder, afaik.

No, fuck that noise. They don't deserve to life.


okay

He didn't say commit dumbshit. And genocide is the worst possible act, not fucking a 14 year old, you twat.

Exactly. It's an even worse idea to do it to pedophiles. They need to be given support and alternative outlets to help them suppress those urges. Instead the current policy is to tell them that resisting their urges is a losing battle and they'll be locked up if they seek help or masturbate to porn (even fictional porn). I genuinely couldn't imagine a more counterproductive policy.

Personally I find fapping to loli drawings kills my libido for ~12 hours. As long as I fap once a day I don't struggle at all to contain my urges. There's a reason "porn addiction" is associated with a lack of interest in dating.

Except Rind et al weren't entirely talking about teens, were they? They were attempting to normalise child sex as well.

Seriously read their fucking conclusions against fuckwit, they clearly made a distinction between "child-adult sex" and "adolescent-adult sex", regardless of their earlier criticisms of CSA using "anyone under the AoC that had sex with someone over 5/10 years older than themselves" to determine whether sexual abuse occurred

Fair enough, but the minute they do some shit they are free game.

Your rights end when you start stomping on others'.

Being 16 and having an attraction to kids is the worst act possible?

I'm not defending that.


I'm all for preventing harm to children, provided that we can determine what age is appropriate for informed consent. But to say this without evidence is stupid.

No, no it's not. Having an attraction and acting on it are two very different things. You may want to kill someone, but if you don't do it, you're fine. Do you know about how mens rea and actus reus must coincide for there to be a crime? If I want to kill you on Wednesday, but then accidentally run you over with my car on Thursday, I'm not guilty of murder.

However of course those with this problem, this attraction which cannot be acted upon because to do so would be harmful to others, should seek help.


This is correct. Ignore the troll poster.


Are you serious? That person is not talking about people who have already abused children. They are talking about people who have the attraction. And even if someone had abused a child, they should be rehabilitated with adequate treatment, or kept away from potential victims if this is not possible.


lol

I can't see why justice gets thrown out of the window when someone does a bad thing. People can be treated, and people make mistakes.


Very good idea.


I wish I knew this shit. I have an analogue electronics and physics exam in a few weeks and I don't know shit for it. Instead I'm arguing about fucking pedophilia on here.

Why? How does that benefit them?

That there is no point in censoring them because the overwhelming evidence proves the opposite. If anything they are the exception that proves the rule.

learn psychology bro. Besides we are talking about the age of consent period. Don't try and hide behind all this rhetoric and then make exceptions for the "spooks" that you hold.

Move over Hitler, you've got company.

Fucking lol

I see you raping a kid I don't care what your rights are, you get mowed down.
You have the right to die.

Well, praise where praise is due. That's a good start.

Still, in the long term we should aim to treat them as equals. That includes not hovering over them like vultures waiting for them to make the slightest mistake so you can eviscerate them.

I see you stealing a pen I don't care what your rights are. You have the right to die.

...

What the hell dude, my last physics lesson was when I was 16, that doesn't mean I don't know the utter basics of how gravity works.

I would stab you to death with the pen for being an idiot faggot.

Yes, you are a ticking time bomb waiting to go off.


frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS02E3

I hate the place but they do have their sources at the bottom.

What about the rights of that little girl?

NO BULLY

fuck I copied the wrong thing hang on

...

I'm not trying to be mean but who does not know that gravity (at the most basic level) works by attraction of objects with less mass to those with more mass.

So your message to all the young pedophiles out there is that they shouldn't bother trying to resist the inevitable?
Great. I'm sure child abuse will be solved by tomorrow.

I'll add: especially if it's something people believe is uncommon. Then the people who are that thing will all be thinking "shit, I'm one of them. I have to pretend I'm not to fit in with the normal people" even though they're surrounded by others who are the same way. This psychology is exactly how you end up with the Holla Forums-tier narrative of fun where anybody can be "corrupted" when in reality this is just the way that many many people already are.

The distinction is important because it's rooted in biology. I don't support the former being legalized, but to criminalize the latter and build up such an insane brouhaha around it is ridiculous. Rind's conclusion was that it's normal for people of around 15 to have sex with people up to about the age of 30. That was the only thing he actually labeled as being normal. As for the rest of it, he simply said it may not be as life-ruining as previously thought, but he didn't outright call child-adult sex normal or even say that there was no harm involved, and he shouldn't.

It's funny. I actually felt reluctant to bring my mouse over that gif in order to stop it playing. My brain clearly thinks of the cursor as an extension of my body.

I love that the pedos always win these threads.

-Dr. Gene Abel in a National Institute of Mental Health Study.


The problem will never be solved, but we can reduce it by killing those who wish to perpetrate it.

this is what puritans actually believe

Its almost like the pedos actually have an investment to be educated on the subject and the moralfags are just parroting what they were raised to believe and have no actual reasoning behind why they think the way they do.

Let me give you examples from history.

1965
1985
2005


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

yellodyno.com/html/child_molester_stats.html
Forgot the source.


Considering how unreported child rape is, it shouldn't be a surprise. From that same source:
-FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin.

Then why are we considering ages lower than 15? Hebephilia is 11-14 and the point of the thread. Your conclusions don't make sense because you are aruging that the age of consent is just spooks.

But now all of a sudden your own personal interpretation of the the appropriate age is important? Even though its also used by the government to restrict civil rights?

You can just throw that out there and have it make sense in the context of your arguments.

Why are you even commenting on this thread if your intention was not defend pedophiles?

Nice word for "winning arguments without being right" you have there.

Everything makes sense now

No, you'd rather kill pedophiles than solve the problem. I've explained multiple times why your bloodthirsty idiocy would only make the situation worse:

Listen to yourself.

…you seriously don't have anything better to do with your time?

Did you not read what I said? I'm talking about people with the attraction in general.


Doesn't this only apply to people who say they're pedophiles? How can you extrapolate it to everyone who has an attraction?

This guy looks like a pedo to me, we should kill him just to be safe.

Dayyyyum! I would be impressed if I thought that were even remotely true. Pedos are getting some action.

Which don't explain how they benefit the state. I can think of a hundred reasons why they would want to persecute communists and a thousand reasons why they would want to be able to imprison someone because they say "Obama. Bomb" in a text message. All I'm asking from you is one reason why they want to persecute pedophiles.

If you can't think of one then you just fuck off because you don't know what you are talking about.

Also way to ignore every single other point I've made in this thread.

I've got an idea, lets tie him to a rock and throw him into the ocean and if he sinks hes not a witch pedo.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right

In ancient Athens it was called "Sophistry" and it's part of how they killed Socrates.

He can't be a pedo. Pedophilia is a mental state, but I'm the only entity in the universe with a conscious mind. He's just a mechanical husk which acts like it has a mind.

Literally what?

why are you even in this board

What?

...

It's a brilliant thing to frame people for. Planting CP on a computer is trivial, and as long as they maintain the current stigma nobody will even try to defend the accused. This sort of tactic was even described in the NSA leaks.

As a said before, those with the attraction are ticking time bombs waiting to molest children at the right time. There is no difference between a "vitreous" pedo and a child molester.


Science would be used to determine who has the propensity to commit rape against children.

Yeah theres no way YOU could be wrong on the subject, everyone else is just playing mind games with you to make you look like an idiot that can't defend his position, you aren't actually though right?
… Right?

I'm not arguing for the AoC being a spook in general, merely that it's too high in the US right now. Sexual characteristics don't develop until a certain age, after all. Also I personally think 15 is pretty much the best age and wouldn't consider going lower. This thread moves fast and it may be difficult to tell who's arguing for what without IDs. My apologies for any confusion.


DEEPEST LORE

This shit is hilarious. You have the autistic hebe and the reactionary feminist at each other's throats, and everybody else is either fucking with them or blowing them the fuck out. It's like old Holla Forums.

see

why are you even in this board

pre-crime is idiotic. If you implement it for any crime you might as well get rid of criminal law as a whole.

What part of "censured by the US Congress" don't you understand? Teenagers can read well enough to get that, but you can't. Sounds like you should be forbidden from having sex, and also killed for being a thought criminal.

...

It's not idiotic, it could be used effectively (rt.com/uk/248305-dna-rapist-gene-scientists/). In fact it's already being used by some police departments through risk assessment.

Cool, one reason, thank you.

Now why use that tactic and not a million others like implying they have ties with terrorist organisations?

Yep. That is exactly the excuse they used to take down the deep web.

Are you listening to yourself right now? The act and the intention have to coincide. Otherwise there is no fucking crime. A pedophile is NOT a child molester-in-waiting, at least not necessarily. You're talking about precrime which is unjust.


This is what pisses me off about this shit. These threads are addictive to argue with moralfags and people who think having an attraction is the same as abusing children. But I know it's all shit tier nonsense and nothing will be resolved. It never is resolved. These threads happen again and again and it's pissing me off.

Someone needs to come out with a screencap'd post with citations to show whenever this shit comes up. It's fucking cancerous.

...

the whole point of criminal law and criminal prosecution is punishing someone for something they did, like I said before.
If you punish them for something that "might happen in the future" that simply means you're punishing them for nothing that has actually happened.
At that point might as well get rid of the whole body of criminal legislation.

Raping children and fucking them up for life is also unjust. What I want will save lives, what you want will hurt children.

Because people shit themselves over pedos a lot more than they do over turrurrists. You can't justify the whole surveilance state with evil muslims. Pedos make even better boogiemen.

Because, as I said, pedophilia carries a far greater stigma than even being a card-carrying ISIS member. People sometimes understand that one man's "terrorist" is another man's "freedom fighter", and certainly there is public outcry against torturing suspected terrorists. The same can't be said for pedophiles.

Have we unwittingly boarded your ruse cruise?

No, it blatantly won't. Ignoring the posts explaining why it won't work doesn't make you right.

Why can't there be a single day without a thread about lolita / pedophilia on leftypol?

Holla Forums is so fucking stupid.

you're just pulling statements out of your ass with absolutely no evidence

Because all the other boards on this site are either dead or ban you for talking about it just like 4chan.

Because the mods don't give a shit. I reported it before I started posting.

Because it's the best excuse for a shitposting troll thread in existence.

Alex Jones told me leftists love pedophiles.
That's probably why.

...

Well, I'm a leftist and I love pedophiles, but I think I might be an outlier. Most leftists are awful people, just like most humans.

Yep.
Also the mod faggot deleted all of it for your loss.
Those were some super dank gifs.

Benjamin Franklin is shaking his head inside his grave at speeds fast enough to turn it into a relativistic kill vehicle.


It wasn't always like this, but ever since the Milo thing happened it's been a lot more common, and not only here.

No, pedos are hot as fuck when they're women.

Maybe people are finally realizing the witch hunt has gotten out of hand when even the people who are victims of child abuse are having their lives ruined because of it.

What Milo thing? Did that faggot finally do something to get himself permab&?

I KNEW IT!

...

I fear being banned soon at /r/shitliberalssay for defending lolicon porn, even while saying the pedophilia is a sick disease.


milo is probably defending it as a psychological reaction to try and pass off the abuse that happened to him as something not that bad; it's natural behaviour to try and make oneself seem unaffected by past horrible experiences

it's a coping mechanism

It's a combination of that and the recent drive toward censorship by the political establishment. People are worried that they're going to get caught up in the witch hunt for having completely unrelated opinions, so now they're finally paying attention.

And just think, all they had to do to stop this from ever happening was to pay attention a decade or two ago. Fucking idiots.

...

...

I honestly wish you would tell me why you think pre-crime is a good idea and address what i said here

Or he was just a horny teenage faggot that took advantage of a priest whos willpower was broken down from years of celibacy and couldn't resist a horny faggot begging for dick right in front of him.
But then he wouldn't be a victim and that wouldn't fit your narrative that anyone who has sex under 18 is a victim so lets not even entertain that idea.

Trust me. This shit has been going on for a lot longer than that.

That reasoning seems extremely circular. Underage sex is always harmful, therefore if the victim says they enjoyed it they must be lying to themselves, thus proving that it's always harmful.

...

It's good because it can prevent children being harmed. To address what you said in that other post, yes I recognize it goes against the grain but when it comes to the heinous act of raping children, I am willing to make that sacrifice.

Would it be a good idea for everyone to be locked up? Then no children could be harmed at all!

No, it can't. You're still ignoring all of the posts which explain precisely why the legal system cannot prevent child abuse. The only control you have is over how depressed and alienated pedophiles feel. Guess which mental state is more conducive to ethical behavior.

Just lock the children up, kids suck anyway

Legalizing child pornography is statistically proven to lower the rate of sex crimes against minors but that avenue for preventing children being harmed doesn't involve genocide so I'm guessing you're not interested.

But the problem is that the whole basic premise of criminal prosecution is action and consequence.
An action (ilegal of course) leads to -> a consequence (like imprisonment or whatever the law prescribes).
If you remove the action part of the equation it just becomes consequence. And at that point the consequence becomes applicable to basically everyone.
And at that point, might as well drop the pretense and get rid of the legislative body as a whole. Because at that point you basically deny the whole underlying principle of every legislation in existence. Cause and effect.

(cont. forgot to type this in)
This is why the premise of pre-crime is inherently flawed. It tries to subvert the entire principle of the system it claims to serve.

...

Most people do not commit crimes worthy of being arrested.


I know it can't fully prevent child abuse, but the lesser number of pedophiles the better off we all are.


Legalizing child pornography would lead to more people becoming pedos and harming children. Your post is completely ridiculous.


Pre-crime maybe flawed now but in a couple of decades the science and AI behind will be better.

That wouldn't just protect the kids. It would also protect the adults of the world who have to constantly put up with their shit!

No it won't. What do you think inherently flawed means? A concept that denies the basic principle of action and consequence cannot coexist with a system who's entire basic principle is just that.

Do you think pedophilia is a disease that you catch by seeing sexy kids or something?

Oh god, it's spreading!

Friendly reminder that this guy is a pedo everyone. Just trying to appear tough on them so people don't figure it out.

ONE OF US
ONE OF US

I think people would be willing to allow it coexist if it is for child rape.


Legalizing child pornography would give pedos the green light to rape any child they want.

legalizing possession not production retard.

kys

Pre-crime coexisting with a criminal justice body is like a black hole tyring to coexist with a star.

Pedophiles keep being born, and they're completely undetectable until they choose to act.

It's clear you've never read a single scientific study on the topic. Sexuality is fixed at puberty. Nobody becomes a pedophile from seeing CP.

yeah, every look at some outspoken anti gay people?

Well, he's posting on a pedo site already, so you're probably right. We should execute him to be on the safe side. Can't risk anyone's child getting hurt.

Obviously, but now that we have the internet everyone can have a voice that they didn't have before. The fact that they still want to keep censoring now that we've had the tech to debate this issue among everyone for over a decade lets people see that their true motivations have nothing to do with protecting the youth. This is the US government we're talking about, after all. They bomb kids with drones almost every day.

you make a good point man, better safe than sorry

The same thing still applies. They'll say "why can I own porn but not produce it?"


I think a criminal justice body can handle one pre-crime system.


Not really.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Causes

Sure they don't. Keep telling yourself that.


fucking stop

Come to the dark side. We have lolis.

Not saying gays are pedo friend, just saying a lot of very outspoken gay people were in fact gay.

...

So because some retard like yourself might say that, so what?
Letting them own it gives them a sexual outlet that doesn't involve creating a new victim, letting them produce it creates new victims so they shouldn't be allowed to produce it.

Unless that child had a sexual thought about one of their classmates, then we execute them too.

This isn't a pedo site. Jim got rid of them all (thank God).


Fine, but not everyone who recognizes the fucked upness of pedos is a pedo.


Why the fuck should they be given a sexual outlet in the first place, especially one that is at the expense of children?

All of those studies cited only look at populations taken from prisoners and convicts. I linked to some far more reliable and less biased studies here:
Those completely debunk that entire section of the article.

...

If that's true then rewrite the article.

Better execute victims of child abuse too. Everyone knows that positively correlates with pedophilia.

It can't. That's the whole point. It would be like someone trying to be a devote muslim and an atheist at the same time. The two directly contradict each other at the most fundamental level.

That would go down about as well as rewriting the article on capitalism or CIA-sponsored terrorism.

You clearly are going to be doing something horrible to a child in the future though, at least I think so.

Better safe than sorry you know, nothing personal kid.

Because anyone regardless of sexual orientation that has no sexual outlets is more likely to rape someone in order to have a release.
You talk about wanting to reduce the rate of children being abused but you don't give a shit about children at all, you just want pedos to suffer because you were raised to hate them.

Oh, I thought you wanted to reduce the rate of child abuse. I guess you're just on a moral crusade without any regard for evidence.

Honestly I would be fine with this if they wanted it.


But you have the science on your side that totally debunks all those other studies right? Why wouldn't that go down well? Would they find out your study are complete horseshit?


As I said before, science would be used to determine if someone is going to harm a child in the future, not baseless claims.


The best outlet for the disgusting fucks is death.
not true
true

...

Have you seen this thread. I've showed you the science and you've completely dismissed it without even reading it.
Anyway, wikipedia is not a fucking peer review system. There's a reason every serious academic would laugh at you for citing it.

How do we know you aren't left handed man? A lot of people who were born left handed were beaten and so on just for being left handed.

don't try to muddy the issue with facts and statistics

I did read it. I like this one the best:
summit.sfu.ca/item/13798#310
You called that a study and that's why I said they were horseshit.


I am right handed.

A lot of people have been brain washed into thinking they were right handed when they were really left handed man.

Its ok you can admit you are pedo, we'll kill you painlessly.

What P value are you going for? Are you happy with a 5% false positive rate? A 1% false positive rate? You'd be lucky to do better than 50:50 any time in the next hundred years. Big data is great at giving you statistical trends, but terrible at predicting the future of individual humans.

I'm going to summarize the arguments of the shrieking feminist neo-liberal Redditors who've posted in this thread.

The other one was over a thousand participants.

Even then, 9 randomly sampled participants is still better than 100 people taken from an extremely biased population.

It's worse than that:

I'm happy with 50:50.

Man its even more silly

By killing kids who show this or this!

I'm kind of impressed. Most people would at least pretend not to be willing to sacrifice tens of millions of innocents in an ideological crusade which every bit of evidence suggests will completely fail.

Lukacs posited the idea that western civilization needed to be destroyed in order for marxism to supersede it. He was also instrumental in the foundation of the Frankfurt school.

But yeah, clearly referencing the retarded bald faggot in your post invalidates mine.

Typical leftist sophistry.

Big data can predict teenagers being pregnant based on their purchase habits. Big data is great at predicting the future of individual humans.

ITT: "Think of muh children" moralfags

says dude with an entire economic theory based on morality

Here's to all the feels > reals retards here