Amos Yee appreciation Thread

What does Holla Forums think of Amos Yee?? he's definitely /ourguy/ i'm proud of him for standing up for pedophiles and our right to love and care for the children we love.

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693773/
cbsnews.com/news/sexual-abuse-accelerates-puberty-girls/
lmgtfy.com/?q=advocating definition
clresearchblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/08/the-negative-effects-of-child-sexual-repression/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

...

shitty troll.

Naawhh hes legit.

In some Sam Hyde video he talked about the importance of us progressing technology versus other people, namely, Asians, and this is why. This guy has a slightly above average verbal IQ and uses it to shill for pedophilia. Asians are disgusting sociopaths. Imagine the Chinese having influence over the development of AI or genetic engineering. We really can't afford to have Amon Yee, or somebody who draws hentia doujinshi, or somebody who grew up collecting gutter oil on the development team of any humanity altering projects.

Not all

No, you're right. It's the Chinese i'm talking about but this shit is genetic and all the other Asians didn't completely escape it.

He has no real argument for pedophilia

video link or title please?

He really doesn't. His entire thing completely ignores the practicality of why we don't fuck kids even from the most animalistic sense.


if i knew that i would've have linked it already but i think it's in KSTV somewhere

Are you sure about that??.

yes

My god you're a fucking normalfag sex isn't only for reproducing.

See this is what i'm talking about. That has absolutely nothing to do with why we don't fuck babies

Only two legitimate reasons why we as humans (women aren't human but whatever) have sex: to reproduce and to strengthen bonds. You can't do either with a kid under 14 through sex. He has yet to provide any evidence against this argument, so yes I am sure about that

You can do this with kids.

If a bj is involved (on video or in pictures), then I can fap to it. Irl I limit my sexual shit to women my age, a few years younger or a lot of years older

Must've missed the part where i said WITHOUT SEX.

Uggghh when will the pedofags get in here??.

Soon. So that I can fucking shoot them.

You're a faggot granny lover.

Come at me nigger.

I'd rather fuck a 50 year old grandma than an 8 year old vomit covered, piss stain wearing, annoying ass kid

Nigger please.

No, dumb argument.

The reason we don't fuck babies, or the pre-pubescent in general is because it will hurt them both physically and psychologically. This has absolutely nothing to do with sex or "bonds". It has nothing to do with consent really. Any minor can consent to drink or do drugs, or even have sex in some instances, but we don't let them. To drink while your brain is developing is not a good thing. At the same time being fucked or getting fucked before you're ready is not a good thing, and children are dumb as fuck and don't really know when they're ready. I'm sure you could convince a 6 year old to suck you off one time, they being completely unaware, not hurting the kid at all. But 2 things are wrong with that. You're fucked up for wanting to do that at all, and we should identify that and put you on a list at least, preferably a cage. We do the same thing to people who hurt animals. It shows that you're fucked up and will most likely go on to fuck other people up because we live in a society where your personal actions don't exist in a vacuum. Secondly, one super specific scenario being the grounds for legality is retarded. It's like saying jaywalking should be legal because residential roads exist. But the law doesn't exist for that and it isn't applied to that. Just like how we don't really care if an 19yo fucks a 17yo or if a female high school teacher is fucking students. It's inconsequential. But having a toddler suck you off is not.

Typical normalfag BS.

the OP of this thread is the hikkichan beta orbiter btw

Not an argument against what i just wrote. We protect children because they are still developing and protecting that development is crucial to their/our success. It doesn't matter if adults are dumb or fucked up, we don't need to protect them, we need to remove them.

...

...

Doesn't matter and you don't protect them you suppress them from having equal rights and experiencing pleasure and making their own choices

Changing the terminology doesn't change the function and purpose of the action.

The irony being that you having these ideals is only possible through "suppression".

Fuck off i was dealt a bad hand growing up you have no idea how much of a fit i threw over the aoc laws when i was 10 years old because i wanted to be with an older woman back at that age.

Well protecting them isn't what your doing faggot.

literally the reason why we enforce the age of consent so seriously


It is, pedo.

I was not molested as a kid.


Nope

not an argument

You're right it was a statement dumbass.

I don't like it when people start off their response with "no" when I'm not wrong. The reason your argument wasn't mentioned is because it's the only argument ever used against him and he somehow combats it. Don't disrespect or discredit my argument when it isn't wrong

t. Faggot

That's the best you got? I see why you belong here

no

No, nobody uses that argument against them, they never go past "muh children" which is correct but the lack of explanation and understanding is why this retard seems like he's making a decent argument.

and no you're not right. Reproduction is not a legitimate reason for sex. This is like saying owning a car is a legitimate reason for driving it. You don't need a reason for it. That framework is entirely unnecessary and is exactly why this idiot seems like he makes a good argument because guys like you use this framework and buy into his premise. When you suggest that sex is for reproduction that's a meaningless thing to say. You might as well agree that water is wet. Sex doesn't have to mean anything in this context because when you're talking about the prepubescent sex isn't anything at all. What Amos does is suggest that sex is some right that the prepubescent have because according to you and him it's some amazing important thing. When in reality it's a very frivolous thing that doesn't really matter. Which is why it's easy and so logical to simply make sure that we protect kids from being abused by the animals who would even make this argument.

More importantly the emotional aspect of sex is completely lost on the prepubescent. The reason it's so traumatic for a child, or anyone who isn't into it, is because sex isn't some sweet little thing. It's a very primal impulsive act that two people participate in. The only way a child can participate and remain unharmed is if they're tricked into thinking they're doing something else.

And i see why you don't belong here go back to 4chan normal person.

Watch destiny debate him and he says exactly what you did. Like I said, I was not wrong

no you are wrong and wrong on multiple levels

I love bitch niggas like you who think they own a fee website like this one and say stupid shit like "go back to whatever the fuck" like you're a speaker for the powers that be on this site. Grow the fuck up and go the fuck outside you man child

Now i know for a fact this is untrue i have seen many cp videos and i can honestly tell you not all are of rape.

...

Do explain why I'm wrong. Everything you say about it being traumatizing to kids is not true in every case since I was one of those kids who had sex with an adult woman and liked it. I didn't love her and she didn't "love" me either, it was purely consensual. There is nothing wrong with anything I said and you have nothing to back you in your soon-to-be argument

Still here pal and ain't going nowhere

...

he's right you need to leave, faggot


You need to be physically removed from society as you are a cancer in it. You problem and the problem of anyone defending this idea is that you think your actions exist in a vacuum. You only consider things from the personal perspective and completely fail you understand how society functions and your place in it.


no, you should read my post again because i specifically laid out why this shit didn't matter but should still be illegal

Kinda already am user and the hikki life is pretty damn comfy tbh.

Too long, didn't care

Lazy cuck

faggot

Reported for normalfag shit.

Not lazy, just not interested in bullshit drivel

You must be quite proud of that word

I could report you for advocating CP

yeah it's pretty great

Is that so? Well good luck trying to insult someone with such a dated word

Top kek never said hey guys cp is great go make it right now that's advocating retard maybe you should go back to Reddit with all of your other normal friends this isn't Cuckchan this is Full chan you SJW fuck and we love little girls so fuck off normie cunt get out don't like it filter out the damn threads faggot.

oh i'm sorry my insults are not trendy enough for you, insufferable faggot

Advocating means endorsing or indulging in, you don't have to tell someone to go make it when you've spent the entire time calling me a faggot for liking older women and calling kids gross. You are in fact for the notion of baby fucking.

Yea well it's not so much as it being trendy or new age as it is being a sign of low intelligence

hey faggot, we currently have both flags and IDs so you can't pretend that there's only one person replying to you

...

...

Naawwhh diaperfags are cancer

Infantalists are not pedos. They don't want to fuck kids they want to be kids.

...

what is even the purpose of living tbh

Kill yourself

probably will soon tbh

Just as bad, if not worse, than cp itself

Good

HA you admit it's worse.

Not really. Most of us are just crazy lonely people who had neglectful childhoods. This fetish doesn't really have any outreaching consequences. We actually get preyed upon by pedos quite often as a surrogate to their perversion.

The same could be sad for pedos i wanted to have sex when i was a child but i never got it and that is one reason i hold a lot of hatred towards society for suppressing children's sexual rights.

this part right here
this is the important part, you want to fuck children, we want to be children, you want to kill, we want to die
simple

Children can consent if you teach them about sex and dumb it down on their level so they can understand it.

children don't even have the capability to have sex you dumb fuck

Sex isn't only for reproducing.

has nothing to do with anything

They can't understand it. They can't participate emotionally because they haven't developed their endocrine system to that point. Nor can they participate physically because they haven't developed that those nerves to register as sexual. You idiots act as if sex is just rubbing your skin together.

Its not that complicated to understand faggot even the most retarded of animals in the animal kingdom understand sex.

But they don't, they feel sex, they don't understand it. It's why even the most retarded animals don't start fucking until they sexually mature and why they don't fuck their offspring.

Yes certain animals actually do user holy crap we got a Jewish shill in here.

killing problematic malcontents, like scocial members who kill/eat/rape offspring, is also natural and happens in the animal kingdom

This thread is a stain on already stained board. People here getting everything mixed up.

...

Or because we find sex pleasurable, hence why it's called recreational sex. We don't have to be in love or want to make a baby or whatever; you can do it simply because it feels good. You don't have to have a deeper reason than that.

...

You're the real degenerate here for once Ellen actually has a point.

...

>

attention whore

...

Yeah sure kinda

...

Results of many analyses, both within circumscribed developmental stages and across development, indicated that sexually abused females (on average) showed deleterious sequelae across a host of biopsychosocial domains including: earlier onsets of puberty, cognitive deficits, depression, dissociative symptoms, maladaptive sexual development, hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal attenuation, asymmetrical stress responses, high rates of obesity, more major illnesses and healthcare utilization, dropping out of high school, persistent psottraumatic stress disorder, self-mutilation, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders diagnoses, physical and sexual revictimization, premature deliveries, teen motherhood, drug and alcohol abuse, and domestic violence.
B-b-but kids need sex, they can feel pleasure tho.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693773/

But you have no argument against it, so who cares?

...

*Not ant an endorsement for you to break the law. Obey the law even if you disagree with it, folks.

Holy shit, user, this discovery in on par with developing cold fusion!

Go read Rind et al.

Y'all really need more papers than Rind; go to IPCE, it's an absolute treasure trove of info.

I never thought I'd see the day.

...

You mean, like… child emancipation?

Exactly. It'll never work. I take a more assimilationist approach like the gays did.

You really don't see the irony of you directing people to the website of an organization that literally has Child Emancipation in the name?

No, because I don't give a shit about what they're called, or even what they believe: I care about the information they provide. They have a tonne of good reports on their website.

Nice rebuttal, retard

...

No one? What about the person this thread is about, maybe you should look him up before you make such claims.

Amos is pretty cool, he's trying. Not always able to keep his slanty-eyed manlet rage in check when confronted with the kind of people he debates with, but that's to be expected when they're generally fucking retarded.

cbsnews.com/news/sexual-abuse-accelerates-puberty-girls/

Kinda funny, your degenerated behavior ironically turns them into 'roasties' even earlier.

My first ejaculation was at age 9.

Now I just have to sit back and wait for all the furious micrococked underdeveloped borderline non-human losers who came from overly puritan households to tell me that the sexual abuse they suffered (being told sex is wrong/bad, or that you shouldn't engage in it, is sexual abuse) wasn't abuse at all and I was the one who was really abused.

With a big smile on my face, I must have been getting abused soooo hard.

Muh sex is bad, muh I'm the Punisher IRL rant! Muh!

My parents told me a lot about sex, they didn't need to fuck me for that tough.

moth

Those aren't reasons, those are your personal beliefs.
We should take a look at that too, anyone who rapes an animal should be punished for it. But if you think an animal can't make it abundantly clear whether or not it wants to fuck you, you've never interacted with an animal before.
You need to come up with some valid reasons why pedophilia should be illegal. You can't use the fact that you believe it's distasteful as evidence why it's wrong. Remember, a lot of people used similar arguments against homosexuals. You think it's icky, but if neither party is being harmed, and both are consenting, what's the problem?

having to deal with sex obsessed pedos would be harmful enough

lmgtfy.com/?q=advocating definition

That article is basically making the assertion that rape victims suffer trauma. It makes no mention of children who engage in consensual relations at a young age. Of course if you rape a child, they're going to be scarred for life, and the same things happens to adults.

those weren't just "rape"

girls you see smiling in those videos likely suffer from something akin stockholm syndrome

it's not hard to imagine that especially the first times were indeed very stressful

You're missing the distinction here. Call it whatever you want, rape is rape. Why is it that we draw a line between rape and sex in adult relationships, but with children, it's nothing but rape? I'm with Amos on this subject, rapists need to be thrown in jail, whether they rape an adult or a child. But to throw a person in jail because they engaged in consensual sexual relations with another person is, to me, insane.

:^)

How can a child be expected to understand all the possible ramifications that engaging in sex may bring with in order to give informed consent? They won't be able to comprehend the sexual drive of the other party until they reach puberty, they also don't know about how the society they grow up in perceives sex and they can't be asked to know anything about STDs. They will give consent to do you a favor, that's how they are.

...

chat bot would be more interesting

Nobody understands all of the possible ramifications of anything they do. There is a distinct possibility that if you put an infant in a car and drive somewhere, you might get into an accident. The child has no say in this, they can't consent to putting their lives in danger, yet we do it every day. The notion that you have to be fully informed of all of the possible ramifications of your actions is not grounded in reality. Nobody is ever fully informed.

But we can generally expect an adult to understand all the points I've listed, and that's not true for small children. Nice chatbot response, completely ignoring my points.

Children can't be aware of all the possible ramifications of undergoing various medical procedures but we don't ban children from going to the hospital. Children lack informed consent, but that doesn't make something intrinsically bad, it just means that the adult bears full responsibility for keeping the child safe and comfortable.
Many children, mostly girls, begin masturbating many years before puberty, so it's reasonable to say that they could.
What, of course they could, the physical aspect of sex including STDs is by far the easiest component to understand. A child could easily understand the difference between protected and unprotected sex and what it entails.
Which is why you should make sure it's something they'd really be interested in doing and not just wanting to please you.


Why are you still here? I thought you hid the thread.

"rofl wow kid you didnt even discover everything about this subject on your own why did you even bother lol"

I addressed all of your points, except for the last one.
That's a very narrow viewpoint, I didn't think it need addressing, but here you go. It's a possibility, but not a guarantee. My argument is, again, that there needs to be a distinction between rape and consensual sexual relations. As the adult in the situation, the burden would be on them to ensure that they are not pressuring the child into doing anything. It's pretty obvious when a child is uncomfortable, they're not very good at hiding it.

Yes, this is why someone who is aware of that is responsible to make a decision in their best interest.
What? So they can't consent?
Even if, many don't, so you are willing to put those at risk by allowing them to engage in sexual activity with adults.
For small kids? Really? I wonder why parents are still liable for their kids' actions, when they are so fully capable of making responsible decisions, weighting the risks etc…
Who does that? The person who wants to convince her that fucking with him is a good idea?


No you didn't, you just denied all of them because children may be at risk in a different situation and therefore it's right to put them at risk. This is basically your argument. Maybe overthink it.

There are plenty of examples of things we do with/to children without their informed consent, or even their uninformed consent. Why is it that sexual relations are any different? Putting a child in a car is fine, but doing stunts for an action movie with that car is absolutely wrong. The burden is on the adult to ensure that they minimize any risks to the child. If the child is okay with it, and suffers no lasting ill effects as a result, what, exactly, is the problem?

The disadvantages of not putting a child in a car or not doing a necessary medical treatment has so far more disadvantages than advantages for the child that we have to make that decision for them. Any risk has to be minimized as far as possible of course. The disadvantages of not having sex at age 7 have yet to be proven.

If you believe children have no emotions then you are fucked in the head.

Increased propensity to violence in adulthood - this has been proven.
Childhood sexual repression is correlated with autism - more research is still needed in this area to prove causation.

If you've ever been around children you would know how ridiculously easy it is to tell when a child is doing something just to appease you.

What is there to appreciate about this gook?

There is no empirical evidence to support this crackpot theory. There isn't even a correlation to be found within the data available, after taking other factors into account. That is to say, victims of child rape are more likely to rape children as adults, but they are equally more likely to rape adults, become prostitutes and engage in other sexually dysfunctional behavior.

I'd like to read the sources.

That doesn't really matter, the point is that they say yes. Your hypothetical world in which everyone who wants to have sex with a child is a perfectly nice person with only good intention and semi mind-reading capabilities is far from reality.

It's possible to have sexual contact with minimal risks.

clresearchblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/08/the-negative-effects-of-child-sexual-repression/
As for the correlation with autism: compare historical rates of autism with increasing stigmatization of child sexuality within the last 50-70 years.

That would be a lot simpler, wouldn't it. But alas, there are cunts in our midst and they have to be dealt with. Community involvement is how you keep cunts away from children. The rates of child physical abuse and child sexual abuse both declined by the same amount within the last few decades. One had a witch hunt, widespread hysteria and punitive legislation while the other did not. What they had in common was increased community awareness.

To an autist it may seem like mind reading, perhaps.

I'd be interested in what exactly constitutes as sexual repression. Not acting on your kids can hardly be repressing behavior. Also, as far as I know violence is rather a male than a female issue and is probably correlated with testosterone levels.

That's not in any way scientific.

You miss the point and resort to ad hominem, sad. If you can't explain the difference between an honest and a dishonest 'yes', it will be very hard to define a consent law.

did they raid him and his cp stack already?

It's a rather unambiguous term.

No shit, sherlock.

Spare me the feminist rhetoric. Women are capable of violence. Take a look at the crime statistics and tell me women never murder or assault anyone.

How is it not? There is demonstrably a correlation between the two.

The law is out of its depth when it comes to these sorts of things. Without video evidence, a confession, or damaged internal organs and evidence placing the perpetrator at the same location as the victim it's impossible to know if consent was given or not. We instead end up with a guilty until proven innocent legal system which, as has been the case throughout all of history, always ends up turning into a witch hunt. We see this happening yet again with the #metoo madness. Community involvement is a far more reliable solution.

What's your point then? I have nowhere stated that children should be repressed in any way. I don't see any risk in them pleasuring themselves, if they want that. They just don't need you for it.
Maybe you should take a look, then you'd realize that the murder rate dropped significantly since the 1980s. How does that fit your narrative? A correlation!!
And that is not a valid argument as long as you can't provide any evidence that suggests a causation. If you didn't imply a causation you might as well have said the GDP rose during that timespan, it makes no sense.

Masturbation is nowhere near as fulfilling as sex.

Murder has dropped overall in our society as a result of vastly improved forensics and more prevalent surveillance. This does not disprove a causation between repression and violent inclinations. The state of our society's mental health is arguably worse now than it was.

Psychologists have found that emotional isolation and detachment have deleterious effects on a child's emotional development and could play a role in developing autism. It is not unreasonable to speculate that the same could occur when repressing other natural human instincts, particularly one that is also related to bonding.

Care to elaborate?

It involves no risks, no regrets, no other party that may act abusive.
And there are many of possible factors that play into this, it isn't all about children not being fondled.
How exactly are children being repressed nowadays compared to 'then'? Did a majority of kids have sex with their parents or other adults a few decades ago? Because if not, then it's absolutely unreasonable to assume the absence of child sex is the cause of any larger problem we are facing today.
When there can't be a law that determines what is consent and what not, and instead you want the community to take care of it, that sounds like a renunciation of the constitution.

Right, well then. Let's just ban all sexual activity. There's that problem solved. You don't mind, right? You don't need sex, after all, you can just masturbate.

The time frame I referred to is 50-70 years.

I did not say there cannot be a law that determines what is consent and what is not. I listed three examples in which rape can be proven without a reasonable doubt. If you can add more to this, by all means do so, but age is not a reliable criteria.

Okay, then answer:

But you can't explain how such a law could look like. You admitted that a child saying yes doesn't mean anything, so..
If you add a certain buffer it is the most reliable and pragmatic criteria we have. No one is going to perform a test on every child in the country every year to determine if they have reached a certain stage in development yet. That is just not going to happen. Just because we don't have a perfect criteria it doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to protect children. You could make the same argument for driving, drinking, smoking etc. No one becomes magically capable of making a decision after a precise amount of time since they were born, and nobody claims that anyway.

...

I miss Hitler already.

Yeah, he doesn't count.

He never said he got penetrated.

...

Child sexual repression covers more than just banning adult-child relations. If we are to limit our scope to only adult-child then it could potentially be a contributing factor to rising autism rates but not necessarily the main one. If we further limit our scope to only exclusively teleiophilic children then a stronger case could be made.

Physical resistance, disinterest, disgust, saying "no", screaming, crying, discomfort, zoned out gaze…

That is the best solution. The same funding that currently goes towards keeping innocent pedophiles in prison could be better spent on exactly these types of tests. It's probably excessive to test every single child in the country. It would be more pragmatic to restrict it to those children whose parents request it.

...

Hitler is /ourguy/

...

t. pedo

Hitler lost niggers fuck blondes and have half-breeds

who the fuck cares about that disgusting piece of shit gook. I hope some anti shoots him or he an heros. t. pedo btw.

If that happened I would molest and rape baby cunts in his honor.

Stfu Amos is our guy

...

Umm nope

Ummm Yes

]\23786tyJM@T2^

@^908y

...

Looks like satan

He's just Asian. That's what they look like.

True lol

...

kek

this thread is against the new rules

t. Moralfag

I sure am g we have all these new rules to stop the CP spam that's happening right now despite them!

...

...

breaking the rules is based

based

I would impregnate that

Dat ass.

we should recruit pedos from tor to raid this board t b h

This has already happened .

we should do it again then

based rule breaker

True The BO of Holla Forums is shit Holla Forums is the pedo home board they need to quit trying to turn this Holla Forums into 4chan Holla Forums

...

I'm gtest they added the anti-pedo rule. I'm 100% sure it'll eliminate all the cp spam.

Seriously? I type g l a d, and it censors me. The only reason people are here is because they can say what they want and they won't get censored. We thought this board was dead before, just wait…

I don't think you know what censorship means

Get out

I should shake her to give her SIDS.

...

...

...

google it, dumbass

I sent him fanmail but he didn't

Respond