Pedo

I'm trying to find the identity of a person who has child pornography. Anyone would could help would be appreciated. Thanks

I have his kik name, Google+, twitch, YouTube and I think they have his Twitter. I've searched everything and can't find anything else.

Other urls found in this thread:

superiorsound.deviantart.com/gallery/
steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198067588587
youtube.com/watch?v=x0gX7T7dFac
girlgamerdating.com/profile/view/10278
youtube.com/channel/UCL-C0wRiYG4klCOjUWdnuwA
google.ro/maps/place/5284 Wintergreen Rd, Bascom, FL 32423, USA/@30.9223687,-85.115918,3a,75y,48.91h,62.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqepJaUMdlH8RYk2itGzFIw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8892da726ee7e389:0xeb6798d73d00896b!8m2!3d30.9224224!4d-85.1159266?dcr=0
report.cybertip.org/
ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=2043156
infoplease.com/us/marital-status/median-age-first-marriage-1890-2010
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#By_country_or_region
cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>>>/baphomet/

Is that where I should have posted it?

you shouldn't have posted this here, this board is full of pedos and I'm sure one's gonna warn that spastic now

u dun goofed.

I did some research for you OP, username didn't yield any infosec results. Best method of finding the data you seek is social engineering the target via discord. infosec leaks like emails, names, or other usernames will be helpful.

Most likely but this dude doesn't think anyone will find him.

All his profiles are socks unfortunately.

The Baphometians are long gone user.

whats his twitch?

nvm got it
his steam is JayDe

I don't see results for 'JayDe' query. Right steam name? Do you have the SteamID number?

I also have this if it's helpful

unfortunately no, steam id jayde is certainly not him. he may have changed his name there

deviantart
superiorsound.deviantart.com/gallery/

bump
got the steam profile
steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198067588587

u still here OP?

Yeah I'm still here. I'm about to check it out

Lord_Jayde is his kik.

That picture's creepy af. Doesn't surprise me that he's an (alleged) pedo.


Holla Forums is the best place for it now that /baphomet/ is dead.

I don't know how much he has on his computer. But I am 100% right he has cp on there. Before he posted the picture, I knew something wasn't right about him. He's also joined a lot of kid groups on discord.
The picture is creepy as fuck.

By the way how to reply to someone's comment directly? I'm on phone btw.

pretty sure there are people he knows irl in his steam friendlist, camcorder8 for instance might be this guy


he subscribed to shadman, that's a strong indicator that he's a pedo at least

youtube.com/watch?v=x0gX7T7dFac

I guess you have to tap on the post number you want to reply to, then it will paste >>[post-no] in the response field

but not sure

Nice! I can't wait to drill this motherfucker

Does anyone else find it interesting that Ron made Dysnigger get all those new vols to combat pedo shit on Holla Forums, and now since they were installed we have become widely known across the internet as the go-to resource on the clearnet for all things CP?

Sounds to me like Ron is learning a valuable lesson in "the Dysnomia effect".

...

girlgamerdating.com/profile/view/10278
some kind of dating profile

You should be able to just click on the postnumber. I'm on Android and it works fine in Brave and Chrome.

he's from florida like his "cam corder" friend


probably not the guy


nice!!

Fuck yus! Thanks man

dumber than the accused pedophile

Don't contact him. Dig, gather evidence, forward it to his local PD, FBI, Cybertipline, etc. Don't freak him out or he'll get rid of his stash.

...

we could probably catfish him

This.

florida, born 96, likes to mention he's an atheist a lot(dating profile, google+ #ProudAtheistGamer), googling superiorsound8 gives a deleted twitter account

user lives on the edge

Profit?

Hang on hang on op
Has it occurred to you that this dude might himself be a kid? Sounds like your average 11 yo autist.

Kids don't have dating profiles user.

Have we just cucked our self's?

fuck off he clearly produces his own child porn and abuses his neighbors

both the google+ and the dating profile say 21.
also his voice youtube.com/watch?v=x0gX7T7dFac

No I'm gen z, trust me I've thought about doing stuff like that before at 11 or 12 but decided against it, nowadays they do.

Yes.
t. 15 yo.

I mean I do too tbb

Ah got it.
Then he's a pedo definitely, sorry for bringing it up, as it turns out he's just a man child.

same tbh
he probably is just a kid himself

Whats the plan?
Do we scrap for now?
Do we catfish?
What do we do?

I unironically try selling my cp but nowadays you can get it for cheaper and younger.

21:10 my sides

tbh pay me to lure the dude in if he's a gay pedo.

nice

Ebin.
Op confirmed for kid.

best dating site tbh

google cached version says it got hacked, not much of interest in his last tweets except a deleted fundraiser campaign he made for his friend's education

I'm out for now since the pedos are here, best of luck OP

...

OP is taking out his competition tbh

Same I guess, frankly I'm just bored.

Original homemade cp™ for $5.99 a vid on sale now I guess, fuckin' hmu, idk tbh.

Made me laugh.

this is now reddit

Thanks guys

He's scared to death because dude in our chat kept talking to him. I might have his address and stuff.

...

Here

dysnomia

That's better.

remember that is a friend of him, it's not superiorsound

This
sage

That's right!

...

Way to doxx an innocent person just because they were the friend of an alleged pedo.
No surprise its the people who are trying to prove themselves to be moral by engaging in vigilante justice turn out to be the most morally bankrupt of them all.
Moralfaggotry, not even once.

you had his instagram??? ..

He said while he was moralfagging like a true hero

opinion discarded.

They're going to end up doxing the wrong nigger and it'll be glorious.

collateral damage is still funny though.

We can only hope they end up getting an innocent person killed by a swat team and then get arrested for murder like that call of duty kid recently.
That would be some poetic justice.

I don't think that's his friend, I think that's him.

for the dead person too?

Why the fuck would he talk to himself and friend a sock account on steam?

It was some random CoD wager match for $1.50 and a nigger legitimately got shot. Fucking niggers lmfao. Saw that on the news yesterday and I couldn't control my laughter. Good start to 2018 imo - niggers dying and autistic kidding sperging out on his family.

seems like our wannabe game developer likes to steal other people's work too

No, because they're dead. Whats your point? Should murdering people just be okay because it doesn't matter to the dead person whether or not you get caught?

you said it would be poetic justice if an innocent person dies

Damn

No I didn't, an innocent person dying isn't why its poetic justice it just makes it more ironic.
Even if it was an actual pedophile who was committing the awful crime of jacking off at his computer got killed by a swat team it would still be poetic justice that the moralfag behind it got arrested for murder.

The only moralfag I see here is you, I do things like this because it's funny

Maybe he shouldn't be friends with a pedo then.

If it was just for the lulz you wouldn't specifically target people you find immoral to punish them, thats moralfag shit.

t. pedo moralfag

Ruin the lives of innocent people if you want just stop pretending theres some higher purpose behind it that makes you a good person for doing it.

Pedo is raging in my inbox. Lol

pick one

found a YT sock
youtube.com/channel/UCL-C0wRiYG4klCOjUWdnuwA

LUL

Checking it out now.

FUCKING KEK

lmao he knows about Holla Forums

And the perfectly innocent person whos dox is now in a thread full of moralfags biting at the bit to ruin someones life for fapping to the wrong porn?

heh.

I didn't post it and made clear that it's not him, everyone with a brain can figure that out

Actually the address he gave me and the address I found are really close. Like same road type stuff

That doesn't bode well for the type of people who would be interested in a thread like this.

they must be close friends, proves the address is valid

masturbating to children is more than just "fapping to the wrong porn".
You're purchasing and supporting it. You know its wrong on every level yet you do it anyway. People who mastubate to children are sick and disgusting.

Children are pretty hot tbh

Your ignorance on the subject is obvious so stop pretending like you're an expert.
A devout christian trying to tell me that the devils lettuce will ruin my life with their only knowledge coming from the reefer madness video would make a more convincing argument to stop smoking weed than your ability to convince me how horrible the porn I fap to is.

Tbh ig pictures of lolis fail to capture the true torture and abuse they go though

GODDAMN OP
you ruined it by telling him
now he's gonna delete his CP and hide his creepy ass
there was potential

I'm more concerned with the idea that someone is actually purchasing pornography in the 21st century, rather than what kind of pornography it is.

Nice to see an honest pedo for a change.

google.ro/maps/place/5284 Wintergreen Rd, Bascom, FL 32423, USA/@30.9223687,-85.115918,3a,75y,48.91h,62.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqepJaUMdlH8RYk2itGzFIw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x8892da726ee7e389:0xeb6798d73d00896b!8m2!3d30.9224224!4d-85.1159266?dcr=0 huh, it is white

Nobody is gonna convince you, that's why we want to lock you up.

He was already talking to dude in our chat. The dude was in our troll chat and he posted that picture out of the blue. We been knowing this kid for awhile now.

Thats why they want to lock up all the weed smokers too right?
Oh wait its because its free slave labor for private prisons and the people moralfagging about how bad weed is are simply useful idiots that retain the stigma to keep the slave flow coming.
But hey if you're fine just being another useful idiot more power to you.

No, you don't need to abuse kids to produce pot, nobody gives a fuck how much you smoke of it

BEHIND EVERY PICTURE THERE IS PAIN
tbh

it's not long til they start saying that about watching pizza videos

You didn't give him the address you found earlier right?

You don't give a fuck because you weren't raised in the generation that was plastered with anti pot propaganda like reefer madness constantly.
Instead you were raised in the generation that was plastered with anti pedo propaganda constantly so instead of retaining the stigma of how bad weed is to keep the prison population up like the last generation did you're retaining the stigma of pedophilia to keep the prison population up.
I wonder what the propaganda of the next generation will be against.

No I'm just able to see the difference between growing a plant and fucking a child.

No I didn't give him anything.

Nice, call the FBI

It haunts my dreams


BASED

The similarities are that growing a plant and fucking a child will both put you in prison based on nothing but propaganda.

this right here.

Now you aren't even trying to hide behind the innocent consumer meme anymore. See that's why you belong in prison or at least on a public list.

Good.

If we had IDs I'd filter your ID, you bubbling fool. Can't tell if this is bait or not.

Not an argument.

report.cybertip.org/

"Muh dick" isn't one either, JayDe

Good thing nobody said that then.

I really hope you get the chance to have nice educated discussions on the issues of child sexual rights with a big black cellmate

I really hope I get the chance to hear an actual argument against giving children the same human rights that adults have one day.

Yeah, nobody thinks of the poor children that are all so desperate for your dick. I get it.

The only good Pedo is a dead one.

Since we're doing personal army requests now I have a doozy

Jimmy was mean to my son on facebook. HES LITERALLY A BULLY! Anonymous must DESTROY HIM

HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
HACK HIM
You're all retarded

Leave pedos alone! We did nothimg wrong tbh!

we >>>/reddit/ now?

ooooohhh shit

Fun fact: children actually like playing with dick.

Or all the poor children that are trapped in abusive households and can't do anything about it because by law they're the property of their abusive parents and aren't a real human bean until whatever the arbitrary age of consent in their country is.
But lets be real this was never about the well being of children for you, only ensuring the suffering of the group you've been propagandized against your entire life like the useful idiot you are.

got a source?

cp

No no you totally convinced me today, children are like dude weed lmao and fucking them is never wrong T B H XD

I don't need to convince you, but your lack of any rebuttal to anything I say tells me all I need to know about whether or not I'm on the right side of the argument.

bad goy

Why should I even bother taking you seriously? To see you come up with some more false equivalences? No thanks, I'll stick with the insults for today.

...

Actually it all depends on your definition of "child". If by "child", you refer to someone under the age of 13, then i 100% agree with you. Children younger than 13 cannot in any way shape or form, consent. If you're definition of "child", is someone under the age of 18, then you are fucking retarded.

u jully he be getting it on with ur neice?

consent is a made up word

I'm sure big bubba agrees with you on that.

No its not. By that logic, im gonna fuck you n the ass, and i dont need your cinsent, because consent is a made up word

If you were capable of making a convincing argument you'd be able to convince people to stop doing the things you find so morally objectionable.
But you can't because your stance is based off lies and propaganda thats been spoonfed to you your entire life so you're right theres no point for you to take it seriously because it would only end badly for you.
Its still funny to me to watch you squirm though.

words are made up. children or for that matter people in general dont need words to communicate. also children can say yes or no.

I know someone who owns childporn.
Who do I go too hmm.
Nah
Nah
Bingo

somethings fishy

You're saying we comunicate with smoke signs? I never saw that. Of course we need words to communicate, you dumbass. Right now, you are reading words, and you are about to use words to reply to this comment. That alone is proof that, we need words to communicate.
So can drunk people, that doesnt mean they know what they are agreeing with.

...

Really? If I make a convincing argument why committing a crime is wrong, then people will stop committing them? How cool, we must tell everyone!

false equivalence sir. next argument

iam using words because were on the internet. but theres other ways to communicate. facial expressions hands etc

The false equivalence is that false. Both can agree to something without having any notion of what they are agrreing with.
expressions hands etc
True,but you said we didn't need words.

I'm not on either site here but niggy, he is just saying that verbal communication isn't the only form.
ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=2043156

*side

If you don't then before long it won't be considered a crime anymore like whats happening with weed.
People aren't being raised on anti-weed propaganda anymore and so everyone in the younger generation is alright with it and it became destigmatized and is going in the direction of being decriminalized as well.

i got it

Nothing's fishy about this post. The whole purpose of this thread was to dox him.

none of that made any sense. i win i guess

Okay, here's you have an easy one: it has been proved that child abuse victims are more likely to commit suicide and abuse drugs than non-abused people. No matter what's the source of the psychological damage, by abusing a child you evidentially put it in danger.

No one is saying that child abuse should be allowed.

The guy you're arguing with isn't disagreeing with you. He's saying that propaganda can change minds, and is doing so.

And he's also saying that pedophiles would stop abusing children if they hear an convincing argument why they should, I provided one.

This right here is the backbone of imageboards.

That doesnt make any sense. Thats like saying, lions would stop being lions, if they heard a convincing, for why they should do it. That makes no sense.

Your "convincing argument" boils down to saying rape is bad and nobody ever disagreed with that. The area of contention is what you define as rape.
You say rape is bad and then go on to claim because rape is bad and you consider all sex with someone under 18 rape that means its all bad and thats where your "convincing argument" falls apart and convinces noone.

This

t. ephebe

You sound just like convicted serial bomber/child rapist Brett Kimberlin. Wouldn't be surprised if CP Craig Gillette were found on you computer. Wouldn't be surprised if the subject of this post was in some way connected to Kimberlin. FYI, Kimberlin did let a pedophile live with his family & take pics of his kids.

t. normie

No, I'm referring to studies about child sexual abuse, not rape in general. Child sexual abuse rarely involves physical harm if that's what you mean.

If I used a study on the effects of sexual abuse on women as proof for why men shouldn't be allowed to have sex with women at all would you find that acceptable?

Yep

Are you admitting that child abusers actually are abusers now? I thought they are put in prison based on nothing but propaganda.

Theres no way to tell which ones actually are abusers and which ones aren't. Just like if tomorrow all sex with women was rape everyone who has sex with women would be an abuser regardless of whether or not they are.
You still haven't answered my question.

So you admit that adults fucking kids is abuse?

If that post admits that adults fucking kids is abuse then it also admits that men fucking women is abuse.

...

Are you illiterate or something?

So you mean even if the child said yes he can still be an abuser?

I mean in a world where all sex is rape theres no way to tell which sex is ACTUALLY rape.

It's sad how much SJWs and third wave feminists have trivialized such a heinous crime

Funny how people talk about hating SJWs and feminists while at the same time taking the age of consent as gospel truth when it was originated by feminists as well.

this is the mind of a pedophile. matured women were designed to be fucked by men.

anyways. what's interesting about pedophiles. they're almost always bisexual. they enjoy both boys and girls. although girls are the only ones to be pleasing without the addition of any articles of clothing unlike boys. pedofags are the worst. they've been around for thousands of years and have effected all levels of classes. but how they get their victims remains the same.

He has a point though. Kids are sexually active earlier than one might think. I had a lot of sexual encounters with girls when I was very young.

To say that a grown man should take advantage of those impulses. No, I don't agree.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm sure you've seen that 13 year old who you eyed for a moment til someone told you her age and thought "FUCK"

The day her vagina starts bleeding is the day shes a mature woman biologically speaking yet you'll still be considered a child rapist if you have sex with them in the vast majority of countries.
Don't even start with how things are "designed" because the way our laws are laid out right now have nothing to do with biology.

You can thank feminism for that one, in a feminist free world we wouldn't have to be fighting our natural instincts in order to avoid being imprisoned as a rapist.

It was necessary, before feminists the "age" of consent used to be the age of marriage, which was around 20 for most women. The legal age of consent meant basically nothing then.

Disgusting.

How was it necessary? Things are worse than ever compared to back then.
Sure 12 year olds were getting married back then but what harm did it cause? The marriages actually had a statistically good chance of lasting with their children being raised in a proper household instead of a broken home with a single parent like most children these days.

Because sex outside marriage isn't taboo anymore, it's the norm now. Do you not see that or do you not want to see it?

There are still some kids around that age getting married, but it is and was always a rare exception, only idiots will buy into your propaganda.

I know. I am a monster.

Pedo detected.

Yeah now its just illegal to get married until you've been having sex for a decade and by then you've been fucking so many people that no one man will ever satisfy you so you'll never have a successful marriage and at best are destined to try and raise a child as a single mother which has proven to result in a shitty upbringing that will further negatively impact society.
Thanks feminism!

underrated as fuck

Someone who can't answer the question detected.

That's nonsense. Pedos come in two flavors: the type that acknowledge what they're doing is evil/cruel/damaging/harmful and the kind that don't. Pedos either act on their urges or they don't. The ones who don't are the moral ones. They only need to be monitored.

Most people don't start fucking at the age of 8. In fact, 99.9% of all children do not fuck before the age of 12.

Thanks for the cleaning product statistic.

Normies not welcome.

I thought the legal age of marriage was 21 in clapistan?
I just looked it up and I guess its just the drinking age thats 21, so you can sign up to go to war and die 3 years before you can drink alcohol and for some reason I'm trying to logically argue your countries retarded age of consent laws with you.
I must be a masochist.

...

No ones a monster here. In the end it really just comes down to this.

Our brains are designed to copulate as young as possible in order to insure the longevity of ours and our offspring's lives.

On the other hand our modern society has us living longer and trained to believe that once was the norm is no longer permissible.

Our primal brains tell us to "fuck young" and our older societal brains says "protect the young"

Just spittin some shit.

tl;dr i wanna fug that loli tbh

Please excuse the spacing. I'm very tired.

Bedder gib dat loli cuddlz

More like our societal brainwashing, these people can't separate the way society thinks from the way they think because they've been brainwashed to think exactly the same way.
Pic related is what they're trying to brainwash men into believing, and hell I've heard a couple people here claiming that they can't find women a day under 18 attractive so its definitely working.

We're ALSO tired of Reddit. Do lions mate with mates 2 years younger or do they stay in their own class? Hmm? Tell me now, come on. Don't be afraid, buddy

...

We have so much to learn from lions, maybe one day our societies can hope to live up to theirs.

I used the term societal because theres usually a father to to brain "protect". Like I said just spittin some shit.


Sorry user. I write a lot of emails a day and formatting just fucked my shit all up. Again, very sleepy.

Theres the human kindgom, and thenthe freak kingdom. And let me just tell you right there, you motherfucking pedo braindead dragdowns can stay in your low-stooping ditch of a freak kingdom with you mentally diseased brain patterns and way of thinking while US!.. the more talented among the human society get to fuck the right way, with grown and both physically and mentally developed mates of our own kind.. You can have your own fucked up pedophilic savage society. Just leave the good sexuality people out of it.

I didn't take your seriously the first time and now I know you're a just a fucking idiot. Thanks for saving me the effort.

Pedophilia is fairly amoral. Even the "best" pedophile is still a pedophile. Just cause one actually abducts/coerces a child and the other only jacks it to one doesn't mean both aren't exploiting a child. Thing is, when you download CP and (dare I say when you upload it), you're basically distributing exploitation. If you copy it and share it, now you're not only distributing but you're giving someone else the opportunity to do so.

Fact of the matter is, children don't quite understand what the fuck it is that they are doing when they are coerced into having sexual relations. I'm not saying you should traumatize a kid and tell them they're a victim, cause that's what leads to the life of trauma bullshit, telling a kid over and over how they should feel like a victim and how what was done to them was the worst evil ever. I don't think a lot of kids would really have that kind of backward think about it, they'd be confused by it, it might harm them in some way subconsciously .. but it's not as bad as brainwashing a kid until they feel like their whole life has been ruined. If the kid feels that way after they have been exploited, that's legitimate feelings about it. But don't berate them to turn what they think about it into your agenda. Likewise don't tell a kid it was good until they believe it was good if they don't feel that way.

Problem is, someone has exploited the child. And the child is a victim. They can "consent," but they can't make INFORMED CONSENT and that's where we draw the line on the matter. If you offer to give me what's in box A and I agree, that's consent. If box A is you throwing acid on my face, that is uninformed consent, because I didn't know what the fuck you were going to do. You are still an exploiter, still at wrong, and you can't pass the guilt off on me because "I was askin for it" by accepting.

There are no "good" or "moral" pedos, pedos are fucking pedos. One is raping, the other is exploiting a raped child, they're both doing wrong.

Nice us vs them mentality you got there, theres the humans and then theres the sick pedo savages right?
What a joke.

You can have it at me cunt nothing will stop your brain patterns being fucked up somewhere throughout your mentally abused childhood

I dont think you know what distribute means.

I don't think you know how the internet works.

A pedo can go through life without doing either of those things though

Oh shit guys we have a webmaster over here.

Maybe? If you jack it to CP, then you are exploiting. If you jack it to someone's family vacation photos, I guess you're just doing something reprehensible but not illegal.

The only thing stopping kids from being informed about sex is society choosing to keep them ignorant about it until after they're already impregnating each other unknowingly.

Not all pedos are savages. But are they anything special? No good comes from it.

Isn't kind of clear to everyone now? When has a John Lennon type ever been a pedophile? An Albert Einstein type. I think first of all, pedophiles have to think to think about. possibly because alone? or isolated? hmmmmm

Wow its almost like people who have something to lose aren't eager to come out as a witch during the witch hunts or something.

They'll learn pretty obviously through media. Kids are bright, right? It came naturally to us

I agree.
All I'll say is that those who act on the urge are amoral at best and more likely immoral. Those who acknowledge the evil of abusing children at least realize it's immoral. There are plenty who rationalize it, and they're even worse.

Sure, as long as they you aren't jacking/saving/uploading CP. Of course, it's always possible to turn over a new leaf and do right. I have empathy for all.

Well you're right John Lennon never chose to face up to the public with his wife beatings. But he would never come out as a pedo. Even as he was miserable and on heroin tbh, he would never be an Elvis Presley

So how are they uninformed? I informed myself about sex using the internet before I was even 10 years old.

Were you trying to use the example of "do-gooder" vs "intelligent person?" I dun get the Lennon vs Einstein analogy.

I don't disagree on this matter, society is definitely fucking up by teaching them that the only form of birth control is abstinence and that sex education can't be taught by a school. Parents are too fucking awkward and stupid about the subject they think they would know best how to teach. If the words "birds and bees" come out of your mouth, shut the fuck up and leave it to a trained professional.

But all the same, that's not the ONLY THING that prevents a child from being informed. They don't understand what they'll feel about something when they are emotionally matured. They can't understand. They have sex, and they feel pain or they feel sad, and they can't understand or remember why, and it was because a man used them for sex once and they forgot about it.

A child can't understand that something today can have a very major and lasting repurcussion that you can't even REMEMBER AS HAVING HAPPENED 20 years ago.

No one can understand what they will and won't regret 20 years down the line, what a ridiculous reason to force me into a life of celibacy destined to die alone.

You actually hit on a truly difficult subject. I don't know what I would advise someone to do. I guess if you haven't personally done anything with or to a minor, I wouldn't encourage you to report to any authority. I would encourage you to do whatever you needed to do in order to ignore urges to sexualize minors. Stay away from forums where you might be tempted to do wrong, avoid contact with children. Maybe see a therapist.
Let me put it this way: I don't like to hear about children being victimized, but I can forgive people who have done even worse than that. People are still human and deserving of compassion.

I would mainly blame the ones that produced or uploaded it.


The blame lies mainly with the people that produce it or make it available though.

Are you 'exploiting' victims of crime if you watch videos of their torture or murder that was posted online?

Kids are more promiscuous than you might think. Im no pedo but I did have a neighbor girl who walked into my house (unlocked back door) and got under my blankets and look around before I woke up and threw her out. I didnt tell her parents I was more scared for my own

You're not forced into a life of celibacy. If you want a girlfriend who looks 14, go to fucking Bangkok or Thailand. Plenty of women 16 to 30 who look like they're 8-14 years old, they make it a lifestyle, you can make it a choice. Or go get a hooker, or look for anormal woman your age.

You are NOT entitled to fuck children.

I had sex twice before I was 12. I've been a perve since I was eight.

Good for you. I remember googling "hot girl fucked lots of penis milk" as a 7 year old. Except I didn't know deep down probably what it truly meant. Okay maybe I did, just didn't know how to jack off strangely enough. Just a dumb child? I couldn't have been subtly groomed by my uncle right? He was even in bed one time when I looked porn up. Didn't even do anything about tbh. Actually, he started fondling my balls.

You'll realise if you live long enough into the future we will adapt to abstinence all the time as long as we keep advancing into the intelligent realm

Therapists are legally obligated to report pedos to the police so no pedo in their right mind would ever go to a therapist.

You are the exception, not the norm.

I don't even know what the fuck you're trying to say…

He'll be the norm in prison do not worry.

If all I wanted was to fuck a hole I would get a fleshlight.

There must be someone you can talk to other than totally unqualified anons on a 4chan-offshoot. Someone who can help you through life.

I'm sure some fucked up little think tank is coming up with child-like onaholes. Once again, you are NOT entitled to fuck my daughter, or the daughter of my neighbor, or the boys walking down the road to a fishing hole.

Therapists are not "legally obligated" to do so, some of them hold confidentiality as their highest virtue.

This statement is true. Children are not holes though. And you certainly can't mutually understand them. Never. Children are only holes for money. I mean, like, they "run you down the hole" if you get that retarded phrase

Are you drunk?

Producers are worse, to be sure. That's why police go after them primarily.

I think hes donald trump actually

I don't like kids. Too clingy, too stupid. Not worth having a child until you can support one financially. Noisey, annoying. Not my cup of tea. Besides, I'm a poorfag who
wants a surgardaddy/mommy

You can't even pick your sexuality, why would they pick you?

I am only agreeing with your phrases. Children are indeed not holes. Theybare merely money-holes. For running you down the hole financially. Where can a man get a fucking beer with this child anymore? I wish I was drunk. All I got is this my friend's other strange yellow liquid, and the bottles clear and unlabeled.

Hell if I know. Worth a shot, still.

Take a sip for me. I feel your pain.

Theres nothing wrong with me though and thats the entire problem. I'm not going to some shrink whos entire job will be to convince me that I have a problem when its them that has the fucking problem with me not the other way around.


Every japan made onahole is basically a child like one because they're made for the average japanese dick size :^)
As for entitlement I never claimed I was, but its not your place to speak for what your daughter wants so honestly I don't give a flying fuck what you think whether shes 12 or 20 shes her own human being who has a right to make her own choices.
And yes by law therapists have to report pedos to the police, its not a matter of choice.

you wont feel this guys pain when he throws up his backstabbing friend's piss tbh

REPORTED

>>>/cuckchan/

I mean, if you're not seeking out child pornography or molesting children, then I guess you're okay. As okay as any of us are. Given what you say, it sounds like you're into kids.
In any case I've prayed for you, I've prayed for us all.

Well if you think its okay then I guess I can rest easy.
Fuck you

That says everything, doesn't it? You know right from wrong.

==The only smart pedo is a pedo who hates other pedos. The only true anti-pedo==

t. hex
at least you aren't tripfagging anymore

Eh, I've had to wash my best friend when he was too drunk to even see after he shit himself. Or after taking acid. I'm a good friend.

Well then child. Hop in.

multiple times? you seem real eager to clean up shit

I have never tripfagged in my life.

The fact you consider yourself the arbiter of right and wrong says everything.
Fuck
You

Wee, Shoot me some shrooms plx

Natural born house wife. Of course those who ARE naturally born house wives don't fulfilly their destiny until after 18, heh.

He sounds like a very intelligent man. I'd have beer with him. He knows what he is doing.

Your anger says everything. I'm not above you, brother. I hope we both get lifted up.

oooh. This whole time we thought you were stupid but you're actually just a chick.

Lifted up into the ass of elves hopefully

Just twice. I brought the fire down so i had to clean up the ashes.

If you didn't think you were above me then you wouldn't be giving me your approval as if your approval means something to me.

I was calling someone else a natural born housewife. Thanks :p

I was trying to give you sympathy and moral encouragement.

Approval from the other side of the screen. That's a big fucking deal, user. This shit is important. Either you join everyone else or be a goner. See you on the other side. And believe me, I am not crazy

I don't need moral encouragement from someone who thinks fapping to porn is immoral.

I don't recall saying that.

Fapping to porn is not right. Try to restrict your urges. No time for porn tbh. You're smart and intelligent, You are going to change the world tbh user. This actually brings us closer to being natural beings! :D

Fucking name

I'll take "housewife" as a term for taking care of your friends when they're fucked up more than you are.

You said seeking out CP is not okay to you even though the damage if there was any has already been done at that point and nothing more will happen from someone fapping to it.

If you want to be a natural being then go run naked into the woods, I want the future to be purely artificial.

You know it's wrong. You know there are alternatives. You know that God loves you no matter what, even if you don't believe in God. Just do your best to do right. None of us are perfect. I'm not.

I know its wrong just like you know god doesn't exist, right?

You wouldn't argue with some user at such length if you didn't feel the prickings of your conscience. I'm not claiming superiority. I just want you to try to be better than your inclinations. And me too. All of us.

Humanity was born from nature. Whatever it is that we do is natural.

I argue with everyone about everything because unlike everyone else my unrelenting natural urge to fuck isn't allowed to be sustained by anything so I'm stuck with this pent up energy I can't use for its purpose so I use it to rape people in internet arguments instead.
You aren't the first and you won't be the last.

Sometimes "Nature" tricks itself.

Use that energy and drive to learn. Go beyond what you think you can do and resist your anxiety and go.

So are you a pedo or not.

If you're getting off to this, that's great. Picture me defeated.

you got btfo. no need to be bitter about getting assraped.

It does not "trick" itself. Its not sentient. It is a whole of all thing. It just finds ways to make things work.

No you're just tricking yourself and putting on a fake character tbh. This will change from time time.

If it worked like that I'd be a millionaire already.

What do you think?

kek no I'm not getting off to internet arguments or anything like that its just that the act of arguing with someone until they run off with their tail between their legs really relieves sexual tension in a way I can't explain.

I think you'll make a fine collection to the Holla Forums pedos. Welcome brother. We have lolis and much butthurt to consume.

Nigger please, I've been here arguing with these retards over whatever the fuck since 2014.

It does work like that but it takes time and dedication. Want to know my insecurities? 5' 3" tall. Been browsing these boards since 06, fapped to the worst. Doesnt make you that person. In 2 years of work i've gone up the ladder.

Yet im still here, with you faggots. My lovely fucking faggots.

newfag

Don't touch me

Shut up fag, you're new here.

2014 is about as oldfag as it gets for Holla Forums, deal wid it.

Look at the mess I made. LUL

Who cares and what does it matter when you're a loser. I guess you just are what you make yourself out to be. Unfortunately, this is true, and you obviously always have been portrayed in a negative light from others we only assume quite usually.

Are you on /lg/?

No it doesn't work like that, you can't just channel sexual frustration into calmly studying by reading a book. It only works in certain circumstances.

Pedo hugboxes don't appeal to me, I come here to argue not preach to the choir.
Oh and I come here to speak anonymously to other anonymous people, not hang out in a community of tripfags that all know eachother and do nothing but circlejerk all day every day.
Fuck that place.

Christ man im just giving you a hard time. Dont take it seriously. And yes you are right. I have always been portrayed as lesser. Fuck em, i'm their boss now.

Bretty gud

Reason #1 why we need IDs

No one said anything about a book. You have to go out and learn.

You just described 2015-2016 pedo threads. Fair enough if you just want to argue though.

Yeah I stopped coming to the pedo threads here when they stopped being for anons and started being for the same handful of tripfags to pretend to be on facebook every day.
If jim did one thing right with this site it was getting those cancerous cunts to fuck off, I loved the pedo threads here before they ruined them.

Way to keep that vague enough to not be able to respond to.

probably for the best. if you guys were digging around on open net for such… he did you a favor.

...

I pity the fool

I'd rather have the 2015-2016 cancer tripfags than what we have right now.

I would too honestly, the thread was easy to hide and the rest of the site was completely fine.
But them going the fuck away was definitely the silver lining to jim ruining this place.

A lot are using their phones….

Where'd you go when the Jimmening started?

Is good comic with happy end

...

Nowhere, I come here a hell of a lot less but thats about it.
There were too many desperate faggots wanting to be hotwheels 2.0 making their own imageboards and shilling them here for there to be any concise exodus to anywhere and even if there were I don't think I'd go.
I'm sick of watching imageboards turn into normalfag safe spaces. 2 was enough, after Holla Forums is gone I'll find something else to fill the gap.

Dear brainless OP, just a brief and friendly reminder: one does not become pedo because they chose it, because it is so cool and they like to masturbate to children because muh entertaining hobby. One is born pedo just like one is born gay, nothing wrong with it, it is human nature. There is an enormous difference between a pedo and a child molester, the first masturbates to pictures and does not harm anyone. Can you see the difference? I can, it is very clear to me, and I am not a pedo. I am not a brainless time wasting moron like you either…

b-but its just for the lulz!

Sounds grim. I guess you didn't follow tbe other anons to onion forums since you're pro anonymous.

...

HEILED

we anonymouse

...

Right, onion forums are too cliquey and onion imageboards are just too dead to be usable.

We're kill.

rip the pedo race

No you fags can circlejerk all you want since you love it so much, I'm the one that has nowhere to go because of you.

HA, GAY

Just lurk and leech cp on onions. That's what the others are doing unless they've made their home on an obscure imageboard.

Yes that, and in doing so made it uninhabitable to anyone who likes the anonymous part of anonymous imageboards with their constant tripfag circlejerks.

Try Mewch

Mewch is anti pedo.

Then we're fucked.

...

Try a noose.

heres an idea:
dont put youre personal info online!
anyone who uses social media and gets doxd is a victim of darwinism.

Nobody's stopping you from user posting among them

Noones stopping me from slitting my own wrists either but that doesn't make it a fun time.

literally nothing wrong with tripfagging

lil bitch detected

Yeah it just defeats the entire purpose of the anonymous aspect of anonymous imageboards but aside from that its great.

remaining anonymous is a choice

Just got back from church. Did I miss anything good?

...

...

It doesn't matter whether or not I remain anonymous, what matters is the people who don't and choose to act like this is their personal blog like
The more faggots like that there are running around the less anonymous this place feels until its like lolifox where its just one big tripfag circlejerk 24/7

t. tripfag

say that to my face not online and see what happens

im a proud tripfag though

You think you're anonymous on a site like this? Someone who articulates themselves like you do sticks out like a sore thumb. It means you're identifiable even when you're posting under the name 'Anonymous.' To me you're the 'run off with their tail between their legs' user and like I said earlier you're easily dentifiable. If you want to remain legitimately anonymous then you should dumb down your vocabulary to me 'Fuck off nigger' and 'Kys faggot' but you find pleasure dismembering people's arguments and stupidity so I can't blame you for articulating yourself.

dude you got triggered by 10 words i dont think he is the 1 with the problem

Its not that hard to identify me while I'm still in the same fucking thread with this board as dead as it is but even if IDs were on and you could know for sure which posts are me in this thread that still doesn't make me any less anonymous overall.
You can't character assassinate me based on what I've said in the past or take into account my reputation or how long I've been here or how many posts I've made or any other personal info you could get on platforms that aren't anonymous.
None of us have identities here and thats why I love it because it just purely becomes about the exchange of ideas instead of who is saying what.


dude triggered lmao

It's not just this thread I remember you from. It's from numerous pedo threads in the past 10 months. You were one of the few pedos who actually want to have a discussion rather than a circlejerk. You were the user who made valid points and you're the same user who btfo many antis. They were reduced to their catchphrase 'kys pedo' in all the threads.
I think I can characterize you because I've been on both sides of the argument. One day I'm an anti and the other day I'm a pedo. But truthfully I'm like you, a pedo. A shit stirrer. You don't know me personally and it's going to sound gay as fuck likened to a tripfag circlejerk but I was by your side the whole time. Also fuck off faggot this is getting too touchy feely for me.

Why do you think you can attribute every pedo arguing with antis on this board to me though?
I know this place has been the most dead its ever been over the last 10 months but that doesn't mean its just me here arguing with antis.
Pedos have always been a huge segment of this sites userbase so surely theres lots of us still here arguing like we do right?
I at least hope the way I type isn't that distinct compared to a lot of the drooling retards here that can't even muster up basic grammar and punctuation, but if it is then I guess I'm a mix of worried and flattered at your comments. Mostly worried.
But regardless it was a pleasure arguing with moralfags with you and I plan to continue doing it so long as this site stays up, the ride never ends.

That was the main reason tbh.
And I'm glad to still be here.

Shit I guess I should learn how to speak retard then to better fit in with what remains of the Holla Forums crowd.
I remember when I could just blend right in to a sea of people who talked similarly to me back when Holla Forums was actually popular.
Good times…

Clearnet imageboards are done but that doesn't imply onion imageboards are going to see a boom of traffic. It just means imageboards as a whole is done; there is no more culture. It's just become too mainstream and 'too normalfag' now. It's sad but it's very much the truth. Going to sleep now. Take care bud. :D

Couldn't agree more, see you space cowboy.

I'd like to end on a postive note:

nigger

Not that there's anything wrong with having CP, but you're a moron

No it's not, society has changed and people just don't do that anymore for various reasons, feminism is one of them. What you'll get if you remove the age of consent now certainly won't be anything like the world before feminism, you'll just get a lot more degeneracy. And you're fine with that because you are a degenerate and all you want is fucking kids and getting away with it. I can tell because otherwise you wouldn't shill bullshit like that.

If a girls first sexual partner could be considered their last instead of just another cock on the carousel until they come of age then yes it would end up more like the world before feminism with less degeneracy.
They would be staying with a single partner instead of fucking everyone they see because they've been told they aren't old enough for serious relationships.

Yes, if that utopian premise was true your point may be valid.

That utopia existed when people could actually get married when they wanted with who they wanted to marry.
Now you have to go completely through your entire horny teenage years before you're even legally allowed to marry and by then you'd have already fucked everyone and ruined your ability to be satisfied by any one person.

No, it was true when people valued marriage and religion. Women usually got married around the age of 20, not 12, and it still worked fine. How is that?

Whered you get 20 from? Not that I think all girls were getting married at 12 back then but if it was such a non-issue and everyone was marrying at 20 I don't see why legal marriage ages even needed to be put in place to begin with.

infoplease.com/us/marital-status/median-age-first-marriage-1890-2010

Well I think the average age raising by 5 years alongside the added restrictions speak for themselves. Sure I'll give you the fact that religion had an influence but the correlation between the age of consent and marriage laws being established and divorce rates skyrocketing is too obvious for me to just ignore.

Yeah, rather ignore all other possible factors (contraception for instance), blame everything on the age of consent although it doesn't make much sense.

By the way, you can still marry a child with parental consent and court approval, 25 states don't even have a minimum age requirement.

How does contraception make more sense to you?

Sex doesn't have consequences, no marriage required.

But contraceptives have existed far longer than the time frame we're talking about, why would its effects only be seen now?

Birth rates dropped after the pill came out, no babies - less need to marry.

The problem with this entire argument against pedos being made is that the arguer allowed himself to be thrown off track from the "age of consent" argument, which is a more viable argument.

The reason why age of consent is established is exactly because of biology, ironically enough. A fourteen-year-old girl is not as mentally or physically developed as an adult male (let me define "adult" here as eighteen or older to clear this up right now and avoid semantics) and and thus is not mentally equipped with the cognitive abilities necessary to make certain decisions - this is why their parents are still entrusted with their care.
Their underdeveloped frontal lobes will restrict them from making educated, informed decisions about what they are doing and will cause them to likely disregard any information that they do receive at the time. Simply put, sexual activity is a serious thing, just like driving a car, getting a job, and owning property. And yet, many teenagers make many mistakes in all of those subjects – the problem is not the necessarily the mistakes, yet the exploitation by the older humans (e.g. "adults") that takes place as a result.

Yes, pedophiles exploit children's inability to make informed decisions about what they are doing ("I agree to this" is not necessarily informed consent, which is why people get locked into contracts and (((exploited))) ). Teeangers have a better chance of making informed decisions, but the point is that someone even better at making informed decisions is taking advantage of someone that is not.

That should not be referred to as "pedophilia" in that case. It should be a simple argument against the concept of exploitation in general with support from a biological root, child or teenager.

But the people having kids can't stay married either, tons more kids are being raised in broken homes with single parents now.

If there was a biological reason behind the age of consent then it would be the same across the planet. Its wildly different across the planet because there is no basis for it to exist its all just semantics.

And they were able to stay married 50-100 years ago, when they married at 20 and not at 12, we go round in circles now.

How many actual pedophiles would want to marry anyway? Pedophillia is attraction to pre-pubescence, so you would marry them at what age, 9? Then you could "enjoy" them for 3 years and then live the rest of your life sexually frustrated, because your partner doesn't attract you anymore? No, I don't believe that that's what a majority of pedophiles is after.


The feminism/marriage meme seems to be a common argument among pedos, they bring it up all the time, I think it's worth addressing from time to time. It's incredibly weak.

Those symbols at the top?
Those are notifications, not open apps.

We go around in circles now because you still have yet to show me a more compelling reason for why it worked in the past and doesn't anymore.

That sounds like the typical marriage, yeah.
I can't speak for all pedos but for me personally if I fell in love with someone their physical appearance changing after a few years wouldn't matter to me just like I assume it wouldn't matter to you that the woman you love would age and turn into a granny eventually.
But just because you can see yourself loving someone as a granny doesn't mean you consider grannies to be potential sex partners from the get go, at least I hope not.

Holla Forums doxxes grimgy atheist gamer kid.

What happens to a poor jerker whos never been a molester and probably wont?
We gonna have a jerker swatted just for jerkin it to kiddies or we gonna actually go after real pedos producing?

No we're fucking useless. Well OP is useless.

Im not going to defend any actual pedophiles but it seems to me this jayde kid isnt one.
But another note, feminism. How do we destroy it?

It takes entire teams of alphabet soups months to get a handful of producers behind bars only for them be replaced by more a day later.
The fuck do you doxxing faggots hope to accomplish?

Your point is invalidated by the assumption tat every human being has knowledge of or bothers to recognize this biological truth.

For instance, some cultures still think pooping on the streets is absolutely fine even though fecal matter exposure causes biological harm.

Well thats wonderful i guess we all just be happy when some poor kid and his friends all get wasted by trigger happy cops.
They did a fucking lan party from the deviant art comments, this doesnt seem pedo to Me and he gave the fucking address lmfao

Oh but it just so happens that the society you were raised in is the enlightened one that has the truth right?
Wait are we arguing about religion?

That makes the two of us. OP fucked up by telling that faggot his plan instead of alerting the authorities he alerted the alleged pedophile. Now if he actually had CP then he's probably deleted it accordingly which just defeats the whole point of doxing. Making this whole thing a huge waste of time, which makes me think that OP isn't telling us the fully story and probably hiding some details. Maybe he has a grudge against this guy or something?

Not going to fall for your straw-mans.
No one even said anything about religion, enlightenment, or whatever else other unrelated rhetoric spilled out onto your keyboard. I was talking about biology and made a point on basis of biology – science.

Sorry that you think biological facts are lies.
Oh, by the way: "L-liar!" is not an argument.

If you think being continually exposed to fecal matter is healthy – despite scientific and biological evidence explaining the opposite – then I cannot help you just as well as I cannot help you if you think that underdeveloped human beings are suitable for sexual engagement. These are your problems, not my own or society's.

Let me just point one thing out to you, though: There is a reason that America and the UK are more advanced than India and Thailand.

Sorry the similarities between moralfag arguments and religious ones confuse me sometimes.
So to be clear you think your society is the one with the right age of consent and everyone else is wrong because you can be an armchair biologist?

This is such a waste of time.
OP is probably just trolling him becuase hes weird or something. This honestly doesnt seem like any pedo ive encountered. No pedo give anyone their address and probably isnt this easy to find.
Let this thread die so the kid can have some peace.

The original purpose of this thread has been dead for hours anyway, I made the OP argue about pedophilia instead until he got BTFO and left works every time.

My apologies: I was unaware that science was a religion.

Underdeveloped human beings cannot viably breed more human beings, which is the purpose of sexual activity in the first place – not your personal pleasure. How do I know? The biological fact that sex breeds human beings.

The pleasure is a necessity and accessory of the sexual activity, which makes sense because no one would want to or care to breed if breeding was painful or numbing.

If you want to ride off into a Muslim-dominant country where even six-year-olds can be taken as bride, then be my guest. Just remember that first-world countries did not get to where they are by ignoring scientific facts and that there is a reason that those third-worlds are still third-worlds.

If you can't see the similarities between you claiming your country has the one true age of consent and a religious person claiming their countries has the one true religion then I can't help you.
As for your "underdeveloped human beings" nonsense see:

Let this thread die

Let this cringy kid go back to playing minecraft with his friends

Do you think hes being held hostage until this thread 404s or something?

No, arguing with sick pedos is fun. Haha.


Pretty sure I said …
"Underdeveloped human beings cannot viably breed more human beings…"

"Mature" and "Underdeveloped" are completely different things. You are not suddenly an adult just because you had your first wet dream. You are not suddenly an adult because you had your first period. You are not suddenly an adult simply because you turned a certain age. If a person were indeed "mature" at that point, then why does their body still continue to grow and develop? I can answer that: because the body is still (((underdeveloped))).

The age laws are established as a general measure of when the average person does reach a viable age of consent, which is estimated to be around the age of eighteen.

I made the argument earlier – that you completely ignored – explaining how underdeveloped individuals are far less likely to make informed decisions or avoid exploitation by older, more well-developed humans. This is common sense and also evident considering how a six-year-old child can coerce or influence their younger sibling into behaving differently or performing actions that they otherwise would not do. If you think I am wrong, then think back to your days in grade school.

Fast forward to the present, exploitation is an objective problem. Why? Well, how about the fact that underdeveloped humans have higher risks of dying from birth complications or lack the capacity to care for an infant?

Nothing I am saying is rooted in morality or religion because I have never once brought any of that into this discussion – you did and still are.

One more thing:

is a claim I never once made.

No
Just think we need to let this thread die.

No one is going to die because of this thread so quit making it aeem like someone is.

If the age of consent was about finishing development then it would be at 25 but its not because it has nothing to do with development.
You're so fucking american it hurts, yet you've failed to even look into the history of the age of consent in your country to see what it is you're actually taking as gospel truth.
News flash it wasn't designed by a bunch of scientists trying to determine a "general measure" for when someone can consent, it was made by jealous old feminists who were sick of men going after young prime age girls and so they made it illegal so they'd be forced to fuck them instead.
Don't believe me? Research the origins of the age of consent in the U.S yourself and tell me that you find something different.

As for exploitation sure its an issue but just like we don't make it illegal for men to have sex with women because men have physical power over women and could rape them we shouldn't make it illegal for younger people to have sex just because an older person has mental power over them and could coerce them.
Rape and coercion should be whats illegal.


see:
Sure you didn't say it outright but you heavily implied that your country has the "knowledge" of the "biological truths" that make your countries age of consent based in fact and anyone elses not.

"The age laws are established as a general measure of when the average person does reach a (((viable age of consent))), which is estimated to be around the age of eighteen."
History is not present and has nothing to do with now.

Honestly, my point about age of consent makes more sense than "the wimenz were out to get us" even though age of consent laws were established way before feminism was.

The Burden of Proof actually is yours. (((You))) have the responsibility for providing the evidence of such a thing, not me. You made this claim just now.

The problems here are:
1. Physical capability to overpower is not exploitation. In fact, I could throw this back at you in favor of my argument about adults overpowering younger humans.
2. "Rape" and "(Consensual) sex" are not the same thing and that discussion here is about consensual sex between two individuals, not rape.
3. Stemming from #2, there actually are laws forbidding rape. Rape is indeed a form of exploitation, which is why it also has this ruling.
4. Women are individuals matured to a point where they can viably consent to sexual activity. Thirteen-to-fifteen-year-old girls are not women.

Shifting the goal post.
No one is arguing against younger people having sex.
People are arguing against younger people being exploited by older human beings.
It is and so is underage sexual intercourse.

Exactly. We can stop here.

One more thing, "Viable age of consent" means "reasonably high enough biological maturity and development to undergo reproduction and make reasonable decisions on the matter."

You can pull whatever you want out of your ass about why you think the age laws were established but you haven't done any of the research into why it was actually established and by who so nothing you say holds any weight whatsoever.
Do the fucking research instead of talking shit then come back and tell me the facts, I already know them because I've been through this time and time again and have become very efficient at it and it doesn't end well for you.

All I'm seeing in regards to the exploitation bit is a bunch of semantics that have no bearing on the point I was actually making, yeah having the physical capability to harm someone isn't inherently exploitative just like having the mental capability to coerce someone isn't inherently exploitative so what?
Yeah rape and sex under coercion are not the same thing but they're both sexual abuse so whats your point?
As for 13-15 year old girls being women yes they are women in plenty of places outside your american bubble, you should look sometime.

Oh and if you're not against younger people having sex then why do you support an age of consent that prevents younger people from legally having sex?

There are Romeo and Juliet laws which allow younger people to have sex with each other but not with much older people. Not in all American states (for example in California it is illegal to have sex with a minor regardless of your age, except if you are married with them) but in many.

I understand, the age in which you're capable of having sex is so clear cut and based in science that you can't even agree within your own fucking country what it should be.

There are Romeo and Juliet laws which allow younger people to have sex with each other but not with much older people. Not in all American states (for example in California it is illegal to have sex with a minor regardless of your age, except if you are married with them) but in many.>>7672221
I'm not against you, I just wanted to counter that argument. Also, it is not “my country”, I'm German. Our age of consent law is much more liberal than the American ones.

Oh, I fucked up the formatting.

Shhh don't tell him that almost all first world countries are more liberal than america in terms of sex hes still under the impression that only third world shitholes allow you to have sex with people under 18.

Happens to me a lot, for some reason your last post stays in the text field even after you've posted it at random.

And yet, the person claiming knowledge of this fails to provide the information. Moving on.
You can keep at it all you want, but the burden of proof will never shift to me no matter know often you keep repeating "le history" over and over again as if 1800 somehow has something to do with 2018.
So, what? Well, laws were implemented to prohibit the possible exploitation in that regard. Stop conflating "Exploitation" with "consensual sex."
The point is that an individual unable to (((viably consent))) to sex is being exploited, which is illegal.
Subjective.
Make an objective point for once.
I previously addressed this before: "There is a reason as to why American, Canadian, and UK countries are move advanced than Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and India."

That reason includes not attempting to procreate with biologically nonviable individuals.


For someone that knows so much about American history and laws, you failed to recognize that younger individuals are allowed to have sex – (((with each other))), and even that still has a limit. Why? Biological viability and extent of biological maturity.

Never said that.

Actually, even in many American states you can have sex with minors if you are much older. (Green: 18; Brown: 17; Blue:16)

In germany its 14

Yes, but you must not “exploit“ “a lack of ability to sexual self determination” if you want to have sex with someone younger than 16 and you are older than 21. Also there are some other restrictions. But there is nothing like a fix maximum age for somebody who wants to have sex with someone who is 14 or older.

Which one is more culturally and socially advanced, I wonder?

Also, notice how you are saying "if (((you))) want to have sex with someone younger than 16 while being older than 21" and not "someone younger than 16 (((wanting))) to have sex with someone older than 21."

You know as much as I do that I am right, given your subconscious slips of selfish and perverse desires to screw minors and children. Haha.

It has something to do with 2018 because what they decided then effects who you're allowed to fuck now, and if you knew the people who made that decision for you then you wouldn't be treating it like gospel truth which is why I'd imagine you're scared to do a simple google search on it like a person who eats fast food would be scared to see whats actually going on in the kitchens there.
But hey ignorance is bliss right?

I never conflated exploitation with consensual sex and I don't even know what the fuck you're on about at this point, you've lost the fucking plot.
How is pointing out the age of consent in other countries a subjective point?
Why do you give examples of lower age of consent countries as being like afghanistan, uzbekistan, and india and then go on to say this

Also sorry I failed to pick up on one of the legal loopholes SOME of the states in your country have, for being so based in facts and science there sure seems to be a whole shitload of disagreement within your own country about if it should be 16, 17 or 18 or if they should be allowed to have sex with eachother before then or not etc.
Theres no agreeable age of consent even within your own country because its not based in facts, and its not based in science. Prove me wrong oh wait you can't.

>Also, notice how you are saying "if (((you))) want to have sex with someone younger than 16 while being older than 21" and not "someone younger than 16 (((wanting))) to have sex with someone older than 21."


I'm not a native speaker, in German I would say “man”. “you” or, more literally, “one” are more or less the English equivalents for “man”. It felt right this way. Would “someone” be more proper?

In other situations “wanting” would be totally normal. For example:

Also, I am 18 years old myself, so it wouldn't be very odd if I wanted to have sex with minors.

Still not grasping how "Burden of Proof" works.


You did. Every time I bring up "Viable age of consent," you run back to "buh we dun punish males for having sex with women" which conflates "age of consent" with "level of maturity."

Because you are using relativism to make a point, which is fallacious: "But they do it, so it is okay!"


Considering how states are actually different sections of country each entitled to their owns rights, the country as whole generally has no say in what an individual state decides to do with its laws. We are called "The United States of America," not "The United State of America."

You also forgot that I said this while back,
"Thirteen-to-fifteen-year-old girls are not women."


It actually is. Remember when I said "(((Estimated))) to be (((around))) eighteen?"
Estimations provide a nice amount of leeway in hitting a set mark. The general point is that people consider age of consent to be above fifteen by both social norm and by law.

What is not acceptable by social norm and by law is sex between a 16-year-old and a fully-formed adult. Why? (((Because that is exploitation, sir.))) You are more than old enough to have sex with another adult instead of an underdeveloped individual – someone that has less viability in caring for your children and bearing your children.

If it not based upon science, then why did we choose age 16 and up instead of age 5 and up? Or age three and up? Obviously because three and five years-old children cannot produce children. You asked, "Why not thirteen, then? They can produce children!" I answered, "Obviously because thirteen to fifteen-year-olds cannot viably raise or produce children, despite their budding genitalia –" keyword is ((("budding"))). We have enough sense to know that breeding with girls as young as that imposes upon their cognitive inability to decide for themselves what they want for themselves.

This entire discussion is me arguing their biological components, rights to decide, and protection from predators like you that for some reason really want to have sex with them instead of someone your own age. I wonder why that is.

The point is that this is about your and your desires to have sex with minors. You do not care about them and what they might want and you are looking for any excuse possible to justify your desires.

[citation needed]

It actually would, considering that an entire year difference in cognitive development presents a huge difference in ability to make informed decisions about situations.

You would be less prone to accept the judgment of a sixteen-year-old about murder laws than you would be so towards an eighteen-year-old's judgment.

This inherent idea is exactly why I know you know better.

No argument? Nothing new.

>It actually is. Remember when I said "(((Estimated))) to be (((around))) eighteen?"


Who estimates this? Not in all countries the age of consent is 15 or more. For example in Germany (as already said) and in the biggest country on earth.

And people still keep comparing less developed countries to America/Western countries.

You never learn, huh?
… The people making the laws? The people that vote them in? The people that agree to follow them which includes scientists and biology researchers?

Germany is not less developed than America.

Right. Carry on.

I'm not linking anything because I've done it in the past and was only met with you moralfags attacking the article or attacking the author or attacking the website or just attacking anything you can to avoid addressing the actual point of the fucking article so do your own fucking research for once in your life and stop talking out of your ass holy shit.

How does pointing out the hypocrisy between older people not being allowed to have sex with younger people because of their mental advantage but men being allowed to have sex with women despite their physical advantage have anything to do with conflating age of consent with level of maturity?

I never said "they do it, so its okay", you said that 13-15 year old girls are not women and thats factually inaccurate because in some countries they are.

As for the entire rest of that bullshit citation needed on all of it because I know for a fact you're just pulling the same shit out of your ass you were earlier based on absolutely nothing since its clear to me you've done fuck all research on the subject.
Whos estimates?
Where are you getting the "general point" of 15
Why is sex between a 16 year old and a fully formed adult not acceptable by social norm when its perfectly legal in some of your states?
If it is based on science then why is what you choose drastically different from what every other country in the world chooses?

There is a big difference between mental and physical advantage.

That's just a matter of definition. They are in puberty and they are physically ready to get children, you can say that makes them to women, but you can also use other definitions.


Actually it is not really. 18 years as the age of consent is relatively high, and extremely high if you exclude countries in Africa and Asia, but 16 is about the international average. See figure.

Stop emphasizing the point and move on, then. We can discuss something else.


How many times must I explain this?
How about this, then:
You are comparing general sex between general men and general women to totally different things.

Sex between two consenting adults obviously is not the same as sex between an adult and a minor. So, where does "age of consent vs. level of maturity" come in? Simply put: You are pretending that sixteen-year-old girls are mature women. They are not.

… Are you doing this on purpose?
How the heck are you able to not be a woman in one country and then magically go from girl to a woman in another country by just simply changing location? Biological advancement be disregarded!

And then, you immediately compared different countries again to argue the same subjective point when I am making an objective point about biology and cognitive ability to consent.


No, you just hate being disagreed with, pervert. Every single thing I have ever said here has biological basis and you know it. You can cry "citation needed" all you want, but nature itself argues against you.

Just answered this.

… What? I think you confused yourself again.
You (((really))) hate reading things that disagree with you. That might be why you keep misunderstanding what I say or flat-out ignoring it.

First of all, I never made an argument on basis of social acceptance. That in itself is fallacious because moral relativism is fallacious. I brought that up (((one time))) for information's sake.

Secondly, I just answered this multiple times on basis of exploitation, cognitive ability to make decisions, and many other points you failed to register.

"If it is not based upon science, then why did we choose age 16 and up instead of age 5 and up? Or age three and up? Obviously because three and five years-old children cannot produce children. You asked, "Why not thirteen, then? They can produce children!" I answered, "Obviously because thirteen to fifteen-year-olds cannot viably raise or produce children, despite their budding genitalia –" keyword is ((("budding"))). We have enough sense to know that breeding with girls as young as that imposes upon their cognitive inability to decide for themselves what they want for themselves."

Well I guess since you've just claimed theres a big difference that means the hypocrisy doesn't exist!

You can play around with words to suit whatever bullshit you like its of no importance to me, legally they're considered women.

Nice figure, it would actually make sense if it had a legend.

Both sides argue in such an idiotic way.

Enlighten me, master.
You clearly have the epitome of skill in debating despite not actually saying anything except "hurr durr both sides stoopid."

they can still get their grubby CIA nigger hands on his goods, eve after he "rids" his computer of it, unless he changes his hard drive and like tosses his old one in a volcano.

...

I don't only say “hurr durr both sides are stoopid”, I have participated in this discussion.

Just the fact that you are discussing wether pedos should or should not fuck children, makes me dismiss this whole conversation and not taking you seriously.

I am not discussing whether or not pedos should have sex with children. I am discussing their reasoning behind why they think adults screwing kids and underdeveloped humans is fine.

Maybe you could find some interest in digging into the twisted mind of an obviously confused person as well. I personally find this level of cognitive dissonance absolutely amusing.

Well, tell me where I went wrong and why my "side" is "idiotic" (the non-pedo).

I'm just saying that this conversations, only furthers the pedo agenda. Pedophilia is ammental disorder and a crime, therefore, pedos should not be allowed anywhere near childer. There, discussion's over.

You desperately want to discuss something else because its a point you know you can't win, stop acting like theres any other reason that you're incapable of making a google search to actually educate yourself on the subject BEFORE you argue as if you're an expert on it.

I like how you change it from a man fucking a woman to "two consenting adults" so you can strategically avoid the fact that the entire point is that a man has a physical advantage over a woman and thats an imbalance comparable to the mental advantage that an older person has over a younger person.
You have yet to explain why one advantage should be permitted and the other should not.
All you do is project your prudish american morals onto me as if they're the word of god when they aren't. In the vast majority of the world 16 year olds are adults deal with it.

You're able to not be a woman in one country and then magically go from girl to woman in another country because THE AGE OF CONSENT IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY.
It is not based on biological advancement, it is not based on science, it is not based on facts. You have yet to prove that it is and no saying the age of consent isn't 5 therefore its based in science isn't an argument.

You can pretend to be a biologist all you want but you aren't one you're simply talking out of your ass like you have been this entire time.
You can't even answer simple questions that I created based on the things YOU SAID.
You say and I quote " The general point is that people consider age of consent to be above fifteen by both social norm and by law." and then you claim I'm confused when I ask what that was from.
You say and I quote "What is not acceptable by social norm and by law is sex between a 16-year-old and a fully-formed adult" And when I ask why its legal in your country then you make up some bullshit about me hating to disagree with you.
I don't know if you're being intentionally disingenuous or what but you're arguing like a snake in the fucking grass and its pathetic.

That is so boring. :/

… Are we not discussing consent or something? Why should I not boil it down to that when consent – age of consent – is what we are discussing? Moving on.

I avoided the point because males having a physical advantage over a woman is not relevant and neither is it relevant when discussing physical advantage of adults over minors when discussing the concept of (((consent))).


… No. Every law, every principle, and every concept is based upon some understanding about science or biology – or lack thereof, rather.

Some countries choose to disregard more biological realities (there, I used that word instead since the word "truth" triggered you that badly) than others and it shows.


Well, arguments from authority never work. Being a biologist never made someone the absolute decider on reality. Reality decides the biologist, actually.


You seem upset. Take a moment to relax. … Now, what question have I not answered (read: "Actually answered multiple times but you ignored them because they conflict with what you believe")?


Yes, because you said:
"Where are you getting the "general point" of 15" (which makes no grammatical or rhetorical sense) instead of directly quoting me, which would confuse anyone due to the lack of punctuation and clear misrepresentation of what I actually said.


… It is not? In fact…
"In most states there is not a single age in which a person may consent, but rather consent varies depending upon the minimum age of the younger party, the minimum age of the older party, or the differences in age."

So, this broad generalization of it being legal in my country for 21-year-olds to have sex with 16-year-olds is not true, as I answered before and you again ignored.

By the way, all this ad hominem you keep throwing at me reduced your opposing side to lower than being a viable position a long time ago. Attack the argument, not the person or their country.

That quote about the ages of consent came from here, by the way:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States

I hate citing wikipedia, though. I admit to being not invested enough in this to care to do deep searching.

So you can't explain the hypocrisy behind why a physical advantage in a relationship is okay but a mental advantage is not yet you expect me to just disregard that and act like there isn't a giant fucking hole in your logic?
Your entire issue with older people having sex with younger people is that the older person has a mental advantage over the younger one, why is it suddenly okay if the advantage is physical instead of mental?
What makes having the ability to coerce someone into sex against their own will a thing that stops you from being able to have a relationship with that person but having the ability to physically force them to have sex with you against their will is no big deal?

I'm not addressing any of your bullshit until you actually answer this because your entire argument hinges around it.

I looked at some of the detailed descriptions for single states. In all cases there was no strict upper limit for who can have sex with you if you are above the age of consent. Also I think this is the definition of “age of consent”, that there is no strict age limit anymore, but other types of restrictions can still exist.

For a detailed overview for all nations see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#By_country_or_region .

There are really interesting things in the list. In South Korea there are no restrictions if all parties are at least 13, according to the article.

But the list does not seem totally reliable. According to it sex is completely prohibited for under 14 years old people, but AFAIK for males there is not even an age of consent in China.

...

I am not sure why having "physical advantage" is even relevant. Additionally, I just mentioned that physical advantages exist with adults towards minors because minors are (((underdeveloped))).

What else do you want, man? It seems like you will never be satisfied until I cave in and agree with you about having sex with underdeveloped people.


Stop.
Comparing.
Physical.
To mental.
They are totally different. Can you please grasp this?


Because one obviously is force and the other is exploitation, neither is okay and there are laws that say so. I am not talking about rape or force, I am talking about coercion and cognitive ability. If "consenting" were a physical endeavor, then you would be completely justified. It is not, and so physical capability is irrelevant.


My answers are not going to change no matter how many times to you ask me. Stop repeating yourself in hopes of getting a different answer and move on.

Not "strict," no. Existent? Yes.

Also, this:
"30 U.S. states have age gap laws which make sexual activity legal if the ages of both participants are close to one another,[10] and these laws are often referred to as "Romeo and Juliet laws".[5] Other states have measures which reduce penalties if the two parties are close in age, and others provide an affirmative defense if the two parties are close in age."

A physical advantage is relevant because all men have a physical advantage over women to the point where they're raping them en masse.
Somehow you see this as perfectly normal acceptable behavior that shouldn't warrant mens restriction from interacting with women in general for their protection.
Then you see some older man coerce a younger girl into sex and hear about it happening on the news and think nobody older should be allowed to have sex with anyone under muh god given 18 age of consent ever and if they even look at one we'll insert whatever horrific torturous act we can think of here because we're the good guys!
You seem to stress theres this huge difference between physical and mental but honestly I don't see it.
They're both creating sexual abuse victims through horrible psychopaths yet you would say #NOTALLMEN if rabid feminists tried to use male rapists as a reason why all men are pigs that should be banned from sex for womens protection.
If anyone has a conflict of interest here its you.

This conversation is now over. We have now dodge into loony world where men are all supposedly raping people.

Are you denying that men are raping women at an alarming rate compared to the amount of women raping men?
That their physical attributes enable them to overpower women so psychopathic men easily rape helpless women?
Not so fun to get moralfagged on yourself huh faggot, look how fast you run while I sit here dealing with this shit on the daily by people like you.

lol

There's nothing alarming about women being raped. It's what they're there for.

cp is gross and anyone caught with it should be executed, period.

Its okay to rape them so long as you don't coerce them because theres a difference between mental and physical sex crimes and the physical ones are fucking nothing I've taken shits that were more traumatizing than a physical sex crime I mean fucking grow a pair jeez.

Terms:
Rape means completed or attempted
Made to penetrate means rape (psst this is how you doctor statistics)

Women, 12 month period:
Rape: 1,473,000[1]

Men, 12 month period:
Rape: 219,000[2]
Made to penetrate: 1,715,000[2]

[1] CDC NISVS p. 18 table 3.1
[2] CDC NISVS p. 26 table 3.5
cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf

...

I wouldn't even rape you.

How many perpetrators were men though? Because we know all men are rapists waiting to happen and should just be castrated because they're a threat to society and all that.

Women, rape: 97.3% male, 0.7% male and female
Men, rape: 86.5% male
Men, made to penetrate: 78.5% female, 3.5% male and female

Tables 3.4 and 3.8.

I mean… there's a link to the publication right there…

I wish I could be raped by a hawt chick

Its not the percentages its the numbers. Rounding down 22 million female victims of rape by a man compared to 5 million male victims of rape by a woman.
Is more than 4x as many victims not significant enough for you to consider how much of a sick fuck you are for being male?

Key things to consider:
You're looking at lifetime tallies, which is basically a statistical mind-game that plays on people's ability to remember decades back accurately.
This is not a self-reporting study but a questionnaire from which the CDC analysts derive the tables you see based on legal definitions.
Until 2014 for example, it was not possible for a woman to rape or for a man to be raped as the legal definition was strictly a man on woman crime. Now women can rape but only by penetration; so we can at least commend them for including a "made to penetrate" category.

The sum total of this is simply that lifetime statistics can just as well be 100% accurate as they can be undeniable proof that men have shit memories of bad to meh things happening in the past or undeniable proof that women make shit up in their heads for attention. You'll probably find the proof somewhere in between those things.
There aren't 1.5 million women getting rohypnol plus bat to the back of the head and AIDS raped every year any more than there are 2 million men getting gangraped by packs of wild niggers and/or sheboons every year either - it's simply applying the broadest, most ludicrous standard for what can legally be described as rape (for example: being nagged into having sex).

As it happens, if we're being honest, there appears to be about as many women "raping" men as there are men "raping" women on a yearly basis.
Suppose you're right and there are 4x as many female victims as there are male victims, that just indicates that male victims at the very least get repeatedly raped more often.

Well now you're trying to discredit the study you showed to me to begin with and play it off because the numbers don't fall in your favor upon further speculation.
Somehow just as many women are raping men when theres 4x as many female victims huh?
Really reaching with that bad memory and raped repeatedly shit too.
But damn the lengths you'll go to defend the amount of rapes men are doing to make sure you're morally justified in being a heterosexual man, playing the moralfag for a change is nice lets stay where you're on the defensive because it seems to be working out in my favor anyway. :^)

The issue is that the younger one can't be expected to know the ramifications of what they're agreeing to. Sexual abuse of children almost never involves physical violence because the children "consent" to it. Should I be allowed to make a contract with a child that says I give them some candy and in return they pay me a certain amount of money every month once they are adults and have a job?

I don't know about you but by the time I could sign a signature I wasn't stupid enough to do something like that.
This is like a mgtows interpretation of what a woman is like,
They aren't going to sign their life away for a mars bar I mean really nigga did you ever grow up or were you developed in a tube or something?

So that's a yes?

Wait, there's no candy in this thread! I wasn't expecting this!

I learned something today, I'm not allowed to do anything involving consent when I have the mental advantage over someone so I can't respond to that :^)

The Zyklon B hits hard.
OY
VEY

There are no ramifications to answering my question. Come on, if you're so smart you can answer a simple yes or no question can't you?

Well no shit isn't it obvious when I said it? Just good luck gettting anyone to do it or follow through with it.
I got fucked over by a contract once that I signed after I turned 18 because what a surprise the act of turning 18 doesn't magically imbue you with any more knowledge about signing contracts than you had the day before.
Anyway it was a fucking cable company that I signed on to for years and then I ended up moving to an area that they didn't have service to and they charged me like $500 of cancellation fees right out of my account and I fucking fought and got that shit back even though I basically signed allowing them to do it.
So I think you put some kind of godlike status on contracts that don't really exist and its not as big a deal as you think. Kind of reminds me of something else you're making a bigger deal out of than it actually is. Can't quite put my finger on it though…

Dude, the contract is just a hypothetical example. If they agree to it they have to pay for the rest of their lives, they don't even need a signature. Should they be allowed to make that decision yes or no?

If you mean some hypothetical godlike contract that will kill you if you don't fulfill it no I don't think anyone should be allowed to make that decision.
If you mean a real life contract that you can break and not have your entire life ruined over it sure why not?

Because it's not only potentially but guaranteed harmful and has no advantages for the child. You now want people to be allowed to take advantage of them.

I mean I know you're trying to troll but you're just making me really sad on your behalf, because there are people out there who are actually as bad as you pretend to be at basic math and reading comprehension :(

I don't care how stupid you are you aren't going to make the decision to sign a contract thats guaranteed to be harmful and gives you no advantages. You think giving them the decision would mean they'd always make the bad decision no matter how obvious it is. but I think you underestimate them

Woah sick burn dude, wish I could stick around to show you the true meaning of trolling but unfortunately theres only so many hours in the day and mine are up.
We should do this again sometime, but next time you have to defend yourself for being a cis het male shitlord and I get to be the moralfag.

But if I can find a child that makes a bad decision I'm in the right.

BUMP

Wtf is that supposed to mean? We are here now because of history

...