User Controls
All I think about is animal abuse, heartbreak, killing, drugs, suicide, & pedophilia
-
2015-12-12 at 4:52 AM UTC
"consensual fun"
Come on soapfist, atleast try
Just because you do not view it as such does
not make it less true. -
2015-12-12 at 6:09 PM UTCObviously everyone who thinks it's so disgusting that they got together and declared it illegal gives a fuck. I know, I know, you don't care about the law but that doesn't make it not a crime or not disgusting. About consent: People develop at different rates and there is no magic age which makes everyone mature enough to understand what they are consenting to. Even some adults are not mature enough to really understand it. Most teenagers don't know what they are doing, even though they fuck like horny rabbits it doesn't mean they aren't idiots about it. So when a child gives you consent they are most likely not actually mature enough to understand what it's all about. That's why there are age of consent laws, to protect those immature individuals who would otherwise be taken advantage of by disgusting perverts.
-
2015-12-13 at 12:21 AM UTCAll y'all are retarded! LOL
Sophie excluded.
They know EXACTLY what they're doing! ...And WANT to experience that shit, THAT is why they go along with it! ...Especially since pop culture indoctrinates it into them now.
Society is just fucked... WAY beyond this petty & trivial matter. -
2015-12-13 at 2:19 AM UTC
All y'all are retarded! LOL
Sophie excluded.
They know EXACTLY what they're doing! …And WANT to experience that shit, THAT is why they go along with it! …Especially since pop culture indoctrinates it into them now.
Society is just fucked… WAY beyond this petty & trivial matter.
Back in 1850 it was perfectly normal to marry and have sex with young girls. Peoples outrage just shifts with the propaganda they are fed. -
2015-12-13 at 6:52 PM UTCI may absolutely fuckin despise muslims.... but that is the one cool thing about their religion.
-
2015-12-13 at 6:59 PM UTCAnd OP is disgusting, for the first 5 things hes been thinking about.
-
2015-12-14 at 2:15 AM UTC
I never said children weren't sexually active but there's nothing wrong with a 6 and an 8 year old experimenting, a 9 and an 11 yr old, 2 5 year Olds but in no way shape or form would a 20 something year old experimenting with a youth under the age of 13 ever not be damaging to their personal and sexual growth
How does that make any sense? Presumably the reason pedophilia is wrong is that it risks harming the child, so it seem like for any given behavior it's either damaging to a child or not, I don't get why the age of the other participant matters here? Like what does that change? Weren't you the one who just said children can't give consent? So how could they ever possibly consent sexual acts with their peers? Or is that rape and rape is ok as long as everyone's under a certain age? -
2015-12-14 at 5:37 AM UTCThe only reason it's damaging, if consensual, is because other people make it damaging. The way their parents raise, teach and condition them, school, peers, societies, and their reactions.
-
2015-12-14 at 11:19 PM UTC
The only reason it's damaging, if consensual, is because other people make it damaging. The way their parents raise, teach and condition them, school, peers, societies, and their reactions.
Thank you. This is probably one of the reasons you should keep it a secret if you have a little gf. -
2015-12-15 at 3:38 AM UTC
Thank you. This is probably one of the reasons you should keep it a secret if you have a little gf.
Sophie I like you, but if you ever even looked at one of my girls I would rent a woodchipper, take it to a peer, tie you up, drop you in alive, shove the woodchipper off the peer, and report it stolen. -
2015-12-15 at 3:42 AM UTC
Sophie I like you, but if you ever even looked at one of my girls I would rent a woodchipper, take it to a peer, tie you up, drop you in alive, shove the woodchipper off the peer, and report it stolen.
I understand, how old are they? -
2015-12-15 at 5:56 AM UTChttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._controversy
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...45213489900306
As some of you know, I actually possess the formal education and requisite experience to validate these experimental designs accordingly and analyze the results mathematically. In fact, a large part of my undergraduate degree was spent on conducting research on pedophiles, pederasts, and hebephiles, so I have enough of my own anecdotes to contribute to the conversation as well. However, the point is moot since it's not going to change any minds. The reality is that there's very little ground for people to switch their thinking on either side because it's such an emotionally charged issue. Furthermore, I really lack hope of this happening on a website called niggasin.space. For the sake of taking the discussion somewhat seriously, I will very briefly give a synopsis of the contemporary research and my own experience in this field.
On one hand we have to (as heterosexual neurotypicals) come to the reality that pedophilia has become a modern day, emotionally charged witch hunt and we have to accept that this is a relatively recent trend based off of poor reasoning. While sociologists have recognized it as a useful witch hunt in that unites the public against a common enemy, this attitude has done more damage to children than good since it results in offenders going into hiding.
The History and PhilosophyThat's why there are age of consent laws, to protect those immature individuals who would otherwise be taken advantage of by disgusting perverts.
This is commonly believed but absolutely not historically true. The origins of statutory rape laws appear ironically as the exact opposite - property laws. During a time when women had virtually no rights and were basically seen as property, the act of a person deflowering her cheapened her value in the process of bartering her for marriage. Hence you see laws designed to protect the father's investment, as evidenced in Deuteronomy 22:28- 29:
[FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]"…If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial][SIZE=11px]29[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days"[/SIZE][/FONT]
So while it's commonly believed that such laws have their origin in protecting young people from their own lack of maturity, we actually ironically see it has more to do with violating their rights in the first place (as in considering them chattel). In more recent history, you see age of consent laws pick up speed more recently as a means of persecuting homosexuals, since they were initially done disproportionately. That is, the age of consent for a heterosexual couple could be very low, while the age of consent for a homosexual pair would be as high as eighteen. The reasoning for this was the longstanding (incorrect) belief that homosexuality was a disease of the mind and all homosexuals pederasts. Furthermore, the belief was largely that homosexuals preyed on young, adolescent boys which turned them into homosexuals. This pervasive mindset went so far even as to result in public service announcements warning people against the dangers of homosexuals as predators, as depicted below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17u01_sWjRE
The idea being that any notion these laws were created initially to "protect" young people from their own ability to consent is demonstrably false.The truth is that pedophilia, pederasty, and incest was widely accepted throughout the world for thousands of years until very recently. Almost every Greek philosopher around the time of Socrates, Albert Einstein, and Edgar Allan Poe immediately come to mind as examples of these.
The Research
The research has basically consistently found that adults having sexual contact with children is not in and of itself harmful. "Sexual play" has been identified in children, and any professional in psychology who is worth their salt will have exposure in their education to the myriad of research discussing childhood sexuality (and no, I'm not just talking about Freud). I refuse to apologize for this biological fact, and the reality that the American Psychological Association has done everything in their power to dance around this issue sincerely compromises their integrity as researchers and scientific professionals. However, it needs to be said that there are elements of sexual contact that can be harmful between adults and children. Sophist (like many pedophiles) is right in saying that consent, coercion, and physical damage to the child are extremely harmful, but can be avoided in sexual contact between children and adults. The pedophile usually sees this as a trump card, because this means they can groom relationships with children and avoid those elements. The problem is the reality that contemporary Western society has pretty consistent views that a child who goes around talking about blowjobs and how much they like anal sex has been damaged. So even if we have a child who "consents" to sexual behavior with an adult, doesn't feel coerced, and doesn't suffer any physical trauma from the act, the child stands to be forever outcasted or categorized as a victim by society in a way that would even cause an educated, intelligent adult to have issues with.
Granted, there are some societies where adults actively encourage children to explore sex (typically with sibling and certainly without westernized concepts of age) with little to no adverse psychological effects, but these societies are usually within third world countries without very good education.The only semi-accurate counter-cultural parallel to this in the west is the Children Of God / Family International Cult, which mandated that sex between children, adults, and families was to be practiced consistently. More information about this group can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_International
One of the best accounts about this group comes from three sisters who were members of The Family International. Their book is available on Amazon for fairly cheap, and I encourage pedophiles and pedophile advocates Such as Sophie and Lock (if Lock even exists anymore) to read it.
https://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Not_Without_My_Sister
The Conclusion
Again, for the few of you who know me somewhat personally, all this information really begs the question as to where I (as a heterosexual, neurotypical) who has an education on such matters stands on pedophilia, hebephilia, and pederasty. The reason that I ask Sophist and others to read the aforementioned book is because I am of the opinion that, even in an entirely isolated group like the Children of God that had the benefit of religious indoctrination and an entire international society dedicated to ensuring the sexual freedom for children to practice sex with adults happens in a safe, supervised environment, it didn't even last two generations because the rates of coercion, trauma, and abuse were so rampant. There's effectively no way to predict how a child will respond to sexual contact with an adult, and you could be causing them irreversible damage for the rest of their life even if they actively consent to it at the time they do it.
So while I do recognize these are not orientations people can control, I am adamantly against them acting on them with children. However, what I don't have patience for are emotional appeals and bullshit arguments. There's literally hundreds of tests demonstrating that this special population is neurologically hardwired to be attracted to minors, and criminologically speaking we need to switch to a medical model in dealing with them or nothing will change. Wasting billions in tax payer dollars for sex-registries and other stupid shit that does nothing positive only propagates more abuse because it neglects treatment. In fact, most people have no idea that sexual offenders have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the entire criminal justice system. My personal beliefs about course of action necessary for the topic are as follows:
1. Abolish the sex offender registry and public shaming of sex offenders. - This makes them defensive and results in them avoiding treatment out of fear. And honestly, can you blame them?
2. Abolish draconian punishments for child pornography, including the harsh laws resulting in federal prison time for cartoons such as that which is expressed in the John Walsh Act. Furthermore, adjust laws relating to child pornography so that they're more realistic (USC 118 & 2257 Compliance are a joke since most pornography is user produced and no such records are ever generated), reviewed on a case by case basis, and have outcomes geared for offenders to receive treatment.
3. Review statutory rapes on a case by case basis, including an individual victim analysis by a licensed psychologist who specializes in the field.
4. Implement a medical model when dealing with sex offenders and use parole as an option when possible.
While most people dislike the idea of parole for sex offenders, the reality is that this is one of the few ways the state can keep track of them. What I mean to say is, if someone is in prison for 13 years for molesting a kid, making them serve their entire sentence does society no good. In most cases the law dictates they're free to go after their sentence, they've been publicly shamed as a child molester (and everyone in prison likely reinforced that identity on them), so they most likely assumed that identity at this point and there's no tax payer money being used to protect anybody. If they get parole early on (say after being in prison for only 2 years), then that's 11 years the state can have social workers monitor them in the real world and attempt to rehabilitate this person through treatment.
5. And finally, for fuck's sake, tell psychologists to pull their heads out of their fucking asses and do some serious goddamn research on this topic so we can get some fucking answers instead of worrying about how we're going to continue charging $83 an hour if we piss off March of a Million Moms.
These are the only ways that I foresee less children getting hurt and reasonable, fair treatment being provided to sex offenders (who are neurologically predispositioned to their sexual preferences, just like everyone else).
Sorry I won't be sticking around for questions, I'm leaving back into the wilderness for a long time and won't have access to the internet. -
2015-12-15 at 10:58 AM UTC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._controversy
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...45213489900306
As some of you know, I actually possess the formal education and requisite experience to validate these experimental designs accordingly and analyze the results mathematically. In fact, a large part of my undergraduate degree was spent on conducting research on pedophiles, pederasts, and hebephiles, so I have enough of my own anecdotes to contribute to the conversation as well. However, the point is moot since it's not going to change any minds. The reality is that there's very little ground for people to switch their thinking on either side because it's such an emotionally charged issue. Furthermore, I really lack hope of this happening on a website called niggasin.space. For the sake of taking the discussion somewhat seriously, I will very briefly give a synopsis of the contemporary research and my own experience in this field.
On one hand we have to (as heterosexual neurotypicals) come to the reality that pedophilia has become a modern day, emotionally charged witch hunt and we have to accept that this is a relatively recent trend based off of poor reasoning. While sociologists have recognized it as a useful witch hunt in that unites the public against a common enemy, this attitude has done more damage to children than good since it results in offenders going into hiding.
The History and Philosophy
This is commonly believed but absolutely not historically true. The origins of statutory rape laws appear ironically as the exact opposite - property laws. During a time when women had virtually no rights and were basically seen as property, the act of a person deflowering her cheapened her value in the process of bartering her for marriage. Hence you see laws designed to protect the father's investment, as evidenced in Deuteronomy 22:28- 29:
[FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]"…If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial][SIZE=11px]29[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days"[/SIZE][/FONT]
So while it's commonly believed that such laws have their origin in protecting young people from their own lack of maturity, we actually ironically see it has more to do with violating their rights in the first place (as in considering them chattel). In more recent history, you see age of consent laws pick up speed more recently as a means of persecuting homosexuals, since they were initially done disproportionately. That is, the age of consent for a heterosexual couple could be very low, while the age of consent for a homosexual pair would be as high as eighteen. The reasoning for this was the longstanding (incorrect) belief that homosexuality was a disease of the mind and all homosexuals pederasts. Furthermore, the belief was largely that homosexuals preyed on young, adolescent boys which turned them into homosexuals. This pervasive mindset went so far even as to result in public service announcements warning people against the dangers of homosexuals as predators, as depicted below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17u01_sWjRE
The idea being that any notion these laws were created initially to "protect" young people from their own ability to consent is demonstrably false.The truth is that pedophilia, pederasty, and incest was widely accepted throughout the world for thousands of years until very recently. Almost every Greek philosopher around the time of Socrates, Albert Einstein, and Edgar Allan Poe immediately come to mind as examples of these.
The Research
The research has basically consistently found that adults having sexual contact with children is not in and of itself harmful. "Sexual play" has been identified in children, and any professional in psychology who is worth their salt will have exposure in their education to the myriad of research discussing childhood sexuality (and no, I'm not just talking about Freud). I refuse to apologize for this biological fact, and the reality that the American Psychological Association has done everything in their power to dance around this issue sincerely compromises their integrity as researchers and scientific professionals. However, it needs to be said that there are elements of sexual contact that can be harmful between adults and children. Sophist (like many pedophiles) is right in saying that consent, coercion, and physical damage to the child are extremely harmful, but can be avoided in sexual contact between children and adults. The pedophile usually sees this as a trump card, because this means they can groom relationships with children and avoid those elements. The problem is the reality that contemporary Western society has pretty consistent views that a child who goes around talking about blowjobs and how much they like anal sex has been damaged. So even if we have a child who "consents" to sexual behavior with an adult, doesn't feel coerced, and doesn't suffer any physical trauma from the act, the child stands to be forever outcasted or categorized as a victim by society in a way that would even cause an educated, intelligent adult to have issues with.
Granted, there are some societies where adults actively encourage children to explore sex (typically with sibling and certainly without westernized concepts of age) with little to no adverse psychological effects, but these societies are usually within third world countries without very good education.The only semi-accurate counter-cultural parallel to this in the west is the Children Of God / Family International Cult, which mandated that sex between children, adults, and families was to be practiced consistently. More information about this group can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_International
One of the best accounts about this group comes from three sisters who were members of The Family International. Their book is available on Amazon for fairly cheap, and I encourage pedophiles and pedophile advocates Such as Sophie and Lock (if Lock even exists anymore) to read it.
https://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Not_Without_My_Sister
The Conclusion
Again, for the few of you who know me somewhat personally, all this information really begs the question as to where I (as a heterosexual, neurotypical) who has an education on such matters stands on pedophilia, hebephilia, and pederasty. The reason that I ask Sophist and others to read the aforementioned book is because I am of the opinion that, even in an entirely isolated group like the Children of God that had the benefit of religious indoctrination and an entire international society dedicated to ensuring the sexual freedom for children to practice sex with adults happens in a safe, supervised environment, it didn't even last two generations because the rates of coercion, trauma, and abuse were so rampant. There's effectively no way to predict how a child will respond to sexual contact with an adult, and you could be causing them irreversible damage for the rest of their life even if they actively consent to it at the time they do it.
So while I do recognize these are not orientations people can control, I am adamantly against them acting on them with children. However, what I don't have patience for are emotional appeals and bullshit arguments. There's literally hundreds of tests demonstrating that this special population is neurologically hardwired to be attracted to minors, and criminologically speaking we need to switch to a medical model in dealing with them or nothing will change. Wasting billions in tax payer dollars for sex-registries and other stupid shit that does nothing positive only propagates more abuse because it neglects treatment. In fact, most people have no idea that sexual offenders have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the entire criminal justice system. My personal beliefs about course of action necessary for the topic are as follows:
1. Abolish the sex offender registry and public shaming of sex offenders. - This makes them defensive and results in them avoiding treatment out of fear. And honestly, can you blame them?
2. Abolish draconian punishments for child pornography, including the harsh laws resulting in federal prison time for cartoons such as that which is expressed in the John Walsh Act. Furthermore, adjust laws relating to child pornography so that they're more realistic (USC 118 & 2257 Compliance are a joke since most pornography is user produced and no such records are ever generated), reviewed on a case by case basis, and have outcomes geared for offenders to receive treatment.
3. Review statutory rapes on a case by case basis, including an individual victim analysis by a licensed psychologist who specializes in the field.
4. Implement a medical model when dealing with sex offenders and use parole as an option when possible.
While most people dislike the idea of parole for sex offenders, the reality is that this is one of the few ways the state can keep track of them. What I mean to say is, if someone is in prison for 13 years for molesting a kid, making them serve their entire sentence does society no good. In most cases the law dictates they're free to go after their sentence, they've been publicly shamed as a child molester (and everyone in prison likely reinforced that identity on them), so they most likely assumed that identity at this point and there's no tax payer money being used to protect anybody. If they get parole early on (say after being in prison for only 2 years), then that's 11 years the state can have social workers monitor them in the real world and attempt to rehabilitate this person through treatment.
5. And finally, for fuck's sake, tell psychologists to pull their heads out of their fucking asses and do some serious goddamn research on this topic so we can get some fucking answers instead of worrying about how we're going to continue charging $83 an hour if we piss off March of a Million Moms.
These are the only ways that I foresee less children getting hurt and reasonable, fair treatment being provided to sex offenders (who are neurologically predispositioned to their sexual preferences, just like everyone else).
Sorry I won't be sticking around for questions, I'm leaving back into the wilderness for a long time and won't have access to the internet.
Muh nigga, i miss you. Wish you'd stick around also after the 21st of dec i will be available to chat i got tox now too if you want opsec, as usual your post was very insightful i read it all and while your argument that you cannot inherrently know if any sexual experience with a child is damaging in the long run even if consensual i believe the incidence of negative experiences may be minimized when proper care is taken in approaching the relation from the viewpoint of the adult in question. -
2015-12-15 at 4:21 PM UTC
I understand, how old are they?
LMAO too old for you. 15 going on 16. You are a funny fuck I'll give you that. Your response actually made me chuckle. -
2015-12-15 at 5:28 PM UTC
LMAO too old for you. 15 going on 16. You are a funny fuck I'll give you that. Your response actually made me chuckle.
Lol, remember my attraction is primary but not exclusive if you recall i have an adult gf currently. But you need not worry lel. -
2015-12-16 at 2:53 AM UTC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al._controversy
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...45213489900306
As some of you know, I actually possess the formal education and requisite experience to validate these experimental designs accordingly and analyze the results mathematically. In fact, a large part of my undergraduate degree was spent on conducting research on pedophiles, pederasts, and hebephiles, so I have enough of my own anecdotes to contribute to the conversation as well. However, the point is moot since it's not going to change any minds. The reality is that there's very little ground for people to switch their thinking on either side because it's such an emotionally charged issue. Furthermore, I really lack hope of this happening on a website called niggasin.space. For the sake of taking the discussion somewhat seriously, I will very briefly give a synopsis of the contemporary research and my own experience in this field.
On one hand we have to (as heterosexual neurotypicals) come to the reality that pedophilia has become a modern day, emotionally charged witch hunt and we have to accept that this is a relatively recent trend based off of poor reasoning. While sociologists have recognized it as a useful witch hunt in that unites the public against a common enemy, this attitude has done more damage to children than good since it results in offenders going into hiding.
The History and Philosophy
This is commonly believed but absolutely not historically true. The origins of statutory rape laws appear ironically as the exact opposite - property laws. During a time when women had virtually no rights and were basically seen as property, the act of a person deflowering her cheapened her value in the process of bartering her for marriage. Hence you see laws designed to protect the father's investment, as evidenced in Deuteronomy 22:28- 29:
[FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]"…If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial][SIZE=11px]29[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet][SIZE=14px]then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days"[/SIZE][/FONT]
So while it's commonly believed that such laws have their origin in protecting young people from their own lack of maturity, we actually ironically see it has more to do with violating their rights in the first place (as in considering them chattel). In more recent history, you see age of consent laws pick up speed more recently as a means of persecuting homosexuals, since they were initially done disproportionately. That is, the age of consent for a heterosexual couple could be very low, while the age of consent for a homosexual pair would be as high as eighteen. The reasoning for this was the longstanding (incorrect) belief that homosexuality was a disease of the mind and all homosexuals pederasts. Furthermore, the belief was largely that homosexuals preyed on young, adolescent boys which turned them into homosexuals. This pervasive mindset went so far even as to result in public service announcements warning people against the dangers of homosexuals as predators, as depicted below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17u01_sWjRE
The idea being that any notion these laws were created initially to "protect" young people from their own ability to consent is demonstrably false.The truth is that pedophilia, pederasty, and incest was widely accepted throughout the world for thousands of years until very recently. Almost every Greek philosopher around the time of Socrates, Albert Einstein, and Edgar Allan Poe immediately come to mind as examples of these.
The Research
The research has basically consistently found that adults having sexual contact with children is not in and of itself harmful. "Sexual play" has been identified in children, and any professional in psychology who is worth their salt will have exposure in their education to the myriad of research discussing childhood sexuality (and no, I'm not just talking about Freud). I refuse to apologize for this biological fact, and the reality that the American Psychological Association has done everything in their power to dance around this issue sincerely compromises their integrity as researchers and scientific professionals. However, it needs to be said that there are elements of sexual contact that can be harmful between adults and children. Sophist (like many pedophiles) is right in saying that consent, coercion, and physical damage to the child are extremely harmful, but can be avoided in sexual contact between children and adults. The pedophile usually sees this as a trump card, because this means they can groom relationships with children and avoid those elements. The problem is the reality that contemporary Western society has pretty consistent views that a child who goes around talking about blowjobs and how much they like anal sex has been damaged. So even if we have a child who "consents" to sexual behavior with an adult, doesn't feel coerced, and doesn't suffer any physical trauma from the act, the child stands to be forever outcasted or categorized as a victim by society in a way that would even cause an educated, intelligent adult to have issues with.
Granted, there are some societies where adults actively encourage children to explore sex (typically with sibling and certainly without westernized concepts of age) with little to no adverse psychological effects, but these societies are usually within third world countries without very good education.The only semi-accurate counter-cultural parallel to this in the west is the Children Of God / Family International Cult, which mandated that sex between children, adults, and families was to be practiced consistently. More information about this group can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_International
One of the best accounts about this group comes from three sisters who were members of The Family International. Their book is available on Amazon for fairly cheap, and I encourage pedophiles and pedophile advocates Such as Sophie and Lock (if Lock even exists anymore) to read it.
https://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Not_Without_My_Sister
The Conclusion
Again, for the few of you who know me somewhat personally, all this information really begs the question as to where I (as a heterosexual, neurotypical) who has an education on such matters stands on pedophilia, hebephilia, and pederasty. The reason that I ask Sophist and others to read the aforementioned book is because I am of the opinion that, even in an entirely isolated group like the Children of God that had the benefit of religious indoctrination and an entire international society dedicated to ensuring the sexual freedom for children to practice sex with adults happens in a safe, supervised environment, it didn't even last two generations because the rates of coercion, trauma, and abuse were so rampant. There's effectively no way to predict how a child will respond to sexual contact with an adult, and you could be causing them irreversible damage for the rest of their life even if they actively consent to it at the time they do it.
So while I do recognize these are not orientations people can control, I am adamantly against them acting on them with children. However, what I don't have patience for are emotional appeals and bullshit arguments. There's literally hundreds of tests demonstrating that this special population is neurologically hardwired to be attracted to minors, and criminologically speaking we need to switch to a medical model in dealing with them or nothing will change. Wasting billions in tax payer dollars for sex-registries and other stupid shit that does nothing positive only propagates more abuse because it neglects treatment. In fact, most people have no idea that sexual offenders have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the entire criminal justice system. My personal beliefs about course of action necessary for the topic are as follows:
1. Abolish the sex offender registry and public shaming of sex offenders. - This makes them defensive and results in them avoiding treatment out of fear. And honestly, can you blame them?
2. Abolish draconian punishments for child pornography, including the harsh laws resulting in federal prison time for cartoons such as that which is expressed in the John Walsh Act. Furthermore, adjust laws relating to child pornography so that they're more realistic (USC 118 & 2257 Compliance are a joke since most pornography is user produced and no such records are ever generated), reviewed on a case by case basis, and have outcomes geared for offenders to receive treatment.
3. Review statutory rapes on a case by case basis, including an individual victim analysis by a licensed psychologist who specializes in the field.
4. Implement a medical model when dealing with sex offenders and use parole as an option when possible.
While most people dislike the idea of parole for sex offenders, the reality is that this is one of the few ways the state can keep track of them. What I mean to say is, if someone is in prison for 13 years for molesting a kid, making them serve their entire sentence does society no good. In most cases the law dictates they're free to go after their sentence, they've been publicly shamed as a child molester (and everyone in prison likely reinforced that identity on them), so they most likely assumed that identity at this point and there's no tax payer money being used to protect anybody. If they get parole early on (say after being in prison for only 2 years), then that's 11 years the state can have social workers monitor them in the real world and attempt to rehabilitate this person through treatment.
5. And finally, for fuck's sake, tell psychologists to pull their heads out of their fucking asses and do some serious goddamn research on this topic so we can get some fucking answers instead of worrying about how we're going to continue charging $83 an hour if we piss off March of a Million Moms.
These are the only ways that I foresee less children getting hurt and reasonable, fair treatment being provided to sex offenders (who are neurologically predispositioned to their sexual preferences, just like everyone else).
Sorry I won't be sticking around for questions, I'm leaving back into the wilderness for a long time and won't have access to the internet.
Much resepect!
I too, found your contribution to be very informative and interesting.
Like Sophie, I also think negative experiences can be minimized when proper care is thought of beforehand. Not spur of the moment lust situations, which makes me think that is a possible reason The Family International went down. Too much lust, not enough caring for forethought.
That is just my opinion though, based on what you have said. -
2015-12-16 at 2:54 AM UTCwhy did I make this thread
-
2015-12-16 at 2:58 AM UTC
why did I make this thread
For the same reason a young boy is fascinated with his father's penis, I do believe. -
2015-12-16 at 4:10 AM UTC
why did I make this thread
Good thread breh, 11/10, i found it fun, engaging and informative. -
2015-12-16 at 4:46 AM UTCThis thread was total cringe. I hope that roshambo doesn't go along with this bullshit, sophie is fat pedophile in his late twenties with a small penis *FACT*
