I already responded to this straw man. Politically speaking, I'm an anarchist. I don't think there should be any laws. That doesn't mean I support people doing every horrible thing you can think of. Any more than allowing surgery doesn't mean I support everyone removing their kidneys for fun or doing heroin. I think those things should be legal, but not encouraged.
No? As I said, I support legalization so that people are free to do it. The only thing I think should be banned is any sort of assault whether it be physical, sexual, emotional, etc. Harming someone is a no-go. Consentual actions, while maybe not encouraged, should be entirely legal. I don't think we should encourage, say, age play, or pain play, but people should be free to do it if they please.
Think of it like drinking or smoking. I don't think those things should be banned. People are free to do them if they like. But that doesn't mean I encourage people to drink or smoke.
You are a complete idiot. You've just described a law code, It's just a completely retarded one that would be completely unworkable because it's based on your own selfish agenda. Kys
TIL that by legalizing pot people who supported the legalization think that doing pot is good and should be encouraged. And that people should be encouraged to drink because it's legal.
Riiiight. Do you realise what a complete dickead you sound like, as an anarchist, by talking about what 'society' thinks or does? Society is a bunch of people who have gotten together and agreed on a way of living together....we call them laws. You seem to fixated on 'legalisation', which is also ironic because such a process only happens within a legal framework. Legalisation is an ordered process, anarchy is most certainly not an ordered process.
Fuck you anarchist shit me. Like, just do as your mom has asked and clean up your room, it's not the end of the world.
Okay, I don't really give a shit what you think anarchism should be; if there are no laws, a lot of people will be murdered for no reason at all. That includes you.
Proof? From what I've seen direct murders unrelated to other crimes aren't all that common. And when they do happen it's a crime of passion and doesn't have repeats. And those start to go away with a more moral, educated, and mentally healthy society.
Assuming it's like the purge is a strawman. Do you really think laws stop people? Because they don't. Laws don't really do much to deter people who were going to commit a crime anyway.
Saying there should be laws and law enforcement literally means you don't support anarchism. By definition.
And those start to go away with a more moral, educated, and mentally healthy society
You realise morality on goes so far to dictate human behaviour right? Thats why the generally accepted theory on the authority of law as a concept is positivism, not natural law... (and has been for a few hundred years now).
Laws don't really do much to deter people who were going to commit a crime anyway.
Oh, but they do.
You have to be really fucking committed to killing somebody because you're putting your entire life at risk doing so. In an anarchist society, I could drive to some small town, rape some dude's daughter and drive home. What's he going to do? Report it? To who? If he has no investigative skills (highly unlikely) there's no way he'll find me, there's no central body of skilled detectives because there's nothing to investigate. Technically no crime has been committed. Sure, if he finds me he's well within his rights to torture me and slit my throat open, but good luck finding me.
These people are very bad at explainging why children can't legally consent so I'll do it for you.
Children cannot legally consent because the laws say they can't. There is nothing about being a child that inherently means that you don't have good enough knowledge and understanding about sex or can't make your own mind about it. The laws are based on very gross generalizations about children should be like.
People seem to have hard time differentiating between giving consent and doing so legally. Consent by itself isn't any more than giving approval to something, which is something that a child can most definitely do.
Gay and trans adults are fully mentally developed and can understand the ramifications of their decisions
This is not true. Many gay and trans people (just like people from any other group) start having sex before reaching mental maturity. Also at least trans people have very high amounts of mental illnesses that prevent them from ever reaching the stage of mental development of a regular person at their peak. Our society isn't formed around letting people do things when they have fully matured and know everything but instead letting them do things when they know enough about whatever it is they want to do and are capable of doing it.
Children are not fully mentally developed
There is no reason for this argument other than "I don't like it". People aren't fully mentally developed until around 25. Should we ban anyone younger than from having sex? How about people whose minds have started to degenerate? Should only people at the peak of their mental capacity be allowed to have sex?
and cannot fully understand what they are consenting to.
No one fully understand anything. However a significant amount of children know what sex is, what it leads to, what the social views about it are and what are the risks with it. There is no scientific evidence that says that sex betwen adult and a child is inherently harmful. Can you come up with any real arguments for why a child that has good understanding about sex shouldn't be allowed to do it with whoever they want?
Not necessarily. Penetration is not the only sexual act that people can perform. Also penetration is not inherently harmful either, there are handbooks about how to stretch the vagina of a little girl over time so that it can handle penetration the "darkweb".
and sex with/around children fucks them up psychologically for the rest of their lives.
There is no scientific proof of that. Also the existence of people who have had sexual experiences with adults when they were children who aren't fucked up psychologically means that this is not true in all cases.
Some of those people come forward every now and then but they are very scared to share their stories and voice their opinions since it usually leads to them being attacked just as harshly as the paedophiles. They do open up about it in PM from time to time.
There's plenty of evidence for both of those. The people who aren't messed up don't make the others who were abused and badly affected not exist. You're just justifying your sick and harmful desires by lifting the harmful component.
Then why do people fail to bring those up? And no, studies conducted on children who didn't consent don't count. Sure there is evidence that it can cause harm, I don't deny that. What I'm saying that there is no evidence that it is inheretly harmful.
The people who aren't messed up don't make the others who were abused and badly affected not exist.
And vice versa. However what the existence of these non-messed up people does do is invalidate any claim about it always messing the child up. Such statements that try to encompass all children tend to be falsifiable and thus easy to defeat.
They're dangerous if they lead to harming a child.
Why do you think they would lead to that? Making these things less taboo would be of significant help to children. There are many cases where the child was ok and liked the experience and still thinks it was positive but has been brainwashed to think that it's wrong for them to think that. These cases are really sad to see when they could be completely preventable by society. People should care more about their children than they care about not making themselves uncomfortable with subjects they think are taboo.
I am not defending anything sexual that's done against the child's will.
Do you think george orwell would throw you a little girl and say "go for it!" ?
I think he would listen to my arguments and probably try to refute them. He most definitely would not try to silence me.
There are many cases where the child was ok and liked the experience and still thinks it was positive but has been brainwashed to think that it's wrong for them to think that. These cases are really sad to see when they could be completely preventable by society.
Well umm... Thanks for agreeing with me I guess. The only part I'd disagree is here:
Also at least trans people have very high amounts of mental illnesses that prevent them from ever reaching the stage of mental development of a regular person at their peak.
You're right that trans people have higher rates of mental illness (namely gender dysphoria, depression, and anxiety). But mental illness does not necessarily inhibit development.
But mental illness does not necessarily inhibit development.
I agree. I didn't mean to imply that all mental illnesses cause that but only some in some cases. I should have been more clear about that. I usually try refrain from making such absolute statements.
I'm not aware of any studies showing that trans people are more likely to have developmental disabilities. Most commonly I just see the three I listed. I personally have been diagnosed with GID and anxiety. I likely have depression as well, but who knows.
75 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-01-25
Error in fetchQuote() line 4 character 0: 400 AUTHENTICATION_ERROR - could not connect to server
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a OldOrder 2017-01-25
/u/kafke what is it like living with such crippling self delusion?
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
I already responded to this straw man. Politically speaking, I'm an anarchist. I don't think there should be any laws. That doesn't mean I support people doing every horrible thing you can think of. Any more than allowing surgery doesn't mean I support everyone removing their kidneys for fun or doing heroin. I think those things should be legal, but not encouraged.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-25
Like having some sort of collective code we all agree on?
n/a xjapxn 2017-01-25
Maybe written down somewhere readily accessible so we could all see what it is?
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-25
What a novel idea, it just might work
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
No? As I said, I support legalization so that people are free to do it. The only thing I think should be banned is any sort of assault whether it be physical, sexual, emotional, etc. Harming someone is a no-go. Consentual actions, while maybe not encouraged, should be entirely legal. I don't think we should encourage, say, age play, or pain play, but people should be free to do it if they please.
Think of it like drinking or smoking. I don't think those things should be banned. People are free to do them if they like. But that doesn't mean I encourage people to drink or smoke.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-25
You are a complete idiot. You've just described a law code, It's just a completely retarded one that would be completely unworkable because it's based on your own selfish agenda. Kys
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
TIL that by legalizing pot people who supported the legalization think that doing pot is good and should be encouraged. And that people should be encouraged to drink because it's legal.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-25
This is gibberish
Rewrite it so it makes sense
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
It's legal to smoke, therefore society encourages people to smoke. It's legal to drink, therefore society encourages people to drink.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-01-25
Riiiight. Do you realise what a complete dickead you sound like, as an anarchist, by talking about what 'society' thinks or does? Society is a bunch of people who have gotten together and agreed on a way of living together....we call them laws. You seem to fixated on 'legalisation', which is also ironic because such a process only happens within a legal framework. Legalisation is an ordered process, anarchy is most certainly not an ordered process.
Fuck you anarchist shit me. Like, just do as your mom has asked and clean up your room, it's not the end of the world.
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
There's a difference between things that are encouraged, and things that aren't banned.
Lol. Ad hominems because you can't actually refute my points.
n/a jimmahdean 2017-01-25
If you're in a state of anarchy, "not encouraged" means "you will be fucking murdered if you try"
Which is why laws exist.
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
No it doesn't. One of the key points of anarchism is the non-aggression principle.
n/a jimmahdean 2017-01-25
Okay, I don't really give a shit what you think anarchism should be; if there are no laws, a lot of people will be murdered for no reason at all. That includes you.
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
Proof? From what I've seen direct murders unrelated to other crimes aren't all that common. And when they do happen it's a crime of passion and doesn't have repeats. And those start to go away with a more moral, educated, and mentally healthy society.
Assuming it's like the purge is a strawman. Do you really think laws stop people? Because they don't. Laws don't really do much to deter people who were going to commit a crime anyway.
Saying there should be laws and law enforcement literally means you don't support anarchism. By definition.
n/a crefakis 2017-01-25
You realise morality on goes so far to dictate human behaviour right? Thats why the generally accepted theory on the authority of law as a concept is positivism, not natural law... (and has been for a few hundred years now).
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
Well I can tell you the legal system doesn't do shit for deterring people or rehabilitating them.
But yes, morals alone only get you so far. You've conveniently ignored the rest of the comment.
n/a jimmahdean 2017-01-25
Oh, but they do.
You have to be really fucking committed to killing somebody because you're putting your entire life at risk doing so. In an anarchist society, I could drive to some small town, rape some dude's daughter and drive home. What's he going to do? Report it? To who? If he has no investigative skills (highly unlikely) there's no way he'll find me, there's no central body of skilled detectives because there's nothing to investigate. Technically no crime has been committed. Sure, if he finds me he's well within his rights to torture me and slit my throat open, but good luck finding me.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
Oof stop giving fuel to terfs you sick fuck
n/a Nomadlads 2017-01-25
Speaking of ugly, bitter women, has anyone heard from Dornish
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
Ew I'm not old like her
n/a Nomadlads 2017-01-25
No silly I was referring to her being like the TERFs. I'm sure you're "youthful" and "beautiful".
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
Beauty is in the hand of the eye-holder
n/a Nomadlads 2017-01-25
It's in her/his hands?
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
Yes
n/a ComedicSans 2017-01-25
n/a Nomadlads 2017-01-25
S H I T T I E R
H
I
T
T
I
E
R
n/a ChaoticEvil 2017-01-25
I have. Want me to pass along a message?
n/a Nomadlads 2017-01-25
Nope just curious.
n/a xjapxn 2017-01-25
Hey don't shoot the messenger
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
These people are very bad at explainging why children can't legally consent so I'll do it for you.
Children cannot legally consent because the laws say they can't. There is nothing about being a child that inherently means that you don't have good enough knowledge and understanding about sex or can't make your own mind about it. The laws are based on very gross generalizations about children should be like.
People seem to have hard time differentiating between giving consent and doing so legally. Consent by itself isn't any more than giving approval to something, which is something that a child can most definitely do.
Look at this idiot (/u/manbugbeebee) for example:
This is not true. Many gay and trans people (just like people from any other group) start having sex before reaching mental maturity. Also at least trans people have very high amounts of mental illnesses that prevent them from ever reaching the stage of mental development of a regular person at their peak. Our society isn't formed around letting people do things when they have fully matured and know everything but instead letting them do things when they know enough about whatever it is they want to do and are capable of doing it.
There is no reason for this argument other than "I don't like it". People aren't fully mentally developed until around 25. Should we ban anyone younger than from having sex? How about people whose minds have started to degenerate? Should only people at the peak of their mental capacity be allowed to have sex?
No one fully understand anything. However a significant amount of children know what sex is, what it leads to, what the social views about it are and what are the risks with it. There is no scientific evidence that says that sex betwen adult and a child is inherently harmful. Can you come up with any real arguments for why a child that has good understanding about sex shouldn't be allowed to do it with whoever they want?
n/a Lepicklez 2017-01-25
wew
n/a marsjazztrio 2017-01-25
https://media.giphy.com/media/NpEE2cRs2Amkg/giphy.gif
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
It is physically harmful and sex with/around children fucks them up psychologically for the rest of their lives.
Btw where are you from?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Not necessarily. Penetration is not the only sexual act that people can perform. Also penetration is not inherently harmful either, there are handbooks about how to stretch the vagina of a little girl over time so that it can handle penetration the "darkweb".
There is no scientific proof of that. Also the existence of people who have had sexual experiences with adults when they were children who aren't fucked up psychologically means that this is not true in all cases.
Some of those people come forward every now and then but they are very scared to share their stories and voice their opinions since it usually leads to them being attacked just as harshly as the paedophiles. They do open up about it in PM from time to time.
I am from Finland.
n/a Vried 2017-01-25
When's the next Nicole 12 album out, Mikko?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Who? What?
n/a jPaolo 2017-01-25
Wew
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
There's plenty of evidence for both of those. The people who aren't messed up don't make the others who were abused and badly affected not exist. You're just justifying your sick and harmful desires by lifting the harmful component.
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Then why do people fail to bring those up? And no, studies conducted on children who didn't consent don't count. Sure there is evidence that it can cause harm, I don't deny that. What I'm saying that there is no evidence that it is inheretly harmful.
And vice versa. However what the existence of these non-messed up people does do is invalidate any claim about it always messing the child up. Such statements that try to encompass all children tend to be falsifiable and thus easy to defeat.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
What's your street address? Just want to make sure your country knows about you
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Yes, for my dangerous thoughts and arguments. 1984 was not to be used as an instruction book.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
They're dangerous if they lead to harming a child. Do you think george orwell would throw you a little girl and say "go for it!" ?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Why do you think they would lead to that? Making these things less taboo would be of significant help to children. There are many cases where the child was ok and liked the experience and still thinks it was positive but has been brainwashed to think that it's wrong for them to think that. These cases are really sad to see when they could be completely preventable by society. People should care more about their children than they care about not making themselves uncomfortable with subjects they think are taboo.
I am not defending anything sexual that's done against the child's will.
I think he would listen to my arguments and probably try to refute them. He most definitely would not try to silence me.
n/a moudougou 2017-01-25
How many cases like these ones did you see?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
I've interacted with at least dozen people for who this holds true.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
...ewwwww
n/a Zachums 2017-01-25
You're not going to convince you aren't creepy. Might as well just save yourself some time.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
I'm not silencing, I'd rather you be watched so your delusions don't lead to action.
n/a Crackertron 2017-01-25
Do you have children of your own?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
No, but hopefully one day I will.
n/a Crackertron 2017-01-25
You don't think you'll have a problem with an adult trying to fuck your kid?
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Not if my child undrestands enough about and actually wants it.
n/a Azalas_Valentine 2017-01-25
Yep.
This just confirmed this is Lolidaisuki people.
Also you say this but also say you are glad Peter Scully got caught. You are a pedophile hypocrite lol
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
Torture and rape aren't quite the same as a loving relationship. If you think they are the same then you have had some fucked up relationships.
n/a Azalas_Valentine 2017-01-25
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You seriously think an adult fucking a kid is loving relationship?
n/a Justincouldbemyname 2017-01-25
What about the adult will you screen them?
n/a LipstickPaper 2017-01-25
Please don't it is clear you will let people abuse your children.
n/a Justincouldbemyname 2017-01-25
Post them
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
I know the onus is on me to provide sources, and I have read them before, but I do not feel like searching that on Google . Bad search history
n/a Justincouldbemyname 2017-01-25
Then your claims are unfounded.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
Feel free to research on your own. I feel like I'm already on a list
n/a Justincouldbemyname 2017-01-25
Nope you made claims and failed to prove them.
n/a Mircabre 2017-01-25
I made claims but I really really don't want my isp seeing "does pedophilia harm children" or anything related
n/a Azalas_Valentine 2017-01-25
Lolidai. You can't hide.
n/a LipstickPaper 2017-01-25
It sounds like those people are harming those girls for selfish reasons. The fact you agree with that is sick.
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
Well umm... Thanks for agreeing with me I guess. The only part I'd disagree is here:
You're right that trans people have higher rates of mental illness (namely gender dysphoria, depression, and anxiety). But mental illness does not necessarily inhibit development.
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
I agree. I didn't mean to imply that all mental illnesses cause that but only some in some cases. I should have been more clear about that. I usually try refrain from making such absolute statements.
n/a Kafke 2017-01-25
I'm not aware of any studies showing that trans people are more likely to have developmental disabilities. Most commonly I just see the three I listed. I personally have been diagnosed with GID and anxiety. I likely have depression as well, but who knows.
n/a Gothmog26 2017-01-25
KYS, preferably painfully and on a webcam.
n/a LittleGirlButts 2017-01-25
What a great argument. 10/10 would read again.
n/a mollested_skittles 2017-01-25
You are on the news :o
n/a marsjazztrio 2017-01-25
Some of the finest men I know have big, spacious uteruses and can carry virtually any animal to term, no matter size or ferocity.