Sexual intimacy with and among children = morally wrong.
The above is entirely a social construct.
PTSD is dependent upon forced societal norms.
Prove me wrong, robots.
Gave this thread a go on /sci/, but they're mostly just a bunch of SJW faggots.
>>29649921
Reported for illegal content, get the fuck out pedo faggot.
>>29649921
So what if it's a social contract? You live in society. Don't like it go out to the Amazon and live with a bunch of primitive savages.
You are forcing a child who hasn't developed her sexuality yet because your sick fetishes.It's both biologically and morally wrong.
And no, we are not prepared to get into sexual intercourse until we reach a certain age. That's the way humans (and most mammals) were made.And yes, I know this is bait. But fuck it.
>>29649921
Assuming bait, but I'm bored.
>they don't agree with me
>"hurr, must be muh SJW"
Also, sexual interaction with children is entirely different than sexual interaction among children.
A child (meaning anyone who isn't at least a year or two into puberty) literally cannot comprehend long-term consequences for most of life's interactions. Give a child the choice between one candy now and three candies later, 99.9% will go for instant gratification, unless they've specifically been instructed not to beforehand. Therefore interacting with a child sexually as an adult is not morally, but almost objectively wrong. Same goes for retards.
Fun fact: Notice how it's always the adult/abuser who says they liked it and never the children thenselves?
Sexual interaction among children on the other hand is oart of exploring the human body and growing up. Unless they're actually trying to cut each other up when playing doctor, there''s nothing wrong with it (exceptions may apply for children who were abused sexually).
Ya it is a social construct but if this isn't bait and you can't understand why that construct developed in society it just shows how deluded pedophiles are.
>>29650013
>Sexual interaction among children on the other hand is oart of exploring the human body and growing up. Unless they're actually trying to cut each other up when playing doctor, there''s nothing wrong with it
That doesn't stop parents from panicking when they catch their 3 year old playing doctor. Remember how back in the early 1900s, they used to have special mittens to put on toddlers' hands to prevent them from masturbating.
The first time I had was 12 with a much older man 35. It was consensual. Yet when people found out he still got arrested. How is it morally wrong? If we both want the same thing.
Also true story.
>>29650013
>oart of exploring the human body and growing up
Why can't they just do that when they're older and better able to reason?
>>29650178
Because they're supposed to at least know the basics by then "by design" so to speak. Puberty is meant to build upon experiences made while playing doctor. That's how mammals grow up.
>>29650173
You're gay. I get it.
>>29650309
>Because they're supposed to at least know the basics by then "by design" so to speak
I don't see at all how that's "by design".
>Puberty is meant to build upon experiences made while playing doctor.
What? Isn't this due to some preconceived notion of what experiences that puberty should consist of?
>That's how mammals grow up.
Mammals also fight each other to the death in displays of dominance.
Just because there's a trend among mammals, doesn't mean we should blindly follow it.
>>29649921
>Sexual intimacy with and among children = morally wrong.
>The above is entirely a social construct.
You have no right to shape the sexuality of someone for them while they are an infant and can't fully understand what you're doing.
>PTSD is dependent upon forced societal norms.
It isn't. It's mostly dependent on violence/coercicion which happens in the large majority of the cases you're referring to.
>PTSD is dependent upon forced societal norms.
Jesus Christ you're retarded. I don't even know why you're putting these together. While a molested child may develop PTSD, PTSD is primarily the result of an event so traumatic your brain goes into full survival mode and cannot stop for a long time, being (literally) triggered by similar events that it perceives as an extreme danger.
Car accidents are the most common cause of such.
As blah blah morality blah blah social construct; almost everything is a social construct; calling something a social construct does not automatically make it invalid a priori.
>>29650364
>Mammals also fight each other to the death in displays of dominance.
>Just because there's a trend among mammals, doesn't mean we should blindly follow it.
We do this. It's just that humans have more subtle ways of it than clawing or biting each other. Anything from sporting events to the corporate world to politics is a form of overpowering your rival.
>>29650625
>It's just that humans have more subtle ways of it than clawing or biting each other.
Humans are more capable of complex thought, which enables them to collectively punish things like murdering each other in displays of dominance.
>>29650773
Just cite
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature
next time.
>>29649921
>there's nothing wrong or evil about sex, it's perfectly natural, fun and safe
>unless that person is below your country's age of consent
This is literally what women believe
I just absolutely love the way people argue. At what specific point do you believe trauma sets in from sex? People actually believe that if they touch a penis they will get PTSD. LITERALLY.
It is pure cognitive dissonance to believe sex is not something bad until it happens with a person who's underage
>>29650913
Every girl that I've met that was molested was a dysfunctional gutterslut.
Make of that what you will.
And I'm pretty sure that the reason why people are mad about pedophiles is because evolutionarily speaking, parents that didn't give a fuck had their daughters die from internal bleeding/infections because no antibiotics yet.
It's like people hating getting cheated on, because anti cuck mechanism.
>>29650955
>Every girl that I've met that was molested was a dysfunctional gutterslut
Because of societal shaming.
>parents that didn't give a fuck had their daughters die from internal bleeding/infections because no antibiotics yet
Newsflash: They didn't have modern medical care in 4000 BC. Today it's entirely possible for safe adult-child love.
Do you believe sex is bad? No. Billions of people have had sex without any issue whatsoever. You desire sex just like everyone else and it hurts nobody.
Do you believe forcing a child do something that is not bad is bad? No. You sit idly by while parents force their children to eat meals they don't want or play sports. You obviously have no issue with a lack of consent. You have no issue with parents "grooming" their children to like a variety of other things. You don't even consider religious or political indoctrination to be deserving of a prison sentence.
So why then do you assert that sex with children is bad, especially if a child actually wants to do it?
You have nothing but your feelings.
>>29650955
>sex = violent penetration
Stop posting
>>29649921
>Ponpharse
Good OP.
>>29651023
>implying children crave sex with some sweaty fat unemployed 35 year old neckbeard
>>29649921
this absolutely looks like it was made by the same guy that does all those porn illustrations on wikipedia
How can you have an intimate sexual experience with a 10 year old? It's impossible not in the least because they haven't the vaguest clue what they're doing.
>>29651118
Some 10 year olds can understand humour better than adults.
Most 10 year olds can generate genuine love better than women
>>29649995
>You are forcing a child
Who said anything about force?
Not that anon, but your arguments are easily refuted.
>>29650013
>A child (meaning anyone who isn't at least a year or two into puberty) literally cannot comprehend long-term consequences for most of life's interactions. Give a child the choice between one candy now and three candies later, 99.9% will go for instant gratification, unless they've specifically been instructed not to beforehand. Therefore interacting with a child sexually as an adult is not morally, but almost objectively wrong.
Redherring: The Post.
>>29650998
>Because of societal shaming.
>MUH MUH MUH NURTURE
She told nobody but us. And there is ample evidence that girls (at least) turn out better the later they get deflowered.
>Newsflash: They didn't have modern medical care in 4000 BC. Today it's entirely possible for safe adult-child love.
So? How does that change the fact that most fucntional adults (not to mention parents) feel like hell incarnate when thinking about adults fucking their kids? Our brains don't distinguish between "safe" child molestation and violent molestation.
Do you let your GF (KEK, who am I kidding) cheat on you because you will never raise her cuckoo kid? Do you fuck your sister because she is taking the pill?
>>29651023
>sex = violent penetration
>Stop posting
Think in evolutionary timescales, moron. Who left behind more descendants, the caveman who tolerated your stone age ancestor molesting his kids or the one who grabbed his club and chased him through the forest?
>>29651237
Actually, it's a nonsequitur, nvm.
>>29651297
1. Appeal to nature is a fallacy
2. For the absolute vast majority of humans existence, people have been having relationships with females 10+
Up until very recent modern history is was acceptable to marry a 12 year old. Mary of the bible was 12-14 years old. In the middle east it was even acceptable for wives 6+. When we look at close primates to humans we see very young members exhibiting sexual tendencies and older members engaging in sex with them.
Most females begin masturbating anywhere from 6-12. Psychologists universally agree that toddlers will commonly masturbate
>>29651401
>Appeal to nature is a fallacy
It's not appeal to nature you autistic faggot.
>For the absolute vast majority of humans existence, people have been having relationships with females 10+
......so?
>whines about MUH APPEAL TO NATURE
>appeals to nature
KEK
