Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

zorblax wrote

"caters to child rapists" is a stretch, considering that the whole "pedo thing" was that they were all(eventually) banned for talking about it on the website.

2

zod wrote (edited )

So why did your discussions with admitted child rapists on that chan site lead to you feeling the need to defend pedophiles here?

1

zorblax wrote

because I think it's a thing that people don't think about often enough.

2

zod wrote

I'm so confused.

1

zorblax wrote

I'm just trying to challenge peoples' viewpoints. My own views are usually pretty vague.

5

ziq wrote

Normalizing child rape fetishes isn't challenging, it's repulsive.

1

zorblax wrote

I don't think it's normal. I think it's a severe aberration.

3

ziq wrote

Then why are you saying we should include them more in our circles and why are you spreading the myth that they hold no responsibility for their depraved and dangerous fetish because "they can't help it"?

1

zorblax wrote

Then why are you saying we should include them more in our circles

Go and re-read my comment. These people exist, they will always exist in some form or another, and I think it's wrong to hate them for being the way they are rather than for any actions they have done.

the myth

are you sure it's a myth?

3

ziq wrote

Yes I'm sure pedos are responsible for partaking in their fetish.

I wish people wouldn't spend all that energy normalizing and defending pedos on the internet and then claim they're only 'challenging' us. It would be a lot easier to communicate if you dropped the facade of doublespeak and misdirection and engaged honestly.

0

zorblax wrote

Yes I'm sure pedos are responsible for partaking in their fetish.

partaking is different from having. That's what I'm talking about. Obviously they're responsible for raping kids.

It would be a lot easier to communicate if you dropped the facade of doublespeak and misdirection and engaged honestly.

I literally do not know how to please you.

3

ziq wrote

Engaging in fantasies and viewing pornography is also partaking.

0

zorblax wrote

I agree that viewing physical child pornography is on the same level as rape. But I don't think having fantasies is wronging anybody.

3

ziq wrote

All pornography, including lolicon. Allowing yourself to entertain harmful fantasies of raping children furthers the sexualization of children in society and the abuse of children both physically and mentally. Children are not sex objects. They are not masturbation fodder. Sexualizing them IS NOT harmless.

-1

zorblax wrote

See, this is what I don't get. What is harmful about it? Sure it's disgusting, it's taboo, it obviously is not normal and shouldn't be treated as such. But what is harmful about it? Who does it harm?

4

mofongo wrote

It's not something that would, it's something that will.

I have three opinions regarding pedophilia/acs. The first being that is necessary to protect children from harm and those that would harm them. It's impossible to know who is just waiting for the opportunity to satisfy their desires and its very idealistic to expect for everyone to have full control of their urges. In many cases of child abuse that I have read and heard, the opportunity to be alone with a child was all that was needed, be it a child under their care, younger family members, their own children. When that's not possible For a few dollars, you can go to any third world country and pay cheaply for a child prostitute. Additionally, normalizing pedophilia because is not abuse opens the door to circumstances like "it's ok to leave children with this person, they're a pedophile not an abuser" which will put children at risk as explained above.

The second part is that desire to satisfy these urges lead to the creation of child pornography, drawn or otherwise. In Japan there has been an increase in child rape, and while a casual relationship is hard to prove there's no doubt that their societies casual acceptance of sexualization of children plays a role.

The third part is that pedophile should receive psychological assistance in order to help them better resist their urges and to not put themselves in situations where they could succumb to them. However this online shit show of defending pedos is unproductive to this third part because it normalizes their feelings (and back to beginning).

3

ziq wrote (edited )

It harms children. I feel like you're not reading beyond the first sentence of my replies.

0

zorblax wrote (edited )

how does it harm children? I've read everything you've written multiple times.

4

leftous wrote

Would you call nazis sitting around promoting and fantasizing about killing Jews, or the if the KKK were fantasizing about killing blacks, making cartoons about it, "harmless"?

You have to realize that sexualizing children is violence. And not just against any group - but literally the most vulnerable, innocent, and defenseless group. It is not harmless.

-1

zorblax wrote

I'd call that violence, sure.

I'd call participating in a subculture that sexualizes children violence, sure.

But I wouldn't call having a fetish about child rape to be violence, and I'd call it pedophilia.

3

leftous wrote

So you agree that lolicon and the associated subculture is violent and harmful.

But you don't consider a fetish to commit violence and cause harm (also known as "pedophilia") to be harmful?

-1

zorblax wrote

yeah, that's a good way of putting it.

More importantly I don't think it's right to hate someone just for being fucked in the head. They have to do something, like participate in pedophile subculture or embrace their identity as a pedophile or at the worst actually act on their fetish, to be worthy of hate, in my view.

3

leftous wrote

So if someone said they had a sexual fetish of chopping your head off, decapitating skulls turn them on. You'd say "Hey, at least you haven't chopped my head off yet!" and tell them it's all good?

The reality is it is harmful when someone is driven to violence, no matter how you dress it up. Whether or not you hate someone for being harmful, or try to help them to challenge and destroy these harmful impulses, is an entirely different question.

1

zorblax wrote (edited )

So if someone said they had a sexual fetish of chopping your head off, decapitating skulls turn them on. You'd say "Hey, at least you haven't chopped my head off yet!" and tell them it's all good?

well, yeah, but I get what you mean.

1

Dumai wrote (edited )

These people exist, they will always exist in some form or another,

did you miss what i said about how nothing in pedophilia (the medical sexual category or the modern western construct of childhood it depends on) is a universal

i ask because you never responded to it and now you seem to be acting like you didn't read it

0

zorblax wrote (edited )

because I don't think it's worth responding to. If it's not pedophilia it's some other disgusting thing. It's absolutely absurd to think that you can tweak everything just right so that everyone is mentally sound and nobody is internally vile.

3

[deleted] wrote

1

zorblax wrote (edited )

I dunno. Keep going until everyone gets bored? I think it's an interesting conversation.

3

[deleted] wrote

0

zorblax wrote

Of course! I'm learning from this conversation as I go. With a subject like this, in a format like this, the hard part is getting points across clearly, which I think has been the point of this entire comment thread.

3

[deleted] wrote

0

zorblax wrote

maybe. But I think that people like this person, who it's not hard to believe exist, should also not be treated unfairly.

2

Dumai wrote

My own views are usually pretty vague.

this is the first thing you've said in the entire thread that makes any sense to me