Topic: Kook: should there be an international age of consent?
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #106,896
If so, what should it be?
Kook !BzYvNEWQS2 joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later[^] [v] #1,200,951
I'm not sure but there should be different ages of consent for men and women. Men should have to wait longer because more of them are abusive.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 6 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,980
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 21 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,982
Not kook but anyone whomsoever supports an age of consent under 18 is a pedophile. (2-3 year Romeo & Juliet exceptions for people near that age are fine).
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 46 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,984
Why are you interested in underage children OPedo?
Erik !AltRitexT6 joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,988
I don't often agree with Fake anon but adults who have a fixation on age of consent need sorting out.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,200,996
@1,200,982 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Your own country sets it lower than that most of the time, is America a pedo?
Your own country sets it lower than that most of the time, is America a pedo?
Monkey Pox joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 29 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,014
It should be 30
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,019
@1,200,982 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Why is 18 the magical, objective, universal age? Why not 17 or 19 or 20?
Why is 18 the magical, objective, universal age? Why not 17 or 19 or 20?
(Edited 18 seconds later.)
Monkey Pox replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,024
@previous (I)
It doesn’t make sense they just picked a random age. It should be like 25 when peoples brains are fully formed
It doesn’t make sense they just picked a random age. It should be like 25 when peoples brains are fully formed
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,028
@previous (Monkey Pox)
Maybe. Or, just have standards for consent and forget any age. Or, make it only win marriage, 30 and over. Or many other options.
Maybe. Or, just have standards for consent and forget any age. Or, make it only win marriage, 30 and over. Or many other options.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,029
@1,200,996 (G)
No but any American whom supports an age lower than 18 is. Thanks.
@1,201,019 (I)
Because it's the year that people are legally considered adults and I think having sex with children is bad. You are free to disagree.
No but any American whom supports an age lower than 18 is. Thanks.
@1,201,019 (I)
Because it's the year that people are legally considered adults and I think having sex with children is bad. You are free to disagree.
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,030
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Legally is sort of irrelevant. You have to be 21 to drink, 25 to rent a car, etc. They are all arbitrary ages. Why is 18 so special and magical?
Legally is sort of irrelevant. You have to be 21 to drink, 25 to rent a car, etc. They are all arbitrary ages. Why is 18 so special and magical?
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 18 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,035
@1,201,029 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> No but any American whom supports an age lower than 18 is. Thanks.
These laws were made by elected officials. The majority of Americans must support this or they would not have elected these politicians, and they would protest such laws.
Why is the answer “no” when clearly the majority of your nation supports what you call pedophilia?
Yes most are pedos, but no the nation as a whole is not? That is a glaring contradiction Mark!
> No but any American whom supports an age lower than 18 is. Thanks.
These laws were made by elected officials. The majority of Americans must support this or they would not have elected these politicians, and they would protest such laws.
Why is the answer “no” when clearly the majority of your nation supports what you call pedophilia?
Yes most are pedos, but no the nation as a whole is not? That is a glaring contradiction Mark!
Anonymous G double-posted this 3 years ago, 30 seconds later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,036
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,037
@1,201,030 (I)
Any line you draw is going to be arbitrary. If it's 16 why not 15 or 17 or 14.3 or 87? If we are going to say that before 18, people need parental consent to do anything significant, then it makes sense to set the age limit for fucking there too.
Any line you draw is going to be arbitrary. If it's 16 why not 15 or 17 or 14.3 or 87? If we are going to say that before 18, people need parental consent to do anything significant, then it makes sense to set the age limit for fucking there too.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,039
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> If we are going to say that before 18, people need parental consent to do anything significant
You can get hormone replacement therapy at 15 in Oregon, even if your parents both refuse.
> If we are going to say that before 18, people need parental consent to do anything significant
You can get hormone replacement therapy at 15 in Oregon, even if your parents both refuse.
(Edited 21 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,040
@1,201,035 (G)
You asked if "America is a pedo" which makes no sense as a question since a country isn't a person. That's why I said any American whom supports an age below 18 is a pedophile. Thank you.
You asked if "America is a pedo" which makes no sense as a question since a country isn't a person. That's why I said any American whom supports an age below 18 is a pedophile. Thank you.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,041
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Ok, so- America isn’t a pedo, but most Americans support the legality of pedophilia?
Ok, so- America isn’t a pedo, but most Americans support the legality of pedophilia?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,042
@1,201,039 (G)
OK. And they have the age of consent at 18 which just proves my point.
@previous (G)
Correct. In the same way that America isn't tall or brown eyed or a featherless biped, America is not a pedophile. Most Americans live in states with pedophilic laws and do not mind.
OK. And they have the age of consent at 18 which just proves my point.
@previous (G)
Correct. In the same way that America isn't tall or brown eyed or a featherless biped, America is not a pedophile. Most Americans live in states with pedophilic laws and do not mind.
(Edited 17 seconds later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,043
Should these two stay away from the basket of children, given their liberal permissive views on sex?Anonymous G double-posted this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,046
@1,201,042 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> OK. And they have the age of consent at 18 which just proves my point.
Your point was children need parental permission until 18, and in reality the law lets the kids ignore their parents to start a regimen of strong chemicals that change their body and sexuality.
> OK. And they have the age of consent at 18 which just proves my point.
Your point was children need parental permission until 18, and in reality the law lets the kids ignore their parents to start a regimen of strong chemicals that change their body and sexuality.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,049
@1,201,043 (G)
What does this even mean? In case it is unclear, I think helping children is good, and having sex with children is bad. I don't care if this is opinion is controversial, I am sticking by it.
@previous (G)
Ok so replace "anything significant" with "most significant things". It doesn't change anything. Even in states where you can get hormones underage (I can't find details on what the process is or how many children actually do it) they still think you shouldn't fuck until you're 18. Which is my point.
What does this even mean? In case it is unclear, I think helping children is good, and having sex with children is bad. I don't care if this is opinion is controversial, I am sticking by it.
@previous (G)
Ok so replace "anything significant" with "most significant things". It doesn't change anything. Even in states where you can get hormones underage (I can't find details on what the process is or how many children actually do it) they still think you shouldn't fuck until you're 18. Which is my point.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,051
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> Even in states where you can get hormones underage […] they still think you shouldn't fuck until you're 18. Which is my point.
Just in Oregon. Most American states have legal pedophilia.
> Even in states where you can get hormones underage […] they still think you shouldn't fuck until you're 18. Which is my point.
Just in Oregon. Most American states have legal pedophilia.
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,053
@1,201,049 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
We can agree that hurting children is bad. The issue is the definition of "children". If all it means is "what the law says," then you would have to agree with very low age-of-consent laws in some countries. You seem to be arguing that 18 is objective and final (and I might have misunderstood your argument, so forgive me if I have done). What is so special about 18?
We can agree that hurting children is bad. The issue is the definition of "children". If all it means is "what the law says," then you would have to agree with very low age-of-consent laws in some countries. You seem to be arguing that 18 is objective and final (and I might have misunderstood your argument, so forgive me if I have done). What is so special about 18?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 10 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,055
@1,201,051 (G)
I agree. And that is bad and I disapprove of it.
@previous (I)
> The issue is the definition of "children". If all it means is "what the law says," then you would have to agree with very low age-of-consent laws in some countries.
No, the age of majority is 18 or higher in 90% of countries. An age of consent lower than the age of majority just means it's legal to have sex with minors in those countries. Which, again, since it is apparently unclear where I stand on this issue, is bad.
I agree. And that is bad and I disapprove of it.
@previous (I)
> The issue is the definition of "children". If all it means is "what the law says," then you would have to agree with very low age-of-consent laws in some countries.
No, the age of majority is 18 or higher in 90% of countries. An age of consent lower than the age of majority just means it's legal to have sex with minors in those countries. Which, again, since it is apparently unclear where I stand on this issue, is bad.
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,056
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
You seem to be missing my point. I am asking if you think 18 is objectively adult, objectively in nature and reality and biology. If so, what are your metrics?
You seem to be missing my point. I am asking if you think 18 is objectively adult, objectively in nature and reality and biology. If so, what are your metrics?
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,057
@previous (I)
His metrics are
1. He made it up
2. The protocols of the youngins of zion that calls for whites to stop having sex while it’s possible to bear healthy children
His metrics are
1. He made it up
2. The protocols of the youngins of zion that calls for whites to stop having sex while it’s possible to bear healthy children
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,058
@1,201,056 (I)
I already said no every line you could draw is arbitrary, but it does need to be drawn somewhere, and since we already have a big existing worldwide demarcation line at 18 which we use for gambling and voting and military drafts and signing contracts etc. that it makes sense to have that line also be the age of consent.
I already said no every line you could draw is arbitrary, but it does need to be drawn somewhere, and since we already have a big existing worldwide demarcation line at 18 which we use for gambling and voting and military drafts and signing contracts etc. that it makes sense to have that line also be the age of consent.
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,059
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Ok, that makes sense. Now, if 99% of countries said that 15 were an adult, or 35, you would then agree with them and feel strongly about it?
Ok, that makes sense. Now, if 99% of countries said that 15 were an adult, or 35, you would then agree with them and feel strongly about it?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,060
@1,201,057 (G)
Women can get pregnant at age 18, age 19, age 20, age 21, age 22, age 23, age 24, age 25, and so on. I can keep listing ages if you'd like but I think you can understand where I'm going with this.
Women can get pregnant at age 18, age 19, age 20, age 21, age 22, age 23, age 24, age 25, and so on. I can keep listing ages if you'd like but I think you can understand where I'm going with this.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU double-posted this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,061
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 20 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,062
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 21 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,063
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 43 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,064
@previous (I)
He thinks his own god got it wrong, you’re trying to uncover a line of reasoning that isn’t there.
He thinks his own god got it wrong, you’re trying to uncover a line of reasoning that isn’t there.
(Edited 7 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,065
@1,201,062 (G)
@previous (G)
I'm literally an atheist you dingus.
@1,201,063 (I)
No. Why are you arguing that it should be legal for adults to sleep with 16 year olds? I don't get it. 18 is so young and you want to go lower?
@previous (G)
I'm literally an atheist you dingus.
@1,201,063 (I)
No. Why are you arguing that it should be legal for adults to sleep with 16 year olds? I don't get it. 18 is so young and you want to go lower?
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,067
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Ask your copatriots. Or visit a synogogue and pick their mind about what maturity and sexuality mean to them.
Your view, right is wrong, is the minority view. Generally speaking, people are curious about deviations from the norm. Everyone should already understand the justification for the majority opinion: Post-pubescent people should make their own decisions about sex.
Ask your copatriots. Or visit a synogogue and pick their mind about what maturity and sexuality mean to them.
Your view, right is wrong, is the minority view. Generally speaking, people are curious about deviations from the norm. Everyone should already understand the justification for the majority opinion: Post-pubescent people should make their own decisions about sex.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,068
@previous (G)
You can just say "I think it is acceptable for greasy 40 year olds to pick up 16 year olds from math class and fuck them". I understand I am in the minority here but I am also correct. I don't think that someone being physically capable of repropducing means you should be allowed to fuck them. There are 12 year old girls who have finished puberty. I think you should be executed if you sleep with one, but you may disagree.
You can just say "I think it is acceptable for greasy 40 year olds to pick up 16 year olds from math class and fuck them". I understand I am in the minority here but I am also correct. I don't think that someone being physically capable of repropducing means you should be allowed to fuck them. There are 12 year old girls who have finished puberty. I think you should be executed if you sleep with one, but you may disagree.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,069
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> You can just say "I think it is acceptable for greasy 40 year olds to pick up 16 year olds from math class and fuck them“.
It is morally wrong to encourage truancy, education is a foundation of civilization.
If a 40 year old, who doesn’t wash, dates a 16 year old (outside of school hours) there must be something that made it worth it to the teen.
It’s legal, and interfering might just piss off the teen and leave them with worse options for partners. Their backup must be a greasier teen in worse physical shape, or else why pick the older man?
> I don't think that someone being physically capable of repropducing means you should be allowed to fuck them
You want it to be illegal to follow jewish customs, because she’s on the market after the bat mitzva traditionally.
That’s antisemitic, even if you have ancestors that were jewish.
I don’t get to ban fried chicken and collard greens because my great-great-great grandmother was a black slave.
> I think you should be executed if you sleep with one, but you may disagree.
Thanks Kanye, pogroms sound moral and sane. 🙄
Their god says one thing, but you feel 18 is the magic number and that trumps religion.
> You can just say "I think it is acceptable for greasy 40 year olds to pick up 16 year olds from math class and fuck them“.
It is morally wrong to encourage truancy, education is a foundation of civilization.
If a 40 year old, who doesn’t wash, dates a 16 year old (outside of school hours) there must be something that made it worth it to the teen.
It’s legal, and interfering might just piss off the teen and leave them with worse options for partners. Their backup must be a greasier teen in worse physical shape, or else why pick the older man?
> I don't think that someone being physically capable of repropducing means you should be allowed to fuck them
You want it to be illegal to follow jewish customs, because she’s on the market after the bat mitzva traditionally.
That’s antisemitic, even if you have ancestors that were jewish.
I don’t get to ban fried chicken and collard greens because my great-great-great grandmother was a black slave.
> I think you should be executed if you sleep with one, but you may disagree.
Thanks Kanye, pogroms sound moral and sane. 🙄
Their god says one thing, but you feel 18 is the magic number and that trumps religion.
(Edited 39 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,070
@1,201,065 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
I am not talking about my own opinion. I am asking you to JUSTIFY WITH METRICS your idea that 18 is ideal.
I am not talking about my own opinion. I am asking you to JUSTIFY WITH METRICS your idea that 18 is ideal.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,071
@previous (I)
He thinks people who wait until the Jewish standard for this but don’t wait until his standard should be executed.
I’m still trying to reach him too, but at a point you have to admit: we are platforming a person who thinks following jewish customs should result in an execution.
He thinks people who wait until the Jewish standard for this but don’t wait until his standard should be executed.
I’m still trying to reach him too, but at a point you have to admit: we are platforming a person who thinks following jewish customs should result in an execution.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,072
@1,201,069 (G)
One day you will say something clever or funny. Keep working at it champ.
@1,201,070 (I)
What does that even mean?
One day you will say something clever or funny. Keep working at it champ.
@1,201,070 (I)
What does that even mean?
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 17 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,074
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Did you choose 18 because it is the law and that is all that matters, or because you think 18 is the objective, natural age at which one becomes an adult capable of sexual consent?
Did you choose 18 because it is the law and that is all that matters, or because you think 18 is the objective, natural age at which one becomes an adult capable of sexual consent?
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 3 years ago, 53 seconds later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,075
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,076
@1,201,074 (I)
It could be a lot of numbers 18 is as good as any, he just wants an excuse for his desire to “execute” a group of people that have been targeted for hundreds of years.
It could be a lot of numbers 18 is as good as any, he just wants an excuse for his desire to “execute” a group of people that have been targeted for hundreds of years.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,078
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 9 seconds later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,079
@1,201,075 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
And I am asking you WHY it makes the most sense? What are your metrics?
And I am asking you WHY it makes the most sense? What are your metrics?
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 26 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,086
@1,201,078 (J)
> Pedophilia is considered a mental disorder
Wrong.
Pedophilic Disorder is a DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition), diagnosis assigned to adults ( defined as age 16 and up) who have sexual desire for prepubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 2013a)
Under FakeAnon’s definition, attraction to postpubescent children under the age of 18 is pedophilia.
The DSM does not classify attraction to postpubescent children as a disorder.
> Pedophilia is considered a mental disorder
Wrong.
Pedophilic Disorder is a DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition), diagnosis assigned to adults ( defined as age 16 and up) who have sexual desire for prepubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 2013a)
Under FakeAnon’s definition, attraction to postpubescent children under the age of 18 is pedophilia.
The DSM does not classify attraction to postpubescent children as a disorder.
(Edited 57 seconds later.)
Emo Green !StaYqkzUPc joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,088
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,090
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,098
@previous (I)
There is no federal law that states you must be 21. In San Juan you can drink at 18, and this is part of the US subject to federal laws.
Renting a car at 25 has nothing to do with the law, it’s company policies.
There is no federal law that states you must be 21. In San Juan you can drink at 18, and this is part of the US subject to federal laws.
Renting a car at 25 has nothing to do with the law, it’s company policies.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 6 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,139
@1,201,068 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> greasy 40 year olds
Would it be better if they were young, attractive and in their early twenties?
> greasy 40 year olds
Would it be better if they were young, attractive and in their early twenties?
dw !p9hU6ckyqw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,142
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,150
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,155
if this is about the convenience of tying it to an easily understood legal privilege (age of majority) why not just make your drivers license also your license to fuck? this would protect a lot of children and additionally prevent a TON of elder abuse
cccuuunnttt !.cATkimmOo joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,160
Anonymous N replied with this 3 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,162
@previous (cccuuunnttt !.cATkimmOo)
it's the British admin here who keeps restoring the CP from backup anytime he notices it's been deleted
it's the British admin here who keeps restoring the CP from backup anytime he notices it's been deleted
shelly joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 27 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,164
@1,201,086 (G)
> > Pedophilia is considered a mental disorder
>
> Wrong.
>
> Pedophilic Disorder is a DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition), diagnosis assigned to adults ( defined as age 16 and up) who have sexual desire for prepubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 2013a)
>
> Under FakeAnon’s definition, attraction to postpubescent children under the age of 18 is pedophilia.
>
> The DSM does not classify attraction to postpubescent children as a disorder.
why are we arguing with a pedo instead of banning it
> > Pedophilia is considered a mental disorder
>
> Wrong.
>
> Pedophilic Disorder is a DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition), diagnosis assigned to adults ( defined as age 16 and up) who have sexual desire for prepubescent children (American Psychiatric Association, 2013a)
>
> Under FakeAnon’s definition, attraction to postpubescent children under the age of 18 is pedophilia.
>
> The DSM does not classify attraction to postpubescent children as a disorder.
why are we arguing with a pedo instead of banning it
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,170
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,201,208
@1,201,164 (shelly)
The DSM, most legal systems, and the Torah all say that this isn't pedophilia.
Why would we ban a non-pedo? Are you against nonpedoism?
The DSM, most legal systems, and the Torah all say that this isn't pedophilia.
Why would we ban a non-pedo? Are you against nonpedoism?