[BenignDesign]

My point is exactly what modi stated.

The argument of "that's what's been done for thousands of years" is ridiculous.

For thousands of years, we lived in our own filth, we tossed our bodily waste into the streets. Then we invented indoor plumbing and things improved.

For thousands of years, people died of horrible, debilitating diseases. Then we invented vaccines and things improved.

For thousands of years, people had to hunt and kill their own food. Then we invented farming and things improved.

But sex! Oh, no, we mustn't mess with sex! If a man only feels like a man by violating a toddler, then by all means! Let him grab her by the hair and have his manly way with her! Because that's how it was done for thousands of years!

[depricated]

TheMightyUch, on 21 October 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

In my opinion

...

The reason why pedos aren't going away is because society doesn't see pedophilia as a mental illness. A schizo can come out an say "I am schizofrenic" with no fear for they would likely be taken with care and sent to help. If a pedo where to come out and say "I enjoy the thought of molesting children" it would best be done behind bullet proof glass because there is a lot of angry people out there who would jump at the first chance to beat up on somebody because most people wouldn't mind or would jump in.

I believe people are born as blank canvases and what they grow up to be reflects the childhood they experienced.

Depricated said:

You can't label everything a mental illness simply because it deviates from the way you think. So you don't get your rocks off to little kids, but Jim over there does. I'm probably into shit you're not - knives and hot wax, for instance, doesn't do it for most people. Am I mentally ill because it does for me?

Sexuality is a weird creature, and yea a large part of it is mental, but to say someone is mentally ill for enjoying something you don't is perhaps one of the greatest logical short-circuits I've ever heard of.

BenignDesign, on 21 October 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

There's a big difference between consenting adults using knives and hot wax to get their rocks off (some of us would prefer leather wrist straps to knives) and an adult molesting a child to get their rocks off.

depricated, on 21 October 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

Yes obviously there's a difference. Mainly that one is legal with consent and one still isn't.

Your mom is mentally ill.

Also: consider the Age of Majority is different in different areas, and wasn't 18 until absurdly recently.

depricated, on 21 October 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:

My point on the age of majority is only that 13-15 has very commonly been the age of majority throughout history. It's only very recently that this has been increased to 18, and that's still only held to by only most "civilized" countries. Shit, Alexander the Great won his first battle at 18. Some of us are still in high school at 18. In ancient Japan, boys would go through their genpuku as early as the age of 11, marking them as adults. It's a very modern, and relatively arbitrary, perspective which biology has no concern for. Nature impacts development as well, no matter how much people want to argue for the importance of nurtured behavior.

emphasis added, this ties in to earlier Nature vs Nurture argument which you took up in favor of Nature, modi - I've done no different.

The rest - is that what I think (that 20 year olds are just as childish as 11 year olds) is irrelevant because biology does not conform to my ethics. Therefore, take it all back to the top, it's not a mental illness, people are just fucktards.

the relevant point of discussing what we think as people, as a society, and what's legal and not, is that it doesn't fucking matter because Nature will still defeat Nurture in a percentage of cases. That doesn't make them mentally ill. So don't give them an easy excuse.

I just noticed, I say fuck a lot, huh.

[modi123_1]

BenignDesign, on 21 October 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

.. snip ..
But sex!
.. snip ..

I want to emphasis that b9 said butt sex.

[depricated]

depricated, on 21 October 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

Well, I think a 30 year old and a 20 year old is just as creepy as a 30 year old and an 11 year old, but only one is considered a child. The other day I referred to when I was a kid and realized I was old enough to drink in the story I was telling.

What I perceive as a child is different from what you perceive is a child, and is different from what society in general holds to.

Since you didn't understand the point of this: 20 isn't an adult either, but that doesn't make me "right" - if we went by my arbitrary cutoff, people who slept with anyone under 25 would be pedophiles and therefore mentally ill. Because...

Quote

That said, biology only looks to see who's ready to mate. So while I may find a 30 year old and an 11 year old creepy, I don't think it qualifies as a disability. I'm not talking about what is acceptable or not, I'm talking about not labeling every act of human fuckery as a mental illness.

Make sense yet?

modi123_1, on 21 October 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Wait.. I thought we were talking about age of consent and not age of majority.

depricated, on 21 October 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

I brought up age of majority, not age of consent. Someone else brought up age of consent. I'm simply pointing out the point at which society thinks you're an adult is kind of arbitrary.

because I could be 18, with a 17 year old girlfriend, which means we could be boning by consent, but if I had pictures of her she's still a minor and me an adult. So what matters in the context of pornography is not consent but majority.

I mean, consent matters TOO, obviously, but...you know what I mean

emphasis added, post combined

modi123_1, on 21 October 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

As for 'boning vs pictures' - different laws champ... but then again it seems you are mixing and matching age of consent vs majority.

I was discussing age of majority to illustrate that what people think has no baring on biology.

Someone else brought up age of consent. You brought it up there, and I pointed out that I was discussing age of majority. But I took a moment to note why it's important to understand that there is a difference between age of majority and age of consent in the context of sex and pornography.

But I mean, you literally accused me of mixing and matching the laws as a direct response to the post where I point out that there's an important difference in them...wtf

[Damage]

at this point i'm kinda torn(read concerned that this is gonna devolve into a flamewar real soon)

This is a really interesting(amusing) debate going on but it's gone waay off track of my original point about the dude getting jail time for looking at a specific combination of ink of paper. I know it's easy to get side-tracked onto the closely related topics of pedophilia and age of consent etc
but for me the question here is the legality of what essentially becomes the theft of an individuals life because he was jacking off to a fantasy world

[modi123_1]

Clearly it is illegal... he is getting community service - again - for this law.

[depricated]

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!

[farrell2k]

Hmm. This begs the question: What is instead of drawing pictures of young girls exposing themselves in school uniforms and engaging in sex acts, this individual drew a picture of someone drawing a picture of young girls exposing themselves in school uniforms and engaging in sex acts? Just think about it...

[BenignDesign]

Pervception...

[modi123_1]

... and that tinkling sound is how the internets tells you a new pr0n film gets its wings.



rule 34