[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 130 KB, 600x691, 1605832697640.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18141768 No.18141768[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Pedophilia? Is it immoral? I've never seen nor read (emphasis on the READ) any compelling arguments which justify that statement. Perhaps you can convince me.

>> No.18141774

>>18141768
Not literature

>> No.18141773 [DELETED] 

>>18141768
Saged Reported and Hidden

>> No.18141779

>>18141768
Read Plato my dude.

>> No.18141783

The common sense of the golden rule is violated.
Don’t sacrifice childhood innocence for your fetish.

>> No.18141791

>>18141773
Truly, if 4chan is no longer a forum where we can discuss these topics rationally, then we really do live in a world of terror.

>> No.18141806

>>18141768
it's /lit/ for sure

>> No.18141807

>>18141783
As a young boy, I actually would've liked it if some big boobied momma forced herself onto me. So basically, that's the golden rule in action.

>> No.18141815

>>18141768
Go back to your goblin cave, Vaush.

>> No.18141816

>>18141783
Wtf Butterfly a Nietzschean Egoist Heideggerian Kantian now?

>> No.18141824

>>18141816
She’s a Nietzschean Kant, alright.

>> No.18141851

>>18141807
If you were a big boobie momma, I’d say go ahead. But you’re not, you’re a man. Probably ugly, probably smelly.

>> No.18141875

>>18141851
Be that as it may, you entered this thread hoping to refute pedophilia, and instead you have implied that ugly, smelly people having sex is immoral. If the Golden Rule does not make pedophilia immoral, then what does?

>> No.18141879

>>18141768
Pedophilia is wrong.
Now initiatory love between a mature woman and a young but pubescent man, that is not pedophilia, not at all.

>> No.18141892

>>18141879
>Pedophilia is wrong
why?

>> No.18141909

fpbp

>> No.18141922

>>18141892
If inserting a dick in a 3 y/o's ass / vag is okay because a certain book that has certain influence in certain people says so then common sense has disappeared.

>> No.18141924

>>18141892
It turns people into trannies, a people group marked by high rates of suicidality, narcissism, and inappropriate sexual behavior (esp. w/r/t children). Net bad for society.

>> No.18141925

>>18141791
This is a literature board you pædophilic pseud.

>> No.18141929

>>18141924
>inb4 not all victims of childhood sexual abuse turn trans!
Even one tranny is too many.

>> No.18141930

>>18141768


1. «PEDOPHILIA»: FILIAL ATTRACTION, AND/OR AFFECTION, BY A PUBESCENT, OR POSTPUBESCENT, INDIVIDUAL, TOWARD PREPUBESCENT INDIVIDUALS (AGE ZERO YEARS TO TEN).

2. PEDOPHILIA: IMMORAL? NOT NECESSARILY; PEDOPHILIA IS MORAL IF IT IS SUPPORTED BY MORAL VALUES, OR BY MORES, BE THEM INDIVIDUAL, OR COLLECTIVE; PERSONAL, OR SOCIAL.

3. «PEDERASTY»: SEXUAL ACTIVITY BETWEEN A POSTPUBESCENT INDIVIDUAL, AND A PREPUBESCENT INDIVIDUAL (AGE ZERO YEARS TO TEN).

4. YOU MEAN: «PEDERASTY», NOT: «PEDOPHILIA», AND: «EVIL», NOT: «IMMORAL», IN WHICH CASE THE ANSWER IS: «YES»; PEDERASTY IS EVIL; PEDOPHILIA CAN BE EITHER: GOOD, OR: EVIL, DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF THE ATTRACTION —ID EST: ON WHETHER IT IS WHOLESOME, OR MORBID.

5. «PEDERASTY», AND «PEDOPHILIA», ARE NOT MUTUAL SYNONYMS, NEITHER ARE «EVIL», AND «IMMORAL», NOR «GOOD», AND «MORAL».

>> No.18141932

>>18141875
The Golden Rules does make pedohilia immoral, in practice. Only weird men want to have sex with children. No one wants a weird man to have sex with them when they’re kids. Big titty mommies are theoretically allowed, but they won’t in practice.

Basically, you wouldn’t want to have been assaulted by a pedophile(a real one, not a fantasy big titty one) as a kid, so don’t do it to other kids.

>> No.18141934

>>18141879
It's still wrong tho. Young people (<16 years of age) shouldn't be having sexual experiences with older people.

>> No.18141941

>>18141892
>why?
Take it from someone who'se been diddled with when he was 6, it ain't fun. And I was lucky, it barely happened, I was able to process it pretty well, but its still fucking weird recalling it 30 years later.

>> No.18141964

>>18141922
>appeal to common sense

>>18141941
>anecdote

>>18141932
You've never heard of a student-teacher liaison? It is such a common-place incident that even South Park did an episode on it.

>> No.18141971

>>18141964
Yes, I think you're shill.

>> No.18141974

>>18141971
>ad-hominem

>> No.18141979

>>18141974
>ad retardum

>> No.18141982

>>18141964
>You've never heard of a student-teacher liaison?
Aren’t the kids always like 15-17 in those? That’s not pedophilia.

>> No.18141996

>>18141930
Immense pity and respect for no contact peds who adhere to a strong moral code. I’m sure it’s difficult to be that way in this century.

>> No.18141999

>>18141924
>>18141929
Lol, time to ban cars then. One accident is too many.

>> No.18142004

>>18141941
Genuine response. I’ve known so many people who’ve had to go through that in adulthood. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

>> No.18142015

>>18141999
Nope, cars do plenty to improve society.

That said, in another 100 years people like you won’t be able to get a license because better safer transportation will be the norm.

So nice job coming up with a retarded analogy, anon.

>> No.18142019

>>18141996


IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE POST TO WHICH YOU REPLIED YOU DID NOT COMPREHENDED IT.

>> No.18142022

>>18141768
In buddhism sexual misconduct, one of the Five precepts, includes rape, cheating, and what you might call pedophilia, but it is very specific about the phrasing.

Rather than assign an arbitrary age that is suddenly "appropriate for sex", Buddhism simply says not to have sex with someone who is "still under the protection of their family."

The specific details of this are left by the Buddha for us to interpret.

>> No.18142024

>>18142019
>... COMPREHEND IT.

>> No.18142033

>>18142004
>I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.
In a way it's pretty fucking sad, but let's not overdramatize. I never had issues because of it. I've never wanted to talk to friends about it either because I feel it would simply make it worse, when it is nothing really at the moment. Not saying this to say pedo aren't horrible, but we should take care not to traumatize the kids either by convincing them they've been through something worst than they did.
It *is* however very fucking sick how devious the man was. He was a sad fuck, but recalling it, the way he lured me away... Guess I was lucky he was a weak degen instead of a psycho.

>> No.18142036

>>18141930
Another retard post by /lit/'s resident nonce, cumgenius.
Pedophilia is always fucked up but your definition is warped; by your definition, an 11 year girl would be a pedophile for liking a 10 year old boy. Obviously she wouldn't be but maybe like you said this would be one of the "innocent" cases. The problem with that though is that it obfuscates what is "ok" or "wholesome" pedophilia and what is "wrong" or "morbid" pedophilia. Everyone roughly knows what we mean by pedophilia though and it is always wrong. (I'd also like to add that though it hasn't been said, the attraction of a 20 year old might have to a 13 year old is colloquially understood as pedophilic, though it isn't technically. It's pointless to bring up hebophilia or whatever because most people here are talking about the atraction an adult has to a person younger than sixteen or seventeen.) No amount of moral relativism can change that since it's absolutely degenerate pseudery.

>> No.18142037

>>18142024
1—«MAYBE» if you didn’t «WRITE» with a

2. «LAME»

3. «AFFECTED»

4—«GIMICK»

5• You might get more worthwhile responses.

>> No.18142042

I've seen some anons on sites like this try to rationalize it because they're into a Lolita thing, but leaving aside moral questions and grant that this is "natural," what happens when the girl gets older?

People age you know.

So are you just going to dump her? Isn't that just exploiting people and then discarding them? That seems pretty messed up to me.

>> No.18142050

>>18142033
Do you want to talk about it, anon?

>> No.18142054

>>18142042
25 year olds age too though, what kind of logic is that?

>> No.18142060

>>18141816
His name is mothman

>> No.18142061

>>18141999
>what do you mean? cars are a perfect comparison to my perverse obsession with fucking children!

>> No.18142062

>>18142033
I don’t know why not wanting it to happen to more kids is overdramatizing, but sure. It affects everyone differently.

Best mate couldn’t fuck his first girlfriend for years because he’d start shaking uncontrollably whenever she looked at his dick. One soccer coach, two sleepovers. He didn’t even reminder it until his twenties.

>> No.18142064

>>18141768
Acting upon it, yes, most immoral.

>> No.18142068

>>18142042
me and my child bride will grow old and die having only known each other

>> No.18142069

>>18142037


1. IT IS CORRECT PUNCTUATION, AND CORRECT SYNTAX, NOT AFFECTATION.

2. I DO NOT POST FOR RESPONSES; IF YOU DID NOT COMPREHEND SOMETHING DO NOT RESPOND TO IT.

3. IF I DEGRADED MY POSTING STYLE TO YOUR LEVEL THE QUALITY OF RESPONSES WOULD ACTUALLY DECREASE.

>> No.18142071

>>18142064
Based on what?

>> No.18142079

ITT: assuming that harming children is bad

>> No.18142081

>>18142079
edgelord