/younglove/ - Pedophilia Discussion

setting, etc)

2.a.) Subject must understand that actions have consequences.

2.b.) Subject must be able to use prior experience and provided factual information to select the course of action leading to the best outcome in a hypothetical situation.

2.c.) Subject must be able to recognize when there is not enough information provided in a question to provide a meaningful answer.

3.) Ability to identify the fact that people lie to and use each other, and be able to judge (to a certain extent) when that's occurring in certain examples.

4.) Understanding of the concepts of rejection (both non-personal caused and personal caused rejection, as well as being able to reject people themselves).

4.a.) Subject must understand that not everyone wants to have sex with them.

4.b.) Subject must understand sexual orientation, and that some people just don't want sex with certain categories of people.

4.c.) Subject must recognize that some people do not want to have sex with them personally.

4.d.) Subject must be able to reject others.

5.) Understanding sexual ethics (like how rape is considered wrong, using sex to hurt people is considered wrong, etc. All because these hurt people for no justifiable reason.)

5.a.) Subject must be able to differentiate between rape and consensual sex in examples.

5.b.) Subject must understand that rape is illegal.

5.c.) Subject must be able to recognize sexual abuse other than rape in examples.

5.d.) Subject must understand that sexual abuse is illegal.

5.e.) Subject must understand the consequences and implications of using sex as a commodity.  

5.f.) Subject must be aware of how to report the crimes they were required to be able to identify.

5.g.) Subject must understand that they have the right to request any potential sexual partners be tested for STDs before consenting to sex.

5.h.) Subject must be aware that they can insist upon a partner using adequate means of prophylaxis (STDs, pregnancy) 

The proposed testing format is as follows:

Use a review board, and allow researchers to propose alternative testing methods, approved by the review board, and allow anyone applying to take the test to use whichever approved test they wish. (I should point out the need for an oral test, under the assumption that even illiterate adults or children could potentially have the necessary skills and knowledge even if they lack the skills and knowledge of reading and writing. And, of course, the need for a version of the test to be available in multiple languages so as not to discriminate against non-native english speakers.)

At the testing facilities, social workers will be present to evaluate and ensure that test takers are here by their own free will. Abuse intervention programs and counseling services will be available at testing centers.

On site sex education classes will be available in order to help prepare test takers for acquiring the factual knowledge required for requirement two. This should help alleviate the imbalances in educational backgrounds of test takers.

Upon having passed the test, a picture ID is issued indicating you are competent to have sex. Having sex with an unlicensed individual is treated as statutory rape.  Test status will be hidden from third parties (First is Child, second is Government) unless the first party decides to tell someone (Ostensibly to prove sexual legality).

If there is reason to suspect that an individual is trying to "play the system" (by deliberately remaining untested despite being actually competent in order to maintain access to partners unable to offer meaningful consent or by deliberately failing the test), the court could order that the parties involved be tested, and dealt with accordingly in terms of the results.  (A stripped down version akin to current criminal responsibility tests should be used in order to prevent deliberate failing.)  If one party is found be capable and the other not, it should serve as compelling evidence that this was a case that should be treated as statutory rape, and the now competent party would have to prove in some way that they only gained this competence in the intervening time between the act and the sexual encounter.  If neither party proves competent, there's nothing to be done, regardless of ages involved.  If both parties prove competent, they should both be held criminally responsible, but not to the same level as if they were the only one involved who was competent.  Likely a fine of some sort would be the best choice for such an infraction.  

A grandfather clause is included in this proposal, such that anyone who is over the local age of consent at the time this proposal goes into effect will not need to be tested so long as they wish to be sexually active only with other individuals who were also grandfathered out of the program. If they wish to be sexual with someone operating under the new system, they must submit for testing, and thereafter abide by the new system as though they had not been grandfathered out of it.

Conclusion:

The primary difference is that actual competency as determined by the test, rather than assumed competency based on age is the primary determiner.

Thoughts? Additional testing requirements you feel are important?

>inb4 "b-but predators could teach the kids how to pass the test and coerce them to take it"

But seriously this is pretty thorough and it's hard to imagine a logical counterargument that isn't economics-based (e.g. who's paying for all this? probably parents I guess through some kind of application fee)

>>25921

>>25933

>On site sex education classes will be available in order to help prepare test takers for acquiring the factual knowledge required for requirement two. This should help alleviate the imbalances in educational backgrounds of test takers.

Anyone who really wants the ability to consent will take the time for the classes.

>>25938

lol ok bro if you seriously think you can find a prepubescent child that could pass even if you gave them the answer sheet to copy paste from (or a child that wants to have sex with you in the first place) more power to them

>>25933

>>25939

That's fine even if most won't be able to or want to. But there's no harm in allowing the others to take and pass it.

>>25941

There's no harm (besides possibly a waste of money and time) actually I think it's a great idea to shove it through some pedo's thick skulls.

Would you go to a DMV-like agency to get your sex license?

This is crap. Normies would absolutely never accept it, and I, a complete pedo who believes that certain forms of sexual parenting should be not just okay but actually normal, think they definitely SHOULDN'T accept it.

Section 1 can be taught to any child capable of reading without them really getting it, just like any other set of information schools shovel into their brains.

Sections 2 and 3 cannot be reliably tested for; they involve forms of practical and emotional intelligence that are complex enough that we don't have a working model for them, as evidenced by how frequently animals surprise us with intelligence that they aren't supposed to have. Aside from that, it would arguably mean that almost no virgin and definitely nobody who has never conventionally dated can meaningfully consent to sex, ever. That kind of learning is heavily experiential; it is attained by being hurt by others, whether through accident or malice.

Finally, Section 5 attempts to test for things that are fundamentally subjective, whether anyone wants to admit it or not. In fact, that's arguably the problem such a test would be meant to address, and yet it attempts to bake in the cultural cipher that we already acknowledge it isn't universally beneficial to adhere to.

>>25956

Section 1) If you don't understand it, you don't pass that part of the test. It isn't as though educators haven't long since figured out how to test the difference between someone regurgitating facts verbatum and someone able to put those same facts into their own words to demonstrate understanding.

Section 2 & 3) These sections are testing for cognative benchmarks which developmental researchers have been able to identify for decades. Also, you seem to be under the mistake impression that the entire test is sex specific. These sections are about basic cognative capabilities.

Section 5) is about the current legal and social climate. If you don't understand what the current legal and social climate are, what expectations and laws exist governing your behavior, you are a danger to yourself and others.

>>26326

The goalposts haven't moved. You just didn't understand the test in the first place.

>>26325

Your in danger now. I don't care I enjoy little girls and so should you. Are you gonna be miserable for your whole life? Be deprived of sweet girl cunts? You should change your name, you aren't radical at all .

antis are like "no kid would pass this test lol"

Maybe not little kids, but kids in the 10+ range definitely would. Were you guys never in middle school? Kids talk about this shit all the time on the bus.

Sexual interaction is not rocket science. The only reason alot of kids dont have a firm grasp on it is because people actively try to keep the truth from them and make sex something scary and taboo. All of this is done to "protect" them but ultimately it just fills with with self loathing and intense perversion.

As a side note to the test, I think it should focus heavily on making sure the child knows who they can turn to if they are violated against their will or harmed in any way and that no is always an option.

>>26501

10 isn't middle school age and this test is ridiculously tough(freaking naturalisation tests are easier), not to mention ultimately ineffective. What do they mean by "subject must understand"? That they can blurt out lines out of a book? How will you measure whether someone truly gets it?

>>26487

As expected of fucker. When he's not making up tall tales of things he's never done, he's complaining about giving kids consent. No doubt his rape fantasies can't be justified if the law acknowledges child consent.

>>26512

You mad? First I'm a child molester/rapist now I'm a liar? Lol. Right I guess for legal reasons: I don't have loli girlfriends, never done anything sexual with a loli and I have never had a loli approach me sexually :p

>>26537

You've said dozens of times that you had, so yes, you are a liar.

>>26584

>>26584

So wait I'm a double liar? First I thought you said I lied about doing shit now I'm lying that I haven't done shit??? Man my haters are hard to follow. :p