/bl/ - Boylovers

>>9128

>I'd submit the argument that "there hasn't been a problem" isn't a good defense for a lower than typical age of consent, because, conceivably, a country could set the age of consent to 4 years old and not have any perceived problems.

This is nonsense. If a law has been put in practice and was shown to work with unanimous support, there's no reason to see it as a flawed defense.

>But most would agree that the fact that adults are even able to have sex with 4 year olds in the first place is the problem.

The capacity and opportunity to commit crime will always be present for those not imprisoned. That in no way refutes my argument.

>Age of consent laws don't exist to stop children from being harmed or to prevent "problems". They exist to help define what does and does not constitute rape, because most are under the belief that even if, essentially, no one was harmed or there were no problems, rape should still be a crime.

Rape is inherently and objectively harmful. Your second se

>If someone is blackout drunk and you sleep with them and they can't even remember it, so they are wholly unharmed by your actions, what you did should still be a crime.

If someone's extremely intoxicated, they wouldn't be able to respond or knowingly engage in intercourse. I don't understand if you're defining how the law works or stating your objections to it. You need to reread your posts, they're very hard to understand.

>If you have sex with a four year old and you give them a piece of candy every time and make them love and look forward to having sex with you, and the kid is otherwise well adjusted and unharmed by your actions, then what you are doing should still be a crime.

Ehm, what? A four year old isn't able conceptualize sex and understand how it impacts them. Conditioning a 4 year old with candy to have sex is NOT consent. They wouldn't be able to understand what was happening to them and would become hysterical.

>Treating another human being as a sex object where they have either no consent in what is going on, or their consent is compromised by too much mind altering substance or too little world experience or any other reason, is rape and should be a crime.

Yet you've JUST suggested in the previous sentence that you'd want to coerce a 4 year old with a lolipop. I honestly have no idea where you stand. Your previous statements make for some very profound contradictions.

>>9134

> This is nonsense. If a law has been put in practice and was shown to work with unanimous support, there's no reason to see it as a flawed defense.

It is when the law, working in the capacity that it is working, isn't fulfilling the needs of the society it should.

An example would be if you lowered the Age of Consent to 12 in the States.

Sure, the law would be just as effective at keeping people from having sex with people from having sex with people under 12 as the laws we have currently. And sure, you might not get many complaints from 12 year olds engaging in "consensual" sex with adults.

But just because the law is doing its job and just because there are no complaints or people voicing problems doesn't mean that the law is just, and it has literally no bearing on whether or not the consent those 12 year olds give is valid, uncompromised, and informed consent. Which consent MUST be, in order for it not to be rape.

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it is right, and just because people agree with the law doesn't mean it's right.

So saying, "In Germany the age of consent is 14 and it's not a problem" isn't saying much, because just because people aren't protesting it or 14 year olds on those relationships aren't saying they're being raped, doesn't mean that it's all good.

Like I said, you could have sex with a 4 year old and make them not complain about it and make them actually look forward to it if you wanted. But just because they want it doesn't mean that it isn't rape.

In short, saying "It's not a problem" in this instance doesn't work because the problems that could concievably arise from having an AoC set too low are nuanced, not easily observable, and only apparant to people who actually live in that culture.

>Yet you've JUST suggested in the previous sentence that you'd want to coerce a 4 year old with a lollipop

I said if you do this, "then what you are doing SHOULD STILL BE A CRIME".

I never said I wanted to do this, I said that doing this is criminal, even if the kid is perfectly okay with the situation and comes out well adjusted despite it.

In other words, there exists no circumstance in which doing this is not rape, even if the kid isn't worse off for it happening.

Reading comprehension game weak, fam.

>>9100

>>7

not man on boy though….

>>9136

>So saying, "In Germany the age of consent is 14 and it's not a problem" isn't saying much, because just because people aren't protesting it or 14 year olds on those relationships aren't saying they're being raped, doesn't mean that it's all good.

Isn't the onus on you to prove that there is some sort of problem though? Your whole point seems to be that something would be worse if the age of consent was slightly lower and you yet you have a real life example of a nation very similar to the US (in the relent categories) which has an age of consent of 14 and lower levels of teen pregnancy and STDs and no other discernible problems regarding the AOC.

If you can't explain why Germany (and other similar nations with an AOC of 14) is either worse than America or how Germany is so different as to make an invalid comparison you haven't really got a point at all. All the problems you suggest, all of your fear mongering hypotheticals don't happen in Germany or Austria, Italy etc. Reality does not fit the model you have so carefully constructed.

>>9138

> Your whole point seems to be that something would be worse if the age of consent was slightly lower and you yet you have a real life example of a nation very similar to the US (in the relent categories) which has an age of consent of 14 and lower levels of teen pregnancy and STDs and no other discernible problems regarding the AOC.

I was gonna respond to this, but I'd essentially just be repeating what I said in this comment:

>>9131

Look, we are all in agreement that having sex with children is rape, for various valid reasons.

These reasons include it being impossible for a child and an adult to have an equal relationship, how children are generally not fully knowledgeable on what they'd be consenting to, how children are much more susceptible to being manipulated, and many more things.

Literally every single country with AoC laws agree with this sentiment, that having sex with children is rape. The just differ on what exactly defines a "child". And this makes perfect sense, because what exactly is a "child" varies significantly from culture to culture.

In America, if we set the AoC to 14, then virtually the *only* adult-associated responsibility that a 14 year old would have would be the ability to consent to sex with someone at least 4 years older than them, and beyond that. This is because, in America, 14 year olds are very much still children and are treated like children by not only our culture but by the vast majority of our laws.

The world a 14 year old lives in and the world an 18 year old lives in are drastically different in America. A side-by-side comparison would show that one is *clearly* not the world of an adult. Not even close. If you live in America then you should know this.

If you can't see the issue in 14 year olds being children in virtually every aspect except being able to consent to sex with adults then you are willfully blind.

Also, it should be noted that other country's having lower STD's and pregnancy rates among teens very likely has little to do with teens being allowed to have sexual relationships with adults, and much more to do with availability of sex education and contraception not being such a big deal. Also healthcare differences, especially seeing how much America's is horrendous, would play a big role as well.

There are several ways in which they are different from us that would account for these good things, and crediting these good things with adults being able to have sex with 14 year olds is disingenuous.

>>9139

Is the solution not to just give more rights and improve sex education along with changing the age of consent again? Would that not address the problems you raise?

If age of consent is based on fact, why does it vary by geographical location? Why does the age of consent differ by 10 years? If this were based in science there would be a far more narrow view of who can consent.

>>9140

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for an increase in sex education at younger ages in the States, and many schools have started teaching the material earlier which is super cool btw.

However, in order to justify lowering the AoC in the United States to something as low as 14 or younger, we'd have to fundamentally change the way our society works such that people at those ages could conceivably not be considered children.

Remember, having sex with children is rape. That is why AoC laws exist. In order for the AoC to be as low as 14 here, then our entire culture would have to change to make 14 year olds less like children in order for the AoC law to do its job.

Knowledge about sex, what it is and the gravity of doing this thing which is one of the most intimate things two human beings can do together, is a large part of what would make one's consent valid.

After all, consent must be informed consent in order for it to count.

Increasing sex Ed would help towards this end.

But there's also things such as the fact that, for children in every society, it's virtually impossible for them to have a relationship with an adult where the imbalance of power is not extreme to the point that it compromises the minor's ability to consent.

In fact, this is a large part of why sex with children is rape in the first place. You could spend months and months teaching a 7 year old everything there is to know about sex, but it's still rape to sleep with them because of how it's literally impossible for a 7 year old and a grown adult to not have a relationship imbalanced to the point where it can no longer be called consensual.

In order for consent to be valid, it must be both informed AND uncompromised.

Childhood implies a lack of information, but more than that, it also entails the inherent extreme power imbalance that corrupts the consent.

Sex Ed helps alleviate one of these things, but the only thing that could stop the other thing that prevents the consent a child gives from being valid is not being a child anymore.

Or, at least, being much less of a child. After all, in the States, 16 year olds aren't quite bonified adults, but they are adult enough to give consent to sex with adults, despite being fairly early on the path to adulthood.

TL;DR: No, you can't just increase sex Ed and decrease the AoC. In order to be justified in decreasing the AoC, you have to decrease the age at which people aren't children anymore, and that requires societal and cultural shifts.

>>9141

It varies so wildly because AoC is literally the law saying, "You can't have sex with people below this age because people below this age are children", and what exactly defines "children" varies culture by culture and society by society.

You can't just "base it in science" and be done with it. That's retarded. This is not how laws work

The law, like most laws that exist, is based on the society and culture it applies to.

>>9144

Laws are not based on science or fact, glad we can agree on that. They are based on feels, like the feels you're using to persecute relationships you feel you don't like.

>>9145

Yes, the laws preventing you from fucking children are based entirely on feels. If that's what helps you sleep at night.

There is literally no logic whatsoever involved in making those laws at all. It's just people using their feelings to keep you down.

>>9146

Sounds about right. Glad you finally get it.

>>9146

At the end of the day why even care about laws? Most people who fuck kids get away with it.

>>9148

If most people who stole stuff got away with it, should we make stealing legal? Should we just stop caring about laws regarding theft?

>>9149

But child sex is harmless.

yall should just drink the kool aid and be done with it

>>9143

In my post I did not just mention sex education. I also mentioned giving them more rights, or rather lowering the age at which they are given rights to coincide with a lower age of consent. If they had most of the rights of adults, as do 16 year olds now, would that not work? If I understand you your point is that 16 year olds in American are treated as adults (I'm not sure I agree) so they should therefore be allowed to consent to sex? So if the rights 16 year olds currently have are just given to 14 year olds then this would now be acceptable to you?

Also I would point out that in almost every nation people do not have full adult rights and are not thought of as adults when they are legally able to consent to sex. Usually there is a 2-8 year gap between being granted the right to consent to sex and having all the rights of an adult.

>>9154

I've answered this question earlier in this thread:

>>9131

> That is to say, if we lowered the drinking age, smoking age, driving age, voting age, military age, and all that stuff down to 13(Which is a horrible idea, btw), but young teens were treated exactly the same in every other respect in our society, they would still be children.

Basically, we give 16 year olds the rights we do because they are at a certain stage in life in our society, but they are not at that stage in life just because we give them those rights. The logic your question implies is putting the smoke before the fire.

I reiterate, the ONLY way for it to be acceptable to lower the AoC to 14 in the States is if we fundamentally saw 14 year olds differently and asked them to grow up faster than we do now.

Changing the rules to give them more adult responsibilities could be a part of it, but that's not all the societal and cultural shift would have to entail.

In the States, 14 year olds are still middle schoolers. I was a 14 year old and a 16 year old fairly recently(less than a decade ago), so I know what it is like to be both in this day and age. Furthermore, I personally know several people in those stages of life, and this is accross multiple states and different cultural backgrounds.

I know what it means to be those ages in the US just as well as anyone else, and the difference between a 14 year old and a 16 year old is, in general, substantial.

14 year olds tend to be much closer to the stage of life called 'childhood' than 16 year olds do. 14 year olds are *much* more like children than 16 year olds.

And anyone who lives in this country and knows anyone around that age at all should know how monumental the gap is between a 14 year old and an 18 year old is.

If you see how we as a society treat and view 14 year olds, versus how we treat and view 18 year olds, you wouldn't even consider 14 year olds being anything other than the children they still very much are.

So much growing is done in those 4 years. And a substantial amount of growing is done between 14 and 16 as well.

And I'm not saying that 16 year olds are adults, I'm saying that they are significantly closer to the stage of life known as adulthood than 14 year olds, and, more importantly, significantly further away from the stage of life known as childhood.

And also, it should be noted that I never said I agreed with the laws in Germany on the subject. I said I don't know what it is like to grow up there, I've never been a child there, and I don't know children there.

If I lived in Germany it's entirely possible that I'd disagree with how they do things, but as is I can't make an informed opinion one way or the other. I can only make an informed opinion about the US

>>9156

>And also, it should be noted that I never said I agreed with the laws in Germany on the subject. I said I don't know what it is like to grow up there, I've never been a child there, and I don't know children there.

>If I lived in Germany it's entirely possible that I'd disagree with how they do things, but as is I can't make an informed opinion one way or the other. I can only make an informed opinion about the US

So basically what you're saying is that you're are only familiar with one system (the American one) and you are just going to assume that said system is the best without even looking into other systems?

Maybe you should try and learn something about other cultures before just assuming America is the best?

>>9158

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that anyone who doesn't live in Germany or isn't accutely aware of what it is like to grow up in Germany can't really say anything qualitative about Germany's rules in this particular subject, because the rules in this particular subject are deeply rooted in the culture of the area the rule applies to.

Unless you grew up in Germany then you as well can't definitively say anything about whether or not their rules in this regard are for the best. Unless you know what it is like to be a 14 year old in Germany, then your opinion on the subject is undercut by the lack of authority and credibility you have on the subject,

All I did was admit this fact.

This rule, more than most others, isn't one where you can say, "It works here, so it should work everywhere the exact same way", because of how intimately its connected with the culture of the area it applies to.

This rule has to be made on a case by case basis, because what's good in one case could genuinely not be good for another case.

I'm not just assuming that America's system is the best, I'm using my intimate knowledge of my own culture to make a judgement call which pertains specifically to my culture, which is the exact same process every lawmaker in every country that has AoC laws had to go through.

Germany went through the exact same process and came to a difference conclusion, which is perfectly okay and expected because these rules should be based on the culture they pertain to. But it doesn't mean that their conclusion is right for the States.

It is for this reason that "It works in Germany" is by no means a compelling argument to change the AoC in the US, because that says nothing about *why* we should change it in the States.

Furthermore, the US's AoC laws work pretty well for the States. We do have issues with dealing with offenders, our criminal justice system is shitty as all hell, and the sex offender registry is outright disgusting, but the actual age of 16 is something that works pretty well. It's one of the few aspects of sex offender laws we have that most reasonable people would agree is perfectly fine in this country.

And although the opinions of the masses should by no means dictate what is right and what is wrong, the information they provide is of some relevance and of some significant importance when concerning rules so delendent upon culture such as this.

And the overwhelmingly vast majority of people who grew up in the US and who know what it is like to be a child in the US and who know children in the US, are perfectly okay with the AoC being where it is.

I'm not saying this makes me right, but I am saying that this is not trivial information in this regard.

>>9171

>>9171

>Furthermore, the US's AoC laws work pretty well for the States. We do have issues with dealing with offenders, our criminal justice system is shitty as all hell, and the sex offender registry is outright disgusting, but the actual age of 16 is something that works pretty well. It's one of the few aspects of sex offender laws we have that most reasonable people would agree is perfectly fine in this country.

>And although the opinions of the masses should by no means dictate what is right and what is wrong, the information they provide is of some relevance and of some significant importance when concerning rules so dependent upon culture such as this.

The problem with this is that America does not have one age of consent it has three. 16, 17 and 18. For example it is 16 in West Virgina, 18 in Virgina and 17 in New York. Do you think that these states are different enough to justify this? Do you think all of these laws accurately reflect the culture of each state?

Your mistake is that you assume that there was careful consultation and planning behind choosing an age of consent. The AOC is usually changed as a result of a mortal panic and is not based on appropriate facts or logic. The UK age of consent was raised form 12-16 in the 1890s following a child prostitution scandal due that was later revealed to have been a hoax/exaggeration. 16 was chosen because it was the current age of menarche. The current average age of menarche today is 11. When American states started raising their ages of consent about 40 years later (also in response to a moral panic) they copied the UK even though the age of menarche had by then fallen to about 14. 18 was also pushed for in some states (as well as a few failed pushes for 21) because puritans felt the higher the age of consent the better. There wasn’t (and isn't) a logical backing for raising the age of consent to 18. Nor indeed was 16 a logical choice at the time. It certainly didn’t reflect whether or not you were treated as an adult. You could be working by 6 but you wouldn’t get full adult rights until 21. Is this a logical system? No. Nor is today’s system.

I do however agree with you that society has now been shaped by these arbitrarily chosen numbers. I do not think however that therefore these arbitrarily chosen numbers should therefore be defended to the death. Your arguments for why 16 is best in America do not advance beyond subjective claims about its appropriateness. Every vague argument you make applies just as much to 17 as it does to 15. You did not chose 16 it was chosen for you. You defend it because it is the status quo and that “feels” right to you. I also live in America and I do not agree with your assessment that most 15 year olds are not ready for sex or that somehow American culture retards the development of people and makes them being ready before 16 rare or impossible.

Also your instance that “most reasonable people would agree” is empty. Most reasonable people once agreed that smoking did not harm your health that slavery was necessary for civilization and that women shouldn’t vote. Most people always unthinkingly defend the status quo and create elaborate mental constructs to defend the system they are born into.

>>9172

> Your arguments for why 16 is best in America do not advance beyond subjective claims about its appropriateness.

I'd submit the argument that it is LITERALLY impossible for a decision to be made on this matter without citing subjective evidence. Even if you say something like, "We should set it during the onset of puberty" or some other milestone, the reasons for choosing that particular milestone to decide the age would be based in intuition and opinions and other subjective data.

Any age that you personally would like for it to be has some roots in subjective information.

But 'subjective' and 'intuitive' shouldn't be dirty words when describing why you think something should be the way it should. Just because there is some intuition involved in the decision making process, does not mean that it is necessarily devoid of logic.

You could have sound logic and intuition at the same time. They are not like oil and water.

And I think I went to great lengths in this thread describing my logic, and, for the most part, it hasn't been unsound.

But it is LITERALLY impossible to use pure cold hard logic to dictate when something that is inherently subjective, such as when someone is old enough for their consent to be reasonably valid, should be.

You can only arrive to that conclusion by reflecting upon your own personal experiences and the experiences of those in the relevant stages of life and the culture that surrounds you, and all of this is based in subjectivity.

If there were a mathematical formula to describe when consent, which is itself an abstract concept, should be seen as valid based on age, then we would use it. But these abstract concepts don't exist in that realm.

>!I do not agree with your assessment that most 15 year olds are not ready for sex or that somehow American culture retards the development of people and makes them being ready before 16 rare or impossible.

I actually don't really hold this belief. I've even said earlier in this thread that lowering it to 15 wouldn't make too drastic of a difference, and most of the time I objected to the lowering it was lowering it to 14. Because 14 year olds and 16 year olds actually are significantly different in terms of development, at least in the States.

I don't think that lowering the age to 15 is unreasonable. Unneccesary? Yes. Unreasonable? No.

Lowering it to 14 in the States is a tad unreasonable though, considering how much like children we expect people in that age group to be.

> The problem with this is that America does not have one age of consent it has three. 16, 17 and 18

State's rights yo. To be fair, this really is a matter that should be settled on the state level, because the federal government shouldn't be able to dictate these kinds of things. Goes against the whole balance of powers idea.

But I think that states who have it set at 18 are definitely in the wrong, especially if there isn't a clause for people with relationships that are only a few years apart.

Some states actually have the AoC set to 16, but if and only if the other person is under 24 or something, otherwise the AoC is 18, which is pretty reasonable in my opinion.

And I think Ohio or Oregon or something actually has the AoC set to 21 if the other person is a teacher or other authority figure, which I'm not too sure I agree with but w/e.

There's lots of little rules like that too.

However, I disagree with the AoC being set to 18 with no caveats pretty firmly, and 17 is also a tad too old being fair. Like I said, I have no issue with disagreeing with the law, and I disagree with those ones.

>>9173

I think we have a subjective disagreement. I think the age of consent could be lowered to 14 (along with other changes to the law and sex education) and that this would be more appropriate/reasonable than 16. Put another away I view 16 in the way you seem to view 18. I do accept on some level that this is subjective and I doubt either one of us will convince the other. Though I am open to discussion on the subject.

>Some states actually have the AoC set to 16, but if and only if the other person is under 24 or something, otherwise the AoC is 18, which is pretty reasonable in my opinion.

This however I strongly disagree with. Either you can consent to sex or you cannot. I don't think age necessarily effects maturity/intelligence as directly after about 18-20. Obviously in general the older you are the wiser but the variation from person to person is so extreme as to make this irrelevant. There are a great many very intelligent students and a great many very idiotic pensioners. So if you can consent to sex with someone who is 18 I don't see why you should not be able to consent to sex with someone who is 25, 30, 60 etc.

Sweetheart, there's so many things you can still do! The world is resplendent with beauty and love. Find a job where you can help boys. Guide them through the tough times so they don't have to go it alone.

You may not receive the physical kind of love you crave, but you will get from them the purest kind of affection and love you could ever imagine. It's worth it. It's wonderful, and you deserve it, just like so many boys out there deserve someone like you to be there for them, and to live them unconditionally.

>>9184

As a Devil's advocate, I think putting a "boylover" in a position of potential child abuse is extremely risky. If he's responsible enough to completely cull his sexual urges, then I'd see it as possibly feasible.

>>9185

>child abuse

There is nothing abusive about a loving and consensual relationship.

>>9180

I think the logic of having the AoC be 16 if and only if the other person is under 24 is that it is substantially more likely and more plausible for a relationship between, say, a 16 year old and a 20 year old to be not so imbalanced that it constitutes rape than a relationship between a 16 year old and a 45 year old.

>>9188

>…that it is substantially more likely and more plausible for a relationship between, say, a 16 year old and a 20 year old to be not so imbalanced that it constitutes rape than a relationship between a 16 year old and a 45 year old.

I disagree. A 20 year old is an adult just as much as a 45 year old is. I agree that in most cases the 16 year olds and the 20 year old would probably have more in common than the 16 year old and the 45 year old but that is besides the point. As I said in general the older you are the wiser but the variation from person to person is so extreme as to make this irrelevant. There are a great many very intelligent students and a great many very idiotic pensioners. Ultimately you can either consent to sex or you cannot, every relationship will be unequal often very much so regardless of age. The ability to manipulate is not tied to age once you reach adulthood nor is the tendency to manipulate so I do not support such arbitrary restrictions.

Let me reply to OP directly.

Only "legally" is it set in stone; I think what the debate that ensued has made abundantly clear is that "morally" it is up for you to decide. "Situationally", well, don't rule out luck ;)

But all that being said, let's assume you are right, and that you will go through your life without being able to have a fulfilling relationship with a young boy. Different people will tackle this in different ways:

1. sublimation: professional or otherwise; this means essentially you dedicate your time to something you really enjoy doing, that provides you with a lot of satisfaction, and that way some people claim they reduce their sexual/emotional needs to a non-suicidal amount. This generally assumes you will spend little time around boys in order to focus on whatever it is that you have decided to focus on. I've heard people say this is a ticking time bomb kind of thing: you might thing you're fine for extended periods of time, but at some point you snap. I personally tend to think you shouldn't completely ignore any part of yourself, even the unpleasant ones like the torture of being a paedo in our society, but hey, some people say it works for them, who am I to argue?

2. proximity: others say taking up a career that would have you be around boys often is the best way to go. Contrarians might say that gives you too much opportunity to be tempted, others (me, for example) claim it's downright torture (it's like arresting a diabetic in a cake shop). People who favour this approach say they would be happy to be helping boys and in close contact with them, regardless of the less-than-satisfactory sexual and emotion bonds. I'm not sure where fantasy comes into play here, since this is not a path I've tried to take. I'd say it's sine qua non, and that you have to constantly make up sexy scenarios with the boys you're close proximity with; that might muddy your feelings though, if you can't separate fantasy from reality.

3. finding an adult partner: this has worked for a surpring number of paedos I know. It does, however, necessitate that you be at least mildly attracted to them, it seems, or at least that you share a very strong emotional bond. Two paedos together work better than one, and they are good at keeping each other in check when it feels like the pressure might be too much. There's a level of companionship that's there that makes it easier to deal with the frustration and hopelessness of our sexuality. On the other hand (and I speak from experience here), when both of you are feeling horny and reckless, you're twice as hard to stop.

4. therapy: when I was a teenager I went to analysis for a few years, and it was very helpful. Admittedly, it didn't "cure" anything, and she was far from encouraging of any sexual contact with boys. But even in just discussing things, laying things bare, rummaging through the past and trying to understand yourself (and all aspects of yourself, not only who you're attracted to) is great exercise. Now, many people are deeply distrusting of psychologists in general, and there are laws in place that make sure we are never fully able to trust them. It's an unfortunate state of affairs, but with a little searching you can probably find someone who is good at listening and who will genuinely try to help you deal with it. I don't know about your financial situation, but this can also be costly.

1/2

5. fiction, legal pornography: a number of other paedos try to let off steam by either writing or consuming paedo fiction; drawing and viewing legal pornography also seems to help (this includes shota in some countries, but not in all of them, and the laws are unfortunately tending to get stricter). Some might say it only causes your urges to escalate, making you realise more and more strongly what it is that you "really" need, and making you more likely to go out there to seek romantic/sexual contact. This has been one of the arguments against any kind of pornographic depiction of children. Others say quite the contrary, that it helps them ease off the pain and let off some steam, and the fact it's legal (if it is so, it depends on where you are…) also makes it easier to enjoy it.

6. religion: it has been much maligned as of late, and many of my generation dismiss it as wishful hocus pocus, oppressive dogma and anti-intellectualism. That might be true of some expressions of religion, but they don't have to be if you don't want them to. Many people have found meaning for themselves within a religious community that is accepting and fulfills their need for community (if you have one, not everyone does). Granted, you will probably need to not say anything about your paedo status. And by the way, there's more to 'religion' than just Christianity. You can become a pagan, convert to Judaism, be a Buddhist monk, or even try voodoo. (Just please not scientology!) As long as it makes you happy in some way, why not? It has clearly a lot of success with helping people deal with past sexual abuse, substance abuse and a host of difficulties in life… You might become a zealot, though, no one wants that.

7. misery: some people thrive on feeling miserable. Some great art has been produced by people who just embrace the pointlessness of existence and try to air it. You might die earlier, be more prone to crippling addictions and depression. But who cares? The whole point of embracing misery is that it doesn't matter. It doesn't seem pleasurable, or indeed avisable, and it's mostly a last resort, but why not? Why not just assert to yourself: yes, my life is shit, everything is unfair and I can't change anything about it? The feeling of utter powerlessness can be a bit much though, and you might feel inclined at some point to do something about it (i.e. commit a no-no).

Have I missed something?

2/2

>>9193

I hope op reads this, one of the few meaningful replies to the actual topic at hand, in a sea of debate about when puberty started in Ancient Greece and discussing the age of consent laws in Germany

Also pretty well thought out and insightful.

8.9/10

>>9192

Good post man.

Personally I'm 24 and have been dealing with daily frustrations of BL and self hate for a long time I normally try for #1 in your post and just ignore it most of the time and concentrate on love interests closer to my age but it's tough.

But I feel like #2 is a good direction for me because I have good self control and if an opportunity did appear I think I'd take everything into account, like maturity of the boy, possibility of affecting his life or mine etc and be able to make the right situational call.

Personally I think #4 would make a difference and be a good venting place but money is a big factor and an even bigger factor is finding someone you can trust to reveal your inner self to, especially face to face. I do really find opening up your feelings to people, and knowing people have the same struggles can really put your mind at ease though

Not sure about others in the thread however in the end for me it all comes down to the fact that I feel like my ultimate end goal in life is to manage to have a BL relationship be it platonic or not so much, whether I can manage to achieve it or I have to live my life in self pity who knows. I totally think the best way to achieve it would be, like people have already said, travel to different countries where there are possibilities a little more open to boy love.

And maybe try to work on your attraction levels a bit OP, I never used to be attracted to guys like 14+ but after finding a friendly gay teen community and talking a lot I found it more possible to be into guys closer to my age. Not saying this will work for you though but it really helped for me.

I can't stand this shit anymore, really. I already did a sucide attempt but didn't succeed, now my life is even worse than before, but I'll make sure it'll suceed next time. I really don't want to live with this piece of a shit sexuality and everything that belongs to it anymore. It is fucked. Society is fucked and so am I. I'm rather dead than having to deal with the loneliness and being treated as piece of non-human shit.

>>9205

There's no need to be so overly dramatic. If you're really that bothered about it just go to some poor country and find some boys. Its risky obviously but if you were planning to kill yourself anyway its not like you've got anything to lose.

>>9205

Oh, boo fucking hoo.

You want to go kill yourself? Do it, don't moan about it on the internet. You don't want to kill yourself, you want validation that your misery is justified, and you want attention, and you can't cope with the fact your life isn't "better", [insert infantile whining sounds]. You don't want advice on how to cope, you want people to tell you it's impossible to cope, and that you're right to be whiny and miserable.

Do you think it matters? Do you think anyone but yourself should be responsible for convincing you to live? No. You are alone and irrelevant, like we all are. Do you want attention? Someone to tell you how it's oh-so-easy to find a gay boy to have a meaningful relationship with and "here is a simple 10-step plan"? Not gonna happen. Do you want people to come running to make you feel better? "No, don't do it, there's so much to live for!" There isn't. Life is pointless and you living yours or not has zero consequences on the rest of the world.

Being a paedophile is shit and our lives are shit. And? Why don't we all just kill ourselves en masse? Because, you know what, we're not all miserable, and we're not all pussies. Now, if you decide your life isn't worth living, no one will stand in your way while you kill yourself, and your death will mean nothing to anyone. Complete silence and indifference, pretty much the opposite of what you want, judging by what you're posting here.

>>9208

There exists some nonzero possibility that your words here can move someone to kill themselves. Not just OP, but pretty much anyone who feels similar to OP.

I'm assuming you're not some sort of horrible monster, which is a great leap here, but have you considered that maybe you shouldn't taunt someone, call them a whiner, and accuse them of behaving like an infant when they say they want to kill themselves? Have you considered that this is not the best possible approach to take in this situation?

Would you even care if your words directly contributed to someone killing themselves?

Which countries would be the most suitable for a BLer who prefers boys in their early teens the most? I come from a 1st world country where AoC is 16 and breaking that would have devastating consequences.

>>9211

Define early teens?

Spain, Brazil, Cambodia.

Thailand used to be good, but they've cracked down on white pedos now.

I really don't understand why people would want to kill themselves just for having feelings for minors, as long as you don't actually hurt a child. Sure society hates you for who you are and most people are ignorant/hysteric assholes who would like to see you suffer for it but why give a fuck about their hypocritical morality? Just accept yourself and learn to cope with your desires - they are not objectively/inherently wrong - nothing is objectively right or wrong - so don't let society plant their seed of guilt in your mind. You don't have to explain your thoughts & feelings to anyone but yourself. Fuck them.

>>9209

Read what I wrote: I already don't care whether anyone lives or dies. What OP *decides* to do with himself is entirely his responsibility. We are all alone and our freedom is brutal. If I believe life is pointless, how could I possibly give a toss? I'm preserving OP's agency as a subject.

Unless OP personally tells me to go fuck myself and that I am wrong, I really don't care. Depending on how he does it, I'll probably still not care. Most people, even if they hijacked the thread at some point, were trying to help. OP's only reply was "no, no, I don't want help, I don't want to discuss anything, I want to be pitied and comforted". Fuck that. He doesn't deserve it, he's not special.

Call me a monster now, please? :)

>>9219

I really like your for that .webm and linking WTWTA's OST. It's my favorite movie ever and I think I somehow got a crush on Max. :S

However, I can relate fully to your whole post. :(

>>9211

The age of consent in Argentina is 13.

>>9212

Early teens I'd say 12-14. And I'm looking for permament immigration, not only for sex tourism. Spain's age of consent is 16 nowadays.

>>9223

The age of consent cannot be the sole reason to move somewhere. I'd like to have a country where forming relationships with boys is possible. Can some European countries do well for a BLer, say Austria, Germany or Estonia? Argentina has also been on my mind for quite a long time, but to be honest I have no idea how well can a BLer live there.

>>9215

Not a monster, just genuinely not a good person. I hope for your sake that one day you become better than what you currently are. But, in my experience, people rarely change, so you'll probably always be like this. It's kinda sad, in a way.

>>9229

I live in Austria - it's a nice country with a good social/ welfare system but in regards to pedophilia/hebephilia and homosexuality it's far from a "safe haven". People are usually pretty conservative - especially in more rural areas and politics are not particularly progressive either compared to average european standards (no same-sex marriage/adoption etc..) - the age of consent is 14 tho and there are local online sites who make it rather easy to get in touch with younger gay folks - http://iboys.at is one such page with I have been using in the past.

>>9237

Austria lowered its voting age to 16 recently. Does that affect the way teenagers are viewed in society?

>>9238

It's been a while since I was a teenager and I don't have kids so I can't really make an authentic statement about the current situation of teens in my country - although I did notice that they grow up a lot faster compared to 15 years ago - they are generally pretty well educated, are self-determined and know what they want. They are not paticularly nice/compassionate tho (the straight ones at least) and bullying is a problem here as well.