/phile/ - For those who think young.

well you only need one question "which age are you most attracted"

1-3

4-8

9-13

12-14

15-19

boom done.

>>3138

> was Cozi hotter in Dolphin Tale 1 or 2?

And anyone who says 2 has shit taste.

>>3142

Damn, I missed Dolphin Tale 2. The first movie was great. I need to watch the second at some point.

>>3144

Never seen either. They any good?

Also, you could ask a question about breast size preference? Smaller sizes would lean one way while larger would lean the other

>>3138

How about just sex/rape section or scale? Most of us like little girls to bleed, cry and beg for more. I don't want to marry one, they grow up to be used up sluts and i hate sluts. We want as many girl cunts and ass as we can get it. Fuck love.

>>3140

Yes that is the point of the survey you fucking retard. Don't be a fucking idiot your whole life , kill yourself please.

(WARNING: This is berating a user without reason. That's borderline shitposting and harassment. Watch it.)

>>3189

>I don't want to marry one, they grow up to be used up sluts and i hate sluts.

Yeah, if you fuck 'em and chuck' em instead of marrying them, of course they'll become used up sluts, you idiot.

Literally no one else here agrees with this bullshit you spew. Why the fuck do you have such disgusting opinions?

>>3138

>>3139

I guess I'd place myself in the 9-13 range, but I do find almost all ages pubescent and younger attractive. It would be interesting to have a broad study done and see where people land; both normies and those partial to le fruit vert and see how (or if) they vary.

>>3200

1. Innocence

2. flat - aa

3. If society wouldn't judge, I'd date a 9 yo.

4. none

5.

>>3139

7-11, but f I had to choose from your categories, I would say 9-13.

This girl is gorgeous !! Any nude or other pics in the appropriate sections of this forum ??

>>3200

I want her

>>3200

>1) Value most in Partner

Acceptance of who I am and sharing common values.

>2) Breast Size

Size doesn't matter so much as as long as they don't don't sag. Gotta be perky.

>3) Under 18/14?

Yes to both. If they liked me, my hard limit for doing anything sexy with a person would be 8 or so, just cuz I don't think they would be fully aware of what they're doing before hand.

>4) Experience?

Actually a turn off. Any more than 3 notches on her bedpost would move her out of the LTR zone.

>5) Carefree?

I'm generally pretty carefree, I think we would get along well. I generally don't like people that get to stuck up on anything.

>6) Which Hermione?

Whichever one she starts showing a hint of development, lol. Right now she's a feminist superstar, so I wouldn't touch her with a 10foot pole, lol.

>7) Ideal Date?

Netflix and Chill, actually, I don't really like netflix, but I really don't like going outside. Part of the reason I've had every girl break up with me so far is because I've never wanted to leave my computer.

>8)Love is…

Love is up to 3 different things, platonic love(for friends and family), romantic love(for a potential, current, or past partner, but lacks at least on element of true love) and True Love(Which is self-sacrificing, forgiving, and most importantly, reciprocal in kind).

>9) Manipulation tactic?

Probably sexual in a way that I/we haven't experienced before. I.e. "You get me that [thing] and I'll let you fuck me in the ass for the first time."

>10) A 15 year olds number?

Probably joke something along the lines of 'Your dad isn't going to run me down with an axe, is he?' Then hopefully she would show some concern/self-control and resend her offer if that seems likely. But I would take it.

>>3138

>>3139

I think the questions should go Ideal/Secondary/Unacceptable. For me for example, it would be

>Ideal

11-14

>Secondary

8-17

>Unacceptable

0-7, Or more than three years older than me(currently 25+)

Also, should be on scales of romantic or sexual. I would probably 'date' a five year old and go on cutie dates with her and wait a few years before I tried to do anything with her. I know a lot of guys that would gladly fuck a 14 year old, but would think they're way too immature to date.

>>4509

Ideal for me: 15-19

Very good: 20-25 and 12-14

Alright: 26 to varying ages depending on how women age.

>>4512

You probably want easy to answer questions. "What is love?" or "What if your favorite panty?" are examples of too broad questions.

>>4683 "What is love?" : a difficult question

.We Ask the same rights as homosexuals

If I have to choose from those ranges, I'd mostly want to fuck (and this is exclusively sexually) a 4-8yo with 9-13 coming in a close second. 1-3 is third and 14 or above would be completely unacceptable.

>>4744

lol, you guys ruin it for us ephebophiles. Not your fault, but yeah, lol

>>4744

I doubt the average 4-9 can handle "fucking".

>>5076

maybe not the average 4-9. but if they've been trained properly they could. especially in the upper range of around 7-9.

>>5081

>There's plenty of other things to do that aren't penetrative.

Of course there are.

Sometimes you just want to be balls deep in a lg's ass or pussy, and if she's willing to go through with taking it slow and building up to it, then I ain't gonna say no, cuz of, you know…"ur age."

>>4744

>>5076

>>5078

>>5081

>>5084

Only one sure safe way to find out: lg sims for Oculus Rift and whatever VR becomes in a few years. For sure the #1 use will be for sex that would be deadly IRL. I could see it becoming a reliable and effective form of stress relief. Once or twice a day (limited only by your wallet cuz you know they'd charge big $) you plug in and go nuts. Plus it'd keep potential rapists in control since they'd be walking around empty all the time.

I'd probably stick to 4-9 as I imagine many guys would after starting 13-16 and then realizing they can change the settings MUCH lower. Only problem would be…who'd have the balls to take such an idea to a developer or patent office?

>>5078

You don't understand the female body. "Training" doesn't change development. Most girls that age can't handle an adult make penis (maybe if you are small but that is still a maybe)

The problem with posters like this is they make MAPs look sick, inconsiderate, selfish and using up little girls.

No sane parent would agree for any man especially one that talks like that to even come near their daughter. If a girl can't handle penetration then don't force her by claiming to "train her".

Disgusting.

>>5100

I have an average sized dick, 6.6 inches, and have had it in the pussy and ass of a 7yo, a 9yo, and a couple 10yo's. So yeah, like i said, lower range probably not, but upper range, around 7+ can handle an adult cock.

>>5106

>>5106

>>5098

We already know. You can actually examine the vagina now.

>>5106

I don't believe you. Talking with a pediatric gynecologist, I was told this would result in some kind of visible injuries (mild and superficial but still injuries) for the girl. Especially if she was prepubescent or in the early stages of puberty. Because the vagina can heal in a decent amount of time, it is harder to detect abuse overtime. However if you did engage in intercourse and they were examined within 24-72 hours there would probably be evidence. That unpon inspection would be noticed.

These comments are disturbing. The average girl is not equipped for sex. I could understand sex with an older teen but not a young girl.

These kind of people should be silenced if MAPs ever want rights. They don't seen to have concern for the implications of such comments.

>>5109

Nothing I can say or do to make you believe me, as I never took pics or vids of any activities, so…yeah.

You're right about injuries, and as you said, mild and superficial. Nothing requiring medical attention, so no reason for them to be examined. They were willing and it happened on more than one occasion. It's not like I raped them and they ran off and told on me after. Contrary to popular belief, some girls enjoy sexual activity and want more.

>>5109

That's exactly it. What we should be arguing is that girls can handle sexual contact. Trying to fight for penetration just makes us all sound like all want to do is stick a dick inside of loli pussy. I think when it comes to penetration its more case by case and it shouldn't be pushed or forced.

>>5110

Anything that causes mild injury shouldn't be pushed. But if the girl specifically wants that and is okay with that then you could proceed (with caution).

>>5111

The more children and sex are mentioned in the same sentence the more you'll be hated just for thinking or writing such things. Be patient. Let the antis get all freaked out as their lil angels go out and decide what they wanna do and with who.

>>5112

what i meant was we should be talking about sexual contact before we talk about penetration. then again, i don't think sex should be the focus of the conversation at all. i think maps need to talk much less about sex and more about showing affection and love.

we need to try to steer the focus of these discussions away from sex and more toward that. sex hadn't really even been the specific topic in this thread until >>4744

but you see how the whole thread was derailed?

>>5115

Affection and love are good talking points, but there are other things that may be more effective. For example, there are a few studies out there (namely Bodily Pleasure and the Origin of Violence) that show that cultures that discourage physical affection have higher crime rates, especially violent crime. This is very important to know, because it doesn't require thinking about sex (hugging is physical affection, after all), and shows how the world could be better, or how the current paradigm is fucking with people.

People need to be persuaded that the way the world works (regarding minor attractions specifically, and sex more generally) is actively harming them before they'll start getting it in their heads to change it. Child love itself won't convince people, but the detrimental effects of it's absence might.

>>5118

I like this line of thought. Never heard of those studies before. Do you have any links to any of them?

>>5110

Sex shouldn't result in any injuries. The fact this doesn't bother you is problematic. Comments like these make it seem like you are going to have sex with girls despite the negative consequences to them. Any injury to the reproductive system of a child is enough for medical attention. You aren't a doctor so your assumptions can't be taken seriously. Not only that, but she should be going to a gynecologist because she is sexually active. Sexually active females must go to a gynecologist.

This isn't just about rape. Consensual sex can result in injury. Clearly if you couldn't avoid injuries then she is too young for sex, especially since they might have been prepubescent.

This is not about enjoying sex, but about making sure the girls are healthy and not injured. I sure people who caught STDs/STIs enjoyed the sex they had.

>>5112

Very disturbing that you indeed don't think it is problematic that genital-related injuries for a girl is not something to freak out about. You sound like him objectifying girls and not having concern for their welfare. What you fail to understand is that sex has health risks especially for females. This man basically dismissed the child's well-being.

You are not grasping the point but rather making this about, "antis freaking out about sex".

Yes having daughter and the idea of them being injured by a man because he wanted to have sex with them is disturbing. This is a sloppy slope into other people using girls and not being concerned for their well-being. Us "antis" don't want girls being pregnant or girls getting STDs/STIs. This is an issue of well-being and you can't pretend to care about girls if you dismiss them being hurt. This is why we freak out. You forcing penetration on girls (yes they enjoy it but like unsaid earlier I'm sure people who caught STDs/STIs enjoyed that sex too) despite them being injured. You don't seem to bother to consider some girls being too young for penile penetration and it is selfish to make them do it any way.

>>5119

http://www.violence.de/prescott/bulletin/article.html

>>5121

What I see from that discussion is an attempt to discuss the potential of sexuality in children. Yes, they could have worded it better, but I don't think it's dismissing their injuries. Instead, I think it's a lack of over-protection. You don't rush a kid to the doctor for every scrape and bruise, and so they feel that applies to all minor injuries. Hell, if the injuries are minor enough, they won't affect the child while healing, which is hardly something to freak out over. Of course, it would be better to check with an gynecologist with any pain that persists during and after sex.

Also, men can have issues relating to sex, which would also be more likely while having sex with someone very young. Like tears in the foreskin which would be exposed to the native bacterial flora of her vagina. If you're going to bring up some of the dangers, you should bring them all up.

Lastly, to many MAPs sex doesn't mean penetration. There are so many ways to experience sexual intimacy without penetration that the risk of injury need not be taken. I won't give examples, you probably don't want to hear, and are smart enough to figure it out if you do.

P.S. Using the word 'problematic' on an 8chan board is a good way to get your point written off without consideration. Too many negative connotations. Just a tip.