/phile/ - For those who think young.

This is exactly the kind of thread I was hoping for, but never started because I'm a shit cunt.

What to tackle first though?

Consent is difficult, because what is consent? Is it consent to want something? Or must you understand the consequences before it's acceptable?

Adults do things all the time without being aware of the consequences, especially with the guidance of others. Drugs, alcohol, property, business, finance, all these things have consequences that are unknown, at least the first time one gets involved, and they all require some form of consent (I will concede that you can do drugs or alcohol without consent, but its the same with sex, and we aren't discussing how to rape). How to we justify it to ourselves? We say that as adults we've thought through the possible failings, or we've got someone to help us, or 'Fuck it'. We suggest that informed consent can be skirted with hypothetical information.

This applies directly to child/adult relations. We can skirt the informed consent of the child, by making sure they understand the potential consequences, both good and bad, if they're old enough. The ability to think for themselves begins to develop around 8, (I'll find a source for this later) which seems a good starting point to blur the lines. That doesn't mean sexual contact younger than this is wrong, rather that it requires a different form of consent.

Being an also means looking out for the welfare of children, occasionally making decisions for them, without their understanding of why. We take them to theme parks, or sign them up for sports because we know they'll enjoy it, and it isn't inherently harmful. Applying this to sex would rule out penetration (depending on child, I guess), but not oral sex. We know they'll enjoy it, and sex isn't inherently harmful.

A final thought on the pro side is that we make kids do things they don't want to because it's good for them. They eat vegetables, they go to school, they sleep early. Sex has beneficial qualities, and understanding the mechanics and effects of sex is important to having a healthy sex life in later years. This is not a argument for rape, but rather an argument against abstinence. A child may fear sexual interaction initially, but with gentle reassurance that fear can dissipate in favor of enjoyment.

On the anti side, the source of harm is irrelevant. Whether sex itself is harmful or not, there will be harm caused by social pressures, and direct pressure if the acts are discovered. It would be wrong to subject a child to this without some warning, thereby putting 0-7 sexual contact in a very murky moral grey.

Is it possible to describe the effects of peer pressure? Or what it feels like to be a pariah? If not, it is impossible to inform a child capable of free thought about the potential dangers of sex, and would therefore make them unable to give informed consent.

My personal stance? It is possible to describe social pressure to a child, because they already experience it, at school or with their friends. With this in mind, I think 8 is an acceptable Age of Informed Consent, where the morality is a light enough grey.

However, in political campaigns, you should always aim for the extreme, so that when you compromise, you may end up where you want. I will argue for the abolition of Age of Consent laws, so that a lowering can be achieved.

Consent: They already do that, but what they are agreeing to is the blurry part. Most of them agree to "one time things", or "for this week", or "Meh, why not, no LBF, he'll do for a while"… But most guys think… "LGF for life, or until I want another one that's cute…"

Thus, as with everything, communication should never be blurry, or implied, or unplanned without an actual goal in mind, other than Fuck LGF… Then think about tomorrow.

(Nothing needs to be said about non-consent, as that is just rape. But ill-information and neglect of understanding is also, in an essence, rape… when the "moment is over", but he/she goes all "marital" on them, or slave-owner… and just assumes he/she can take it, as they already gave it once, or a few times, or while there was actual interest… Same with marriage, but they can't seem to get a divorce, and thus, are essentially just raped from that point on.

AGE: For sex or pleasure? Sex, if it can fit, without breaking the girl, and all precautions have been taken, and understood, then that should be the limit. Age actually has nothing to do with it, except for "mental comprehension", where obvious thinking should be done by the other party. Failure to think, should be a punishable crime, when it leads to harm, abuse, rape, etc… shit we already have laws for. Though, I can't see valid justification for any age below 6 to be having "sex"… Not that I think 6-9 is much better, but that is the natural pre-development "try it" phase of life. On my past, 6 was when I started doing sexual stuff with peers, myself, and babysitters. (Not any adults though.)

What is sex to a pedophile: Depends… Not all pedo's have sex, or want sex. Some are just sexually attracted. Some want to hurt, some want to please them, some want only to please themselves. Sex is sex, no matter what age. Pleasure is pleasure, no matter what age.

I didn't have "sex", until I was about 11, but I did try a lot from 6-11. Wasn't quite sure how to do it, or what I was intended to get out of it. Once I turned 11, I started having ejaculation orgasms, then it all made sense… (By 17 I was sleeping with a married 28-year-old, who was also sexually active at a young age. We had something to relate to, but not in the same ways. Hers was more of falling in love with her "capture". Mine was all consensual "show me yours, I'll show you mine"… "Can we try this? pointing to a photo in a dirty magazine…"

The bigger question is, "What, as a pedo, do you count as love, and how do you intend to show it?"

Treatment of LGS: They should be treated as humans, with human rights. (Not as kids, but with the understanding that they still, as any young adult has to do, learn… many things. And understanding that they will fuck-up, unintentionally. And, as young adults do, become catty and irrational at times, beyond any control, as they are individuals with their own desires and needs, which may include being stupid or hurtful, in spite, to vent or to get revenge on you, for when you do stupid catty shit to them, like treat them like dumb slaves or like children or without equal respect as humans.

Beyond that… There isn't much I can offer as "my opinion", unless you, or anyone, gets into specifics of some situation, without being biased on the situation, or flavoring it to the "story-tellers" favor, or against the opposition… Because then you are just looking for someone to be "on your side", which won't ever happen with me. I am on no-ones side, ever. I take everything into consideration. I would make a horrible judge… I am too honest and logical, and understanding. (I would be the one giving a criminal a second chance, by statistics, because he/she might not repeat shit again, then get disappointed when they don't learn. Instead of the judge who just incarcerates the whole world, because they might, potentially, on a rare statistic, remain stupid.)

>>3993

So you touched on the different facets of consent which I like. I think that there's definitely more to consent than just "they're this age, therefore this."

I do want to bring up "power dynamic", which was brought up in another thread recently. Basically, the two sides were arguing whether a "power imbalance" existed. First, it's important to know exactly what is meant by the term. For me, I don't think there's a huge "power imbalance" with child-adult relationships. And there are power imbalances with adult relationships.

I think it all comes down to how they use their power. If an adult male uses his insight, experience, etc. to help, enlighten, and give to his partner, then that's good, isn't it? And this isn't to say that she'll be the only one learning because as we all know, as humans, we never stop growing and learning. A defining characteristic of any healthy relationship is the give and take; when two people are learning from each other it's a great thing. So, to sum up my point, if there is any inherent "power imbalance" in child-adult relationships, that imbalance should be used to give power to the one that is "lacking" it and to help that person grow, improve, and learn.

>>3994

>The bigger question is, "What, as a pedo, do you count as love, and how do you intend to show it?"

What do you mean by "what do you count as love?" Could you rephrase the question maybe?

Are you asking it is as a broad question or in reference to relationships with minors?

I mentioned doing a poll in a different thread the other day for seeing the stances people had but also because it would make sorting through information alot easier. Like instead of long paragraphs that might be saying the same thing.

If we rightfully assume that pedophila is natural and just, then it would make more sense to first see where we all stood and after see if its still right for us to feel that way.

we'd also avoid going too deep and reaching, hows and whys, that are unnecessary and unanswerable.

>>3993

>Concent?

what are the inherent conquences that you risk when having sex with someone that this would need to be a question.

>caused by social pressures, and direct pressure if the acts are discovered

these aren't improtant

>>3994

>AGE: For sex or pleasure?

I'd say there shouldn't be any age limit for kissing or just touching, though that would fall back into concent …

>Not all pedo's have sex, or want sex. Some are just sexually attracted. Some want to hurt, some want to please them, some want only to please themselves

People who don't want to have sex are already legal and people who want to rape are already criminals.

These people also not important.

>What, as a pedo, do you count as love, and how do you intend to show it

Shouldn't it just be assumed that what ever love there is would be on the same spectrum as the legal relationships ? That we would want the same freedom they have.

>>3996

Power Imbalance

In a different board I remember reading about relationships with children involving their parents, like that the parents would be the ones to decide the relationship not that the parents would be dating their child.

While it was mostly about concent I think parental involvment would probably solve any problems with power inbalances ?

>>4000

"Love", to some is just sex. To some, it is compassion or understanding. To some, it is sacrifice, mutual or one-sided. To some, it is nothing more than a "Friend with benefits", and that is counted as love… such as a wife who "has to have sex, because we are married, and I want it."…

That is why it is important to know what anyone's belief of "love", what THEY think it is… (As opposed to believing what sex is… sex is sex, there is no "belief" there, only fact.)

>>3996

"those who don't have sex"… not breaking the law…

Wrong… tongue-kissing, erotic massage, fingering, blowjobs, anal, cunnilingus, nursing on nipples, talking dirty, mutual masturbation… are "Not sex", but "sexual", and those are all illegal. Sex is the act of penetration for procreation. Nothing-else. Penis in vagina, though, anal is also counted as sex, as horribly inaccurate as it is to the term. (Because you fuck it. Not often an action of a blowjob, but when fucking a mouth, then it would also be counted as sex. Fucking being the act of forcing yourself within the orifice, as opposed to using the orifice for pleasure. As when rubbing your penis on a vagina opening, is not considered as sex, but a sexual act.)

Semantics, I know… but some people don't even want any of that, or sex. When I refereed to sex, it was a penetration of an orifice, as fucking. (Just to be clear of "my" use of the term sex. Which varies widely. Most kids, including myself, barely even count most of the above as even being sexual. In essence, rubbing a palm is sexual, or a belly, or a hug/embrace, which, as stated, is many-times counted as "acceptable", but there are many instances when it is not too.)

>>4001

Oops, the board reversed the quotes… top one is for 3996, bottom one is for 4000

Nice post… 4000 & 000000 Like orgasmic…

>>4000

>what are the inherent conquences that you risk when having sex with someone

Sexual Disease, Sexual Addiction, Pain, Not being able to stop when you want, Rape. Naturally, all of these can be mitigated through getting to know the person you're having sex with, and setting clear boundaries. With child sex, this means the adult must pay attention to their little lover for subtle cues as to what they want, and the child must know that they can say no if they want.

This approach works for committed and casual relationships, though moreso in the latter.

>social pressures, and direct pressure

>these aren't important

I beg to differ, but I've already made an argument for why.

>3996

I'll talk about Power Dynamics after I collect my thoughts.

>>4003

Before discussing power dynamics, it is important to define it, so that we're on the same page.

Power, in this context, refers to the social standing of an individual. This is affected by many factors, including wealth, charm, knowledge, and surrounding environment. A lawyer has wealth and charm, but still has less power than a weeb at an anime convention. It is important to note that power is a fluid and immaterial thing, and is often not perceived consciously until it is being wielded.

With enough power, one becomes an authority figure. An authority figure is difficult to argue against, due to the respect they receive. Favors asked by them are treated almost as orders, and often failure to oblige is punished in some way.

Many anti's think that adults in adult/child relationships are authority figures. In some cases they're right. For example, teachers, parents, priests, and doctors are all in a position of authority. However, where antis go wrong is when the adult is not in these kind of positions.

In adult/child relationships free of authority, adults initially have more power. They have the wisdom of experience, they have a job and money, the know how to convince people to do things, and they're more deft with their uses of power. However, if and when a child learns how to use their own power, they actually have more than the adult. The word of a child relating to sexual abuse claims is almost sacrosanct, and the punishment to the adult is extreme. Children aren't stupid, and can easily figure this out.

Each relationship is different, so it's hard to say with certainty what will happen. In terms of power dynamics, it's fluidity and prevalence within society makes it mean practically nothing.

To sum up my thoughts:

Power Dynamics is an interesting intellectual discussion of observation, but has little use in moral judgments.

Use of authority is fine, Abuse of authority is wrong.

Children aren't idiots, and will learn power plays in time.

I didn't get into this above, but if an adult is improving the life of their little lover, then power imbalance is entirely irrelevant.

If this makes no sense, forgive me. It's very early.

-Consent

The child is informed. The adult has to know the child for more than 3-6 months. (No one night stands or meeting a child, talking for a week and baking them.)

-Age

No age. Rather just have it done case by case. For example Sally may be ready at 4 while Jane may be ready at 10. Why make Sally wait because girls like Jane aren't ready? To set an age is the whole reason this mess began. No AOC laws rather make it case by case with one guardian agreeing or have the child prove they are ready. Make it mandatory that all girls learn in preschool about sex.

-What is sex to a pedophile?

Who cares ask what is sex to girls. Quit making everything about the man. Focus on the girls. I believe once again case by case. If Sandy only wants rubbing them fine while Mary wants full penetration.

-Treatment of lgs

IMHO:Against the rules

No name calling. (Slut, bitch,white etc)

Waiting until you know the child is informed but also not doing anything sexual for the first month

Monogamous relationships, they are not playboy bunnies

No one night stands.

No telling them what you want sexually they decide. If they change their mind it better be because they decided not you bitch and moaned until they said no.

No revenge with break ups. An asshole on hebe posted pictures of his ex lgf to get revenge (his words) and called her a Cunt. NO!!!!!!!

No stalking, obsessing, etc.

Don't have cp if you have a lgf. I actually don't like cp anyway.

Help fund her future if you are exclusive (because if them growing up means you no longer are interested then you should be extra careful not to use up their youth)

Based on the previous one, let your intentions be known. Put everything out there. If you want to get married and start a life with her, or you are exclusively attracted to girls between certain ages. If she is looking for marriage but you just want a going let her go. Don't use her up and ruin her for a an wanting to marry a virgin loli.

Don't ever hurt, abuse, cheat, use, lie, beat, rape, give and STD infection to her.

I'm sure I'll think of more. Also if a man breaks these rules especially the bad ones he should be severely punished. Like crucified. Or at least beaten up. Even petty shit like name calling or referring to her genitals as "cunt" deserves some kind of blacklash. I feel we should be strongly convicted to go after and stop bad behavior. It's not just about us being good but stopping and punishing the bad people.

>>3990

It is interesting to see that there are still such strong "morals", within all the various groups of us.

My only concern is those who just don't give a fuck at all, don't act with any kind of morale-judgement (not even bad judgement), and just do impulsive shit, and think… "Well, I'll deal with the rest of the shit later"… (Or they are the ones who then go-on to do the heinous killings later, or just slut-hop from town to town, raping street-loli's…)

Like with laws, they are not intended for those following them, they are intended for the criminals who have no desire to follow them. Ironic…

>>4006

Also adding to that list, the cunning deceptive fuckers who think this is all just a fucking game. (Typical players)… They love the challenge of manipulation… "Damn, I can't believe I got her to do that!… What else can I get her or him to do… or some other person?"

I forgot what the mental psychosis for that condition was… but it was similar to sociopath, or psychopath or something… But not those two…

>>4004

> if an adult is improving the life of their little lover, then power imbalance is entirely irrelevant

exactly

>>4005

>The adult has to know the child for more than 3-6 months. (No one night stands or meeting a child, talking for a week and baking them.)

I like this line of thought a lot.

>Make it mandatory that all girls learn in preschool about sex.

I think preschool is way too young to be putting all that information in their heads. Middle school obviously they should be told about sex and all that. Elementary school is up in the air I guess.

>Who cares ask what is sex to girls. Quit making everything about the man. Focus on the girls.

I agree.

>No name calling

Yeah

>Waiting

Yeah

>Monogamous relationships

This is a big one and I completely agree.

>No revenge; No stalking, obsessing, etc.

Yeah

>Don't have cp if you have a lgf

Yeah I mean there'd be no point. I don't really have a problem with this one.

>Don't ever hurt, abuse, cheat, use, lie, beat, rape, give and STD infection to her

Of course.

>if a man breaks these rules especially the bad ones he should be severely punished

I agree. People that break these rules don't have their lgf's best interest at heart and are only out for self gain.

>>4003

When I said they weren't inportant I meant for us to really be conserned about because we aren't the ones who can change it. Also because you mentioned that it was really only a consern for children under 8?

Would a 7 year old really bully a kid worse for having a lover than they would for almost anything else. Is that even a problem with kids that age, harsh bullying. With adults, you have the kids parents (who might already be approving of it) and then school people they might know or other adults that usually work with the kid, people that would lose their jobs for making a kid feel bad. And if they know a lot strangers somehow .. the world a kid would have to live in for them to talk to adults without a care would probably be one where they wouldn't be outed for dating one.

>>4005

>Waiting until you know the child is informed but also not doing anything sexual for the first month

If the child knows what sex is when you meet them why wait the month or anytime period at all ? when they're ready they're ready.

>Monogamous relationships, they are not playboy bunnies

>No one night stands.

Why can't sexual relations be recreational?

Are you implying that they would all have to be romantic? If they aren't ( or are, it really doesn't matter) why not you and the child have multiple parters? I'm not suggesting that be the norm or that even being what I personally want, but I fail to see why it shouldn't ever happen at all.

>No stalking, obsessing, etc.

Is this statement talking about in a world where we're allowed to talk to children or the current one we live in now ?

>Don't have cp if you have a lgf.

Why? Hell you could watch it with them

Please let's not devolve into another NAMBLA. Love and affection are both fine. Actually they're great. The more everybody gets to kiss and cuddle with those they love the better. Just remove the whole sex thing entirely. Imagine a climate where MAPs view virginity more as a virtue worth preserving in lgs (at least until the girls decide otherwise).

Girls are maturing much faster these days so they'll probably be the ones making the big decisions for us. Just remember that all acts from adult to child are acts of force, so be respectful and kind, and know that you don't have to come up with an excuse to do something good, but there are many things for which there can be no forgiveness. Cause no trouble. Glory to Arstotzka.

>The adult has to know the child for more than 3-6 months. (No one night stands or meeting a child, talking for a week and baking them.)

While I feel longer relationships should be the norm, and one night stands discouraged, I don't think this rule should be as harshly enforced. If a little girl wants a one night stand, why make it so difficult? If the MAP engaging in short relationships is not treating his partners with disrespect, or hurting them, I see no problem. It's not like it would happen very often anyway.

>Make it mandatory that all girls learn in preschool about sex.

Start. Start teaching them in preschool. The information should be simple, the basics, like the difference between boys and girls, and respect for their bodies and others. Over the years the information gets more complex, until they are either having sex, or know what to expect when they eventually do.

>Who cares ask what is sex to girls. Quit making everything about the man. Focus on the girls.

I agree with the sentiment, although a slight nitpick: child. I don't agree with separating us into glovers and blovers.

>No name calling

Except jovially.

>Waiting

I agree with this, with an exception of waiting until the child wants to, and your judgement tells you there'll be no harm.

>Monogamous relationships

My experience tells me this becomes less possible the younger you go. Hell, many adults struggle to keep a relationship monogamous. I think this, like most things, needs to be discussed with the child.

>No revenge; No stalking, obsessing, etc.

Seems like sound advice for life.

>Don't have cp if you have a lgf

This seems silly to me. It's like saying don't look at porn when dating an adult. It doesn't make sense. How does it affect anything?

My qualms with CP are best left for a separate post, or maybe a video.

>Don't ever hurt, abuse, etc.

This seems natural for any loving MAP.

>if a man breaks these rules etc

I agree, but I think it should be social, not physical. Beating a man doesn't stop him from doing something, it might just make him spiteful. But, make a man feel inadequate or lesser for being an asshole, he's less likely to do it. If it doesn't work… out him. Current society will punish them worse than we could.

And that skipped female pedophiles entirely, but I don't think their treatment should differ.

>>4010

Whoops, I meant to say that social and direct pressure applies to all children, but older children especially. The adults treating her like a victim and harshly punishing an adult she loves will make her think something bad happened. That's what I meant by direct pressure.

In all things, the childs desires should be respected, and tempered with the adults good judgment.

Wow this thread turned out great!!! Good to see great minds at work.

With the divide over monogmous relationships, is really be a problem for us though? From what I understand this thread is to unifiy the community and from there now that we can be sure no ones going to stab someone in the foot, can move on to making child love legal? Like as a long term goal

So at the end of that, would monogamy be something that we would actually want to enforce with the law behind it? Out side of prefrences does anyone here strongly feel that polygamy shouldn't be an option and would want to be sure of it?

With all of this, I understand having a general mindset and attitude that would help immensely if we all shared but I can't help but look at this central philosophy as sorta a petition of what we want the freedom to do and what we want changed and not just what we believed. Given where I thought this might be headed…

>>4058

>No one's going to believe anything MAPs say if there aren't any examples of an A-C relationship that works.

Implying they wouldnt be dissmissive of it like they have in the past.

What do you mean a working relationship, lies! Clearly this child is suffering from stolkholm syndrome! How else would you explain why he/she doesn't show any signs of abuse and is happy in their relationship with an adult. Pedophilia is always harmful even when it isn't! - some anti probably

This isnt to say that we shouldnt have more relationships come out when they can … if that could even be possible, but that lack of proof isn't the problem.

>>4062

I'd say some of this is to unify but it's also in part to weed out the actual sickos that don't have their partner's best interest at heart at all.

>So at the end of that, would monogamy be something that we would actually want to enforce with the law behind it?

I don't know if it'd be something we'd have down on paper per se but, yes, I think it's a good idea to include it in the philosophy. Again, there are some people out there who are only interested in younger girls for sex. I personally don't want to associate with those people and don't think their point of view should be included in the philosophy. Obviously I want their point of view as long as it's respectable but at the heart of it this philosophy isn't just about sex. That's just one part of a larger subject that we're addressing.

>I understand having a general mindset and attitude that would help immensely if we all shared but I can't help but look at this central philosophy as sorta a petition of what we want the freedom to do and what we want changed and not just what we believed. Given where I thought this might be headed…

The philosophy is going to include freedoms because that's part of the belief itself. I wouldn't say it's a petition or anything. We're not writing a document saying "these are our demands". This is really to just get a wide array of opinions to bounce off each other and to hopefully come to a basic general philosophy that we (the non-offensive, loving MAPs) agree on.

>>4063

Uh. Yeah you're right. I'm not saying that it will be well received all the time or even most of the time. I'm just saying it could help others understand if they see the relationship and see that it isn't abusive.

Especially if the child's parents are okay with it. Then you're really making people think.

You can play a jazz song in front of people and some people may say it's metal, even when it clearly isn't. But at the end of the day, they're at least thinking (even if it's to themselves) "hmm maybe that's not metal".

I take certain poster here aren't fathers. I am. I have daughters. I would never let a man use her for sex. Those of you who are just interested in sex only and still want to use cp are disgusting and quite frankly foolish. You must not understand the concept of protective fathers. Trust me on this one. I've talked to other fathers. It it comes to our girls and selfish men……it gets ugly. Lol.

First off young girls will grow up into bitter women if you only care about sex and then show them child porn. To what? Tell them to do that? To make them feel insecure? If you dated adult women (like me) you know they don't like you watching porn. The one that did like it actually was whorish. She wanted 3ways, was a size queen and liked sex to be rough.

Personally I don't like porn i think too much of it warps you. For example those of you opposed to porn are also only concerned with just having sex with girls. Those of you who say "sex is just sex" are the kind of MAPs who are ignorant. Sex has so many components to it. Sex isn't inherently bad but that doesn't mean it doesn't have negative consequences or risks. Raising daughters has taught me that girls need emotionally connection. That sex or a sexual experience can cause a strong emotional connection for girls that doesn't happen for men. They aren't sex dolls with high sex drives. They aren't super obsessed with getting laid. They feel that they are giving themselves to a man.They do have a sexuality but not like you may think. I am open about sex talk with them. Because of how the world works they aren't going to throw away their virginity or have a sexual experience with a random guy. They want to give themselves to a guy who they have connected with. Now older girls may be more open to give themselves up but still.

Girls deserve you completely not just sexually. You should want to spend time with her. Learn who she is as a person. Be a role model and a guide. I would never just let a man use up my daughter. They are sweet, funny, amazing human beings. You are foolish to just be so focused on sex. Girls can offer so much more than just sex.

I hate MAPs whose only concern is sex and porn. You are the reason we can't be trusted. The focus should be on the child's needs. Not you getting to cum the way you want to. You are so self-centered, so programmed to think about girls as sex objects it seems to offend you to give up cp or to actually spend any time with a child outside of sex. You can't say you care about girls but then get mad when you can't get all your demands. Maybe I misunderstood what this forum stands for.

>>4067

>If you dated adult women (like me) you know they don't like you watching porn. The one that did like it actually was whorish. She wanted 3ways, was a size queen and liked sex to be rough.

My experience was and is much different. My adult lovers like when I watch porn, because I have a higher libido than they do. They don't want sex as much as I do, so I watch porn. This way I'm not frustrated and irritable, and I'm not raping or cheating. Don't think you're experience is the only correct one, nor that a bad experience spoils the whole thing.

>That sex or a sexual experience can cause a strong emotional connection for girls that doesn't happen for men.

Are you implying that sex isn't emotional for men? Because that is just sexist. Sex causes a cocktail of hormones to fuck with your brain in a good way. Both men and women get emotionally connected to who they sleep with, if they aren't prepared for the high. It's why some men put up with insanity to stay with a woman, and it's why some women stay with dirtbags. Well, it's one of the reasons.

>You are so self-centered, so programmed to think about girls as sex objects it seems to offend you to give up cp

No. I am offended that you are trying to tell me what to do with my spare time. If I want to watch CP, by myself, for my own pleasure, why do you care? I don't understand the logic.

I don't agree with seeking children just for sex, and would love to find my own lgf. However, we shouldn't silence dissenting opinions. We should invite them, and learn from them through discussion and debate. It's how we can improve ourselves before we go public (and destroy their straw houses).

Except for rapists. Fuck rapists.

>>4058

>>4050

Right on. So glad to finally see a forum where comments are complimented and good ideas have room to stretch out. You're helping to make progress possible and I thank you.

To the parents and all concerned people in general, I'm convinced there will soon be some sort of holodeck technology which will quickly prove that practically ALL men would have sex with underage girls if they were willing, able, and eager, and if it could be done safely. What better place than VR for such things?

Assuming controls were put in place (by law most likely) it would then prove how many hebes/pedos/MAPs mostly desire affection just like the girls we're attracted to. At present we're assumed to be dangerous predators. Will misconceptions change as the "Cuddle With My Favorite Candydoll" game becomes the most popular DL from Playstation Network?

Whatever shape the future takes I look forward with optimism.

>>4067

>I have daughters. I would never let a man use her for sex.

Maybe you should ask your daughters about what they are want to do? Not what are you want to do. Don't be selfish. It's their lives, not your. Don't be overprotective. It's always bad for kids.

I know this thread has only been up for about a week now but it would be nice if we put some goals down.

Like this isn't the first time its been asked to a bunch of pedophiles what they thought about pedophilia, in a forum. I'd say every pedophile forum thats ever existed has done this … without a goal in mind or reason for asking. Unify the maps.. by asking, what maybe 10 people, what they think? Even if there were more people, it still feels like its missing a few steps.

>>4259

Possible rule 1: Never harm or frighten a child…unless she asks you first.

>>4259

I thought this thread was a purely intellectual discussion, with the goal of applying critical thought to /phile/ attractions. There has been a little talk of political or social applications, but this thread is little too broad to properly address those topics.

>>4276

Our chivalry is pretty much covered it would be best if we moved beyond that.

>>4277

>purely intellectual discussion, with the goal of applying critical thought

As if maps havent had enough of those over the years, we're sharp enough! These sorts of discussions are having us talk in circles while the world goes by. Something I thought this thread, when first encountering it, sought to end.

>political or social applications, but this thread is little too broad to properly address those topics

what do you mean exactly ?

>>4259

I doubt most groups are fully unified. Even the gay community and minorities who've gone through unimaginable suffering…they' can't even agree 100% of the time. Not likely that MAPs who are hebes or regular guys into JB will agree with or want to get lumped in with MAPs who like girls under 10.

There is often strength and safety in numbers, but getting lumped into a group also makes you more easily condemned and attacked, all because of popular misconceptions and the actions of a few bad apples.

Virtues start with the individual. Regardless of who or how you are, always do the right thing, or at least try. Get your own house in order. Lead by good example and others may follow.

>>4297

>Virtues start with the individual. Regardless of who or how you are, always do the right thing, or at least try. Get your own house in order. Lead by good example and others may follow.

I dont think you understand, we aren't trying to change each other but how antis and most of the world sees us. That said, you could be the best damn person in the world but without any existing pedophile group that doesn't suck people are always going to look at pedophilia in good people as a contrasting humanizing error. Whats to stop them from thinking this…

"Shame John Doe is a pedophile, even though hes practically a saint and figured out how to turn matter into energy *sigh* but I guess we all have our faults we're only human and even if that guy was perfect hes still a pedophile"

Without any sort of organzation of people saying that childlove is ok and taking it to the public as a group of people instead of an individual you could write off,without any sort of unification even if its not all of the maps. Pedophilia will never be acepted

>There is often strength and safety in numbers, but getting lumped into a group also makes you more easily condemned and attacked, all because of popular misconceptions and the actions of a few bad apples.

Because thats totally, just totally not how it is for us right now. Being condemed and attacked because of popular misconceptions and actions of a few people. Nooo people hate pedophiles for sound, thought out, scientific reasons that aren't in anyway based on or effected by stereotypes and hysteria brought on few bad apples.

I'd address what you said at the start about people not always being a 100% on the same page and whatever else with you seemingly being against a unity or a movment, its hard for me to tell…. along with how having one would only help with every endevor, but that would mean I would have to assume that's what the words "unify the MAP community" we're leading too.

An assumption Im probably making too often.

>>4007

This thread should be on issues like these. 4006 and 4007. If we can set clear guidelines in simple understandable words it would be best for all. If we set what we don't want to see, all will fall in place; because not all of us are pure evil, those we already excluded in the 'rules'.

No drugging of lolis. Especially the ones detrimental to long term use. Overdosage unless extreme care is used, is likely, due to their little sizes. I'd say psylocybin and THC are feasible with proper dosage control.

>>4299

Right on. Pedos of the world unite. I mostly agree and I want to think as positive as possible but…seriously, are we gonna meetings or something? A million MAP march? When I imagine even three of us in a room together I think of Patton Oswalt's bit on what he sees every week on free comic book day; a very delicate ballet of shy basement-dwellers, no eye contact, no touching. No disrespect since I'm over 30 and still playing Skyrim and Fallout so…

Getting back to progress, it's the future. As long as information is freely available and instantly verifiable, liars can't keep driving policy forever. Facts are starting to trump fear more often. Just stay informed, learn more every day, remember that you're only as good as your source, and most of the time the news you're seeing might be two people throwing around opinions and wild assumptions while calling it a debate. That said…..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGL5eRw7rXU

Everyone should see this at least once; Joe Rogan and this month's most vocal bitch-slapper of lying femi-Nazis and SJWs. It's 3 hours and every bit is worth seeing for the entertainment value alone, but about an hour and 10 minutes in Milo drops one of many bombs which I think most of us will want to pay attention to:

"Pedophilia [has been set up as] the next gay/bisexual/lesbian…it's the next frontier in the civil rights struggle."

I'm hoping this thread can continue. Can we at least agree on some kind of slogan or idea? All week I've been thinking of the same one. There's probably much better ones, this is just to start.

Play Nice

Apologies for typing like an idiot Anonimity is top priority

Youre not gonna get minor attracted people to agree on much. Most with strong feelings dont see reality. Objectification is prob#1 but rationalizing relationships is prob#2 and also huge.

I think trading nn pix and pix that minors took is ok but other people say all pix should be deleted because they say trading pix causes more people to steal pix or blackmail minors. I dont think people will stop trading or blackmailing. some people say banning pix and deleting old pix will make people think more about what they do but i dont know if i believe that it would change much and i think making pix illegal would mess up more lives than it would save

Lots of people say its ok to talk or persude minors to get them to do things. it isnt ok though and many MAPs will tell you so even though they are the minority on boards.

Lots of people disagree about CP already circulating. many want to keep it and say it is ok but some think any CP being traded makes people create more Cp and so it should be deleted.

An almost exclusive pedo or hebe or ephebe doesnt think about kids as people they think of them like children think about crushes and romance its overidealistic not rational.

Any rational person thinks of minors as people first and cares too much about their safety and happiness to get romantic or sexual with them. Minors almost always arent ready for real relationships and a good person would bet that a minor isnt ready not bet that a minor they like is an exception.

Lots of minors have sex but it doesnt mean theyre ready for it and them having sex with someone doesnt mean its ok for an adult to have sex with them too.

i think its ok to look at pix and to fantasize but i think minors arent ready for relationships and a relationship with an adult going bad or breaking up could be bad so i think adults and minors shouldnt have romantic or sexual relationships

but i also think MAPs shouldnt go to prison for sex if the minor says they werent pressured and wanted to do it

i think they should be separated by court order until the minor is 18

if the minor says they were pressured or didnt want it even if they say that a few months later then i think the adult should be put on an offender list

if an adult isnt sure the minor would tell everyone they wanted it and didnt feel uncomfortable at all then the adult didnt know the minor well enough to do something with them

>>4543

No need to apologize as long as you make good points.

The main problem with CP is the definitions have been expanded to the point where EVERYTHING is considered CP, which means they're wasting time and resources looking at everyone as a potential predator instead of seeing the clear and obvious distinctions between those who harm children (most often their own relatives) and those who stay online looking at images somebody else took (all of us).

Making something illegal "just because" helps nobody. Unfortunately the most effective solutions involve people educating and learning protect themselves and the state giving up most of the power they love to abuse. But how likely is that?

As far as sex with minors, we need to stop connecting love and sex, just as the antis need to stop confusing pedos/hebes with rapists. The problem here is that people refuse to change their opinions on most things, especially when they've been misinformed and conditioned to live in fear their whole lives.

Laws, however, are slightly easier to change, as long as you go about it the right way. The only acceptable use of force is in self defense. Currently force is most commonly used by hacks to condemn and imprison anyone who offends or disagree with them. Until bad laws and the attitudes that drive them change we're all just talking in circles.

Until then keep learning and discussing. As Robert Steele said at H2K, "Don't give them a reason to lock you up forever…but embarrass the shit outta them!"

And as always, play nice.

you make some good points but…

>>4543

>Any rational person thinks of minors as people first and cares too much about their safety and happiness to get romantic or sexual with them.

I would argue the opposite. I'd say that many antis view children as dumb, mindless beings, and that (some, not all) MAPs view them as people first.

>>4545

>The main problem with CP is the definitions have been expanded to the point where EVERYTHING is considered CP, which means they're wasting time and resources looking at everyone as a potential predator instead of seeing the clear and obvious distinctions between those who harm children (most often their own relatives) and those who stay online looking at images somebody else took (all of us).

This is true

Bump good thread

>>4834

Agreed. Maybe we won't all agree but I'd at least like an answer to a question from years back: Why is CP the only crime it's illegal to see on video or in images? Every other crime caught on tape is made into a video game, TV show or movie. But even NN is now legally equal to a WMD!?! Please explain.

>>4848

Personally I think if one illegal act watched on video is illegal so should any other.

However I think because our society sees sexual abuse (or perceived) as the worst thing ever. Violence no longer becomes a problem when we talk about sex. Plus to sexually abuse children is seen as worse than any other crime. Society has picked that to be the worse crimes thus the people involved to be the worst beings.

>>4834

No this thread isn't a good thread, it was stupid a month ago and its still stupid now.

Its better to let it die and start a new one in a few months that has a point, than keep a vaguely themed pedo thread going.

>>4861

>contribute something to improve it.

Contribute what? This thread is like if you wanted to build a building but everyone kept starting over somewhere else and then left.

The thread started off around the idea of unity based on a central ideal, but it devolved into: antis and things related to them ,whats bad/good about cp,complaining about evil pedophiles you rarely see, coming out, contradictions in laws that we don't like,me complaining a few times over the last two months about the thread's aimlessness, pointlessly going into detail about what being nice to a kid is,etc.

This thread has just become a place to voice your opinions like you were preaching to the choir or making a twitter when you're not a famous person.

We don't have enough people on this board to just comment every thought we have related to pedophilia on this thread and think it'll take off.

>>4864

It's just an illustration of how our shitty community (not this board specifically, but "us" in general) doesn't get anywhere because we don't agree about anything. The reason the fucking self-haters are the organized ones is because their delusional bullshit unites them. They all think they're diseased and that they should fucking hate themselves and live shit lives.

>>4855

Any illegal act on video? That would effectively end all forms of entertainment. It'll never happen though, and not just because prohibition doesn't work, let alone selective prohibition like we have now. Those in power pick easy targets to attack so they can act righteous and get reelected.

The original question stands: why support selective prohibition, or anything that's been proven countless times not to work, and in most cases to work against most people?

In the interest of turning this thread back around into something constructive, think of something you can change in your area. Go to a town hall meeting if you're old enough to vote. The first time I went I was the youngest guy in the room by about 20 years, and when I asked a simple question it freaked a few people out. Those in power don't expect to be challenged, which is how they stick around forever and make sure that nothing changes.

Next year when everyone's pretending they're making a difference by voting for whoever gets to be the next Obama, pick something you can get done at your city, county, or state level. It might not be much but if everyone here could get one good law passed (or more importantly a really bad law removed) it's still a victory and one step towards things we can all get behind: less antis telling us how to live.

>>4865

I think the self haters appear to be more United because general society agrees with them. Any movement has disagreement, but the problem is there needs to be a name and a clear strict set of beliefs and rules.

>>4871

exactly.

>>4871

Society agrees with their self-hatred but they only agree there. The self haters want the world to believe they are not a threat to anybody and should mostly be left alone.

Society believes nothing is enough until you are fully rehabilitated aka castrated. Hell, I've heard castrated sex offenders (actual rapists etc) still "feel" the compulsion and want so even that doesn't fix everything.

Shit just sucks. This board is the only place I don't regret participating in.

>>4956

Oh how I wonder how much hatred is rooted in jealousy. That would explain so many bad laws, common misconceptions and attitudes.

On castration, they even try it with guys who've never had sex but are addicted to porn, once again proving that their favorite solution is always the one that allows them to vent their own frustrations by torturing others.

But things are slowly changing as more and more people wake up. Stay informed, don't let anyone get you down, and do what you can to drop some science on fools.

>>4957

Who is jealous?

Not to be rude but what has exactly changed? If anything I notice more hate. The only change I have noticed is Salon posting stories but the comment shave nothing but anger and hate.

I would like to point out that I am a logical person and in no way am I an anti.

I would like to discuss the perfect theoretical relationship for MAP.

>>4987

Of course I'm not implying that. What I'm suggesting is that given time they can come to understand how power works, and what power they have. Kids are great at learning and figuring things out. This is just another aspect of it. Like an extension of the concept of asking each parent individually to get what they want.

Yes, children can be doubtful, easily frightened and manipulated. A MAP should realize this and work towards mitigating these factors. If they use them to their advantage, they're not in a healthy relationship with a child, they're probably abusing them.

There are exceptions, for example distracting a really young boy so they can get their hair cut, or demanding a child eat their vegetables. But in most cases, it won't be a MAP needing to to this, or at least not without permission from the kids parents.

Is there such a thing as a perfect relationship? Because we're all individuals, with our own dreams, desires, fears, and failings, the idea of perfect is different for each of us. So long as you're working towards your own and each others happiness, it's probably a good relationship.

I'm happy to discuss the topic further, if you have questions or opinions.

>>4986

Many in the old mainstream and those who still follow them are outraged because they know they're no longer necessary and nobody cares what they think or say anymore. More and more people are waking up and realizing most of what they've been sold are lies and propaganda.

There's also a lot of desperation and there will be plenty more to come as rats who think they still have power and influence scurry for lifeboats that aren't there. Concentrate on the good things. Pretty soon most of what we've been conditioned to worry about won't matter.

>>5017

I have no idea what you are talking about. Can you be more specific?

>>4989

Any mutually beneficial relationship where a girl finds unconditional love and affection that she seeks is a beautiful thing. Ideally it would be the kinda thing that's not automatically presumed to be just as wrong as murder.

>>5018

Most of the antis get their misinfo from major media outlets who've been made irrelevant by the internet. On their way down they'll continue to do and say whatever they think will get them ratings. But looking good on TV doesn't make them right about anything, and most people know this.

Real change moves slowly but it's accelerating thanks to technology and instant access to the truth. Signs point to pedophilia being one of the next big minority rights battles we'll see, which is partly what I meant as far as "most of what we've been conditioned to worry about" not mattering in the future. We'll see. I chose to be optimistic.

>>5725

WHO

IS

THIS

GIRL???

>>4067

>You are the reason we can't be trusted

>we

not to be mean here but was this intentional or a slip?

-Consent (and when it may become to blurry)

15, before that age parent's permision should be needed for sex

-Age (and how young is too young?)

10

-What is sex to a pedophile?

i have never had sex but i think attitude to sex is pretty much similar in pedophiles as in normies

-Treatment of lgf

i have never had lgf, i would be friends with her and teach her

>>3990

>We're going to try to develop a central philosophy that MOST of us agree on.

A circle jerk?

>>5760

https://www.instagram.com/official_laneya_grace/

>>5909

>I've considered for a long time trying to formulate a kind of "MAP Code"

Why?

>>5763

seriously what the fuck are you doing here?

>>5916

why not?

>>5918

You act as though he said something to imply he doesn't belong here…

>>5919

>why not

Well back in late September, in a different thread, I was talking about how pedophilia never went anywhere because a couple of people would disagree with everyone else. I suggested that we should round up the majority and make a group out of them so we could get stuff done. Stanza agreed with me and later that day this thread was made.

I figured thats what this thread was about, summing up the majority so we could focus on other things, and as you can see, its clearly not. I've already asked before if this thread was ever going to quit being an ego stroke and all I got were vague answers.

So I still ask, Why make a "code"? >>5919 thinks you're just making it for fun because this is a club and one in need of silly codes and rituals and not serious shit.

>>5920

Well the other guy probably got annoyed with this line …

>how young is too young?

>10

Since I positive it goes, 5-10 pedophile 11-16 hebephile. I guess >>5920 thought this was a pedophile only board.

>>5930

yes, that's exactly why this thread was made.

the thread has sort of been derailed by some people but i'd like to get it back on track because i still think it's very important to have something like this.

so…regarding these points…

-Consent (and when it may become to blurry)

-Age (and how young is too young?)

-What is sex to a pedophile?

-Treatment of lgs

The law is generalised for a reason and there's exceptions. For example, you can drive through a red light to make way for an emergency vehicle.

Children are thought to not be able to consent as a rule. I believe the legal and medical establishment is beginning to realise that informed consent is possible for some young kids.. but the rule exists. I believe working on this, firstly, making the AoC a little more flexible, is a good move.

Perhaps if the parent consents, the child can be assessed psychologically for capacity to consent, therefore legally permitting the child to do so.

This seems to be the main sticking point in the justice system. The whole situation is based on assumptions and frankly, we can do better.

Mentally incapacitated persons can be tested for capacity to give informed consent, why can't children? Social conscience restricts the question even being asked.

>>5933

We have no idea when we're done because we keep discussing and giving lengthy needless explanations. We should try to keep answers as short as possible so we could turn this into a vote.

>>5935

>>5935

>Perhaps if the parent consents, the child can be assessed psychologically for capacity to consent, therefore legally permitting the child to do so.

>This seems to be the main sticking point in the justice system. The whole situation is based on assumptions and frankly, we can do better.

The root cause of the problem then, the way I see it is not so much consent-incompetent minors, but incompetent parents in general.

Which frankly, I also see reflected in the way the legal system just suddenly "kicks you out of the nest" when you turn of the various mish-mash of legal ages, of so-called "protections" that minors "enjoy" under the law, and basically washes its hands of what happens to you and leave you to make mistakes and expect you to learn from them and own up to your own responsibility.

Why, for example, is there different ages for criminal responsibility, sexual responsibility, and legal responsibility?

Part of the problem is how the state views people, and how parents view their children: As having less rights because they have power over them and that makes it easier.

I don't really much like to discuss on chans though, too poor forum-structure and too many trolls / mental cases.

>>5933

Lately I've been hearing more and more about sex, CP, children, etc on my favorite podcasts. To my surprise the guys I listen to most who are parents have said that they treat their own kids like people instead of babies, interacting with them as they would any other adult. As a result they've matured well beyond their years and are excelling in ways their classmates and friends probably never will.

The sooner a person can walk, talk, and think for themselves the better. Of course the antis would disagree, which is confusing because you'd think everyone would be in favor of educating children sooner and more effectively. It's as if those with power and/or influence don't want anyone to be more capable or independent, children least of all, if only because they want someone to pretend to defend so they can act heroic.

George Carlin put it best about over-protecting kids: "You've turned them into little cult objects, you have a child fetish, and it's NOT healthy! You wanna help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone!" Better still, give them whatever support and tools they need in order to learn (ie the internet) and encourage them to excel in every way.

Education and freedom solve most of the big problems we keep ranting about. As long as they're held back this will remain (at least in the minds of morons) a world of victims and predators where the pricks in charge keep coming up with excuses to torture and exterminate all deviants, starting with us.

>>5940

Haha, isn't that the reason for most laws? People don't act responsibly XD

>>5941

I once had a mid teens girl tell me that she likes me because I treat her like a human being. I asked her how everyone else treats her and she stated that they treat her "like a little kid". They never give her the chance to be an adult..

She acts completely different around me because I give her that responsibility. Of course I am smart with it, I wouldn't hand her the keys to the car or hand her alcohol.. that's my responsibility. Anyways, I think you are right.

We should be encouraging people to think as early as possible. Use it or lose it. Learning how to think is important, critical thought is essential nowadays.

I think the antis and others would support that, it allows people to make a more educated decision. It could be portrayed to the antis that the kids could see through grooming attempts, and that is true. But they'd also be able to decide for themselves if they wish to reciprocate or not. :P