Follow

@Terry
Even "scientifically" pedos are only viewed through criminal/clinical samples, so those USA Today tweets should already be obvious to you. This isn't some niche take, though to a lot of people it's an emotional one

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophil

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 0
@applejack that looks like it was edited by pedos themselves lol
@Terry @applejack Half of it is true. The "You can fuck a kid without being a pedo" stuff is all nonsense though.

@Ricotta @Terry Men by default are going to have some attraction, but the clinical definition requires it to be at least primary

Despite nobody liking them, fat women still get fucked if the guy is desperate or drunk enough

@applejack @Terry
>Despite nobody liking them, fat women still get fucked if the guy is desperate or drunk enough
Or a nigger.

@Terry And you'd be wrong

Despite them refusing to actually state what the MD5 says about pedophilia, only listing it as a disorder and not an orientation, and then having a rule against discriminating based on disorders, you're not allowed to own an account or edit a page if you're a pedophile or pro it in any way

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedi
>Editors who attempt to use Wikipedia to pursue or facilitate inappropriate adult–child relationships, who advocate inappropriate adult–child relationships on- or off-wiki (e.g. by expressing the view that inappropriate relationships are not harmful to children), or who identify themselves as pedophiles, will be blocked and banned indefinitely.

@applejack
Wikipedia: are you a pedophile?

Pedophile: no.

@Terry They're explicitly anti-pedo, so the fact they still put that most obvious fact there shows you it's still obvious

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Game Liberty Mastodon

Mainly gaming/nerd instance for people who value free speech. Everyone is welcome.