@mario If I participated I would be ashamed (this doesn't mean I wouldn't participate just that I would be very ashamed if I did)
it'll be all lesbians and then lecter
@bitterblossom @mario I wish Lecter would like me but he's such a pretentious faggot who is super ceral all the fucking time, can't even say nigger or retard or "damn kids are stupid" around that guy.
@mario @bitterblossom He runs a little cult of personality regarding mapness, and they gatekeep the fuck out of their gay little clubhouse. They say I'm fake and shit or a troll or something just because I'm a free speech absolutist and I don't respect their touchy feely sensibilities because I'm not so retarded that I can be tricked by lovebombing or naming and shaming.
i've got my disagreements with him, but i dont have any hate for him. his garden isn't as rough as my preferred neighborhood.
>NNIA
fuck them lmao
legit pedophiles should seek help not create online communities around being pedophiles
@mario @bitterblossom Agree to disagree if you're saying maps are sick and need correction, no sicker than any other paraphiles at least, and perhaps even less, as studies show it is normal (NOT abnormal) to find girls as young as 9 sexually arousing. What is NOT normal and is NOT common is finding girls much younger than that to be arousing, that is unusual, behaviorally speaking. Society has to accept what is normal, before it can offer help to those who are abnormal and want the help, grouping all maps into the "banish" category will leave you with an endless war against mostly innocent people, since (statistically) every normal human man is a "map".
they can't enter any legal contract
technically, consent can be given by anyone on any issue; even infants can "consent" by means of body language. what you should be focusing this issue on is whether or not an individual in a particular case is capable of giving "informed consent".
which, in most practical cases, toddlers can provide - provided somebody actually educates and informs them, instead of this bullshit "oh, you aren't allowed to learn about that word until you're older".
how can you be sure what the infant consents to if it can't give a description of it?
>a child is literally a slave
because children can't make informed decisions and require their guardians to make sure they're not get taken advantage of
@mario @bitterblossom If I may save some time, is it right for me to say that you (Mario) believe that any human who has lost verbal capabilities, is incapable of consent, or verbal and writing abilities, but you believe they can't consent if they can't use words, right? I remember you once said you would not sleep with a deaf mute, because you wouldn't know if they were consenting or not.
(continuing here bc l.t is bugging out on me too much)
consent choice is a simple positive or negative. that doesn't require a description, that's where the concept of informed consent comes in. which, clearly, an infant is not going to be able to provide (unless you got some freak genius baby on hand, which is a whole other mess of concerns).
the only reason children can't make informed consent decisions is because the adults refuse to fucking educate them properly. contemporary society forces children to be ignorant of many things, especially sexual ones, for no good reason - and then uses that abuse to justify overbearing protections "because they don't know better".
and despite it being the legal guardian's legal duty to protect a child from being taken advantage of, it's almost always the legal guardian who provides that sort of abuse, because the child has no means or rights with which to escape or prevent such abuse. nor is there any substantial system in place to check things and ensure that abuse isn't taking place - not until it's too late. AFTER a child starts showing the signs of being hurt, publicly, then MAYBE some other authority figure willl bother to contact legal authorities, and then they MIGHT bother to show up to investigate, and even when they do, chances are they don't do anything at all, because it's too bothersome for them to interfere and too expensive for the state to put more kids into protective custody.
informed consent required the subject to:
- actually be informed. if you don't allow a child to learn about love, sex, babies, etc, then you have failed them; they aren't inherently incapable of learning the information.
- make a decision based on that information and their own desires. it may be a positive or negative result. that is their decision to make, not yours, not anyone else's. you certainly don't get to say they don't have the right to make a decision in the first place.
the duty of a legal guardian comes into play when these conditions are not met. when the child is not yet capable of receiving, understanding, and communicating a choice of consent - then the parent would have the right to a decision on their behalf, PRESUMABLY for the child's benefit.
and this applies to mentally impaired adults as well as children. not everybody operates at the same level. age is literally not a factor, except that there's a bell curve of functionality, where the youngest edge of the spectrum is uneducated and unable to process complex information, and the eldest edge of the spectrum has gone senile and crippled and has lost necessary faculties. that middle section where one is perfectly capable of deciding things for one's self does not arbitrarily begin at 18+ years old. it would be far more accurate to say it begins around two years old, spikes around 4, and then rapidly accelerates as a child absorbs information from formal schooling.
@sekuhara @mario @bitterblossom Thankyou, seriously, because I did not have the fucking energy
@mario @bitterblossom The point here I think is that it's not ethical to bar them from legal contracts, just like it was not ethical to bar certain races from entering into contracts or certain genders. If a person has a brain condition that makes them incapable of decision making that is not a factor of their age and so age should not be taken into account. If a person has their wits, they have their wits, I've seen kids you'd swear had a little old man inside their head driving them around, and I've seen adults who you'd swear were being operated by a clinically retarded toddler. Age is not the factor here.
Just be nice to them and they will do what you tell them.
If we were to allow children to give legal consent, they would fck up their whole adult life.
@mario @bitterblossom Anybody can be manipulated, it is not a uniquely youthful quality, it is the quality inherent in any naive person, regardless of age. I say to you, the solution is simple, do not take advantage of or manipulate naive people, regardless of their age.
That's just my experience, but I was naive af as a child and during my internship at a kindergarden I also got confirmation that you can't trust children to make informed decisions without approval of responsible adult caretakers with life experience.
@mario @bitterblossom Replace the word children with blacks, and kindergarden job with prison guard job, and reread what you just wrote
@mario @bitterblossom Yea you're not really this stupid, you can't be, I refuse to believe you're not taking the piss
@mario @bitterblossom I already have explained where you went wrong, and you pretended not to understand, I am confident you are playing dumb because you are smart enough to know your argument leaks like a seiv but you have moral ideals ingrained which will not allow you to entertain contrary arguments.
Children can leave the kindergarden with their parents, you can't just leave prison.
@mario @bitterblossom The children do not determine when they leave, the niggers do not determine when they leave. Any other gotchas or can you drop the act?
they can ask.
it won't happen.
children at a daycare center, or school, don't get these simple rights. no caretaker or teacher is going to phone home to parents just because the kid asked to leave. not even if there's a good reason for it. the only time they'll bite is if there's some medical emergency, because then it's too much trouble and they don't want to be held responsible. then, depending on the facility and who is working there, the parents are forced to take them out.
ethnic groups have differences in mental capacity as much as the different age groups do, cranial maturity is not the same for every cluster - to replace the words only reinforces the fact ironically
@doorroo @mario @bitterblossom It does not MATTER if 99.9999999% of niggers are werewolf people from hell that bleed acid, you cannot just fucking shoot them on the basis of being black, you cannot just take an entire fucking groups rights away on the basis that most of them are retarded.
@doorroo @mario @bitterblossom The subtext is clearly that they can not do that if they wish to remain moral.
that's what i wanted you to say, moral. morality is rooted in empathy, consent based on age grouping and conscious development is designed to protect the generally immature from exploitation because children have a higher propensity of being impressionable than adults do. this doesn't mean there aren't children that know better than to be exploited, or there aren't adults who can be, but outliers don't define rules
some individuals with down syndrome are high functioning while the mass of them need assistance, you wouldn't make the rule based on the few who are fine
@doorroo @mario @bitterblossom This is a valid point that I have considered myself and is why I believe everyone should be restricted from giving consent from infancy onward, and it will only be when they are able to pass a series of tests to prove they aren't emptyheadded. Some will pass the tests at an early age, single digits for some, most will pass as teens, and another smaller percentage would pass much older, or maybe even never.
@mario @bitterblossom I believe you are glancing around too quickly and you are not noticing the hole in your argument, or you do not care, but it is this; by arbitrarily restricting an entire class of people, based on the assumption that many in this class are not wise enough to be unrestricted, you will inevitably restrict those who happen to be in this class, but also happen to be different from their fellows in that they are wise enough to take care of themselves. Is not this binding of an unwilling and consciousness entity a form of rape, a form of slavery, a form of torture, a form of dehumanization, and this dehumanization is inescapable, forever, the victim will know they were less then human, their rage will grow, until...problems.
Agism is bigotry. It just is. There's no getting around that. It's either ok to be a bigot or it's not. We're either individuals or we're numbers. And in this society, we are numbers, and I hope that changes one day.
Yes, I am intolerant to the notion that underage people can consent.
@mario @bitterblossom Well I just made the age of consent 99 years old, happy now? It's arbitrary. You seriously don't see the problem with that, this is what I don't get, you seem rather logical and sharp yet you refuse to admit that your logic is faulty and revert to anecdote and "common sense talk" and shit, I just don't get you.
That's true. But 18 sounds reasonable enough for me.
and also, here's your reminder that "normal" and "common sense" are NOT infallible, nor immutable, and are consistently at fault of ethical failings.
>legit pedophiles should seek help
no, normies need fucking help. mental help, psychiatric therapy and drugs, until they realize that they're the freaks, they they and society have been lieing to them so hard and so long they are literally incapable of acknowledging or contemplating the truth.
@bitterblossom @mario I don't have anything against him really other than mild annoyance that he seems to judge others when he's the one saying not to judge others, feels fake as fuck.
but you just have no filter
you say the most retarded or closeminded things with no sense of self awareness
you'd be banned from many places at this point, not just nnia
@bitterblossom @mario "🤓 um actually that's a slur and that's ableism and um that's agism omg do better" is what I imagine he's all about, and fuck that shit
i feel like that sort of pretentiousness is literally a direct result of which generation of gays he's a part of.
anyways my joke is funny bc lecter doesn't like girls, much less like-like girls. i'm imagining him in the full nazi-bondage getup, in a coffee shop full of fluffy lesbians and the thin-lipped frown on his imaginary face... it just makes me giggle all the way through.
i had to post it and share that visual. it'd work for any other gay man who really doesn't like girls, but i dont know anyone as allergic to girls as he is.
i don't know tham