@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)

@Jazzy_Butts @mario one day there's gonna be a fedi meetup for gays




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.

who is the person who shall not be named? :ablobcatsweatsip:
i don't know tham

@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.

@Jazzy_Butts @mario he's a bit sensitive, and he runs NNIA, which is the sensitive zone for paraphiles.

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.
>mapness
>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".

Founding communities around the attractiveness of living things that can't consent excludes you from my definition of normal behavior.
@mario @Jazzy_Butts the fact that you believe children are inherently incapable of any form of consent is inherently abusive and dehumanizing.
tell me how children are supposed to give consent?
they can't enter any legal contract
@mario @Jazzy_Butts that's because the legal system strips children of nearly all human rights and hands it over to the parents/legal guardians. Legally, a child is literally a slave, even more so than the average laborer is a wage-slave.

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".
>infants can "consent" by means of body language
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
Follow

@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.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Game Liberty Mastodon

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