Not that it's any of certain people's BIZ, but I have been thinking deeply on pedophilia lately, the last few weeks/couple months. It all started when I saw an episode of star trek where an alien visited the ship without anyones knowledge, it befriends a young girl, and after observing for a while unseen, it decides that the adults on the ship are oppressing the children, Picard then explains that children have restricted freedom to protect them not harm them. And I ultimately agree about that, and in that moment I suddenly understood the antis position, they're not repressed or in denial, they genuinely believe that they are protecting children from harm, that harm being the psychological and/or physical impact that sexual contact may potentially have. Letting your child free climb mount everest for example, may not result in the childs death, but it's not unlikely, depending on many factors, such as who is guiding the child, the guides level of skill and personability, the climbing equipment, the elements, and any number of others. And so I would agree it's reasonable to stand in the way, so to speak, of a child reaching and attempting to climb everest, no matter how determined they were, they could try when they had gained the skills and experience in less dire situations as a precursor to Everest. I get it, I get all that. Where me and antis ("normal people" as they call themselves) differ in view may be two fold, first: I think they may see sexual contact (consider its mildest form, petting, gentle snuggles and rubbing, nothing more) as a greater danger than I do, and maybe there is something I'm not getting. I understand that children are easily manipulated and that the sex drive in humans is strong and so there would be people who would take advantage, but those people already take advantage, social norms do not dissuade them when the opportunity occurs. You do not know what you are talking about if you deny this. But this predatory type of interaction is wrong no matter what the social norms, this is not what I'm talking about when I question the validity of adult/minor relationships and you know it. All things being equal, a sex positive society is preferable to me than a sex negative society. This may seem very odd for someone with such personal feelings of disgust regarding sex and sexuality but those feelings were not always present in me, they were acquired through negative social experiences involving SHAMING. The SECOND point of disagreement may be: that different people are ready to "climb everest" at different ages, and that putting a hard line based on age for participation in social sexuality is wrong in that it violates every ethical norm of our society. There was a time when parents were part of the decision about when a "child" was ready to "go with boys" or "go with girls", and everybody knew that it was very possible that a "man" or "woman" of 10 or even 20 years senior could end up with a "young woman" (girl) or "young boy" (respectively, homosexuality was not yet accepted in those days). Nobody cared about these age differences, unless the parents DIDN'T LIKE the older suiter, in which case they'd chase them off, and if the girl or boy really had their heart set on their OLDER PARTNER they would RUN AWAY AND GET MARRIED. THAT'S THE WAY LIFE WAS YOU IDIOTS. FAKETRADS SEETH AT THE REALTRAD BASED CHAD.

AND TRANNYS ARE TRAD YOU FUCKING IDIOTS, YOU CUCKOLD FREAKS, TRANNIES HAVE BEEN AROUND AS SHAMANS SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME YOU SCUM, FAKETRADS! FAKE!