Like unironically he said that
@Terry There is nothing wrong with being a pedophile
and, the word "prey" is quite definitely what it is. the entire rest of society *defensively* vilifies and hates pedophiles for the same reason they vilify and hate rapists or killers: because, by their very nature, pedophiles (et al.) are *predators* against the rest of the citizenry; they represent a danger or a threat to others and their loved ones
are you born a pedophile? can you not help your inclinations or neurology? in most cases that probably *is* the case, and there is nothing *morally* wrong with that so long as one recognizes the deviance, does not act upon it, and seeks help. we should not demonize people for things outside of their control. it *is* wrong from an amoral, empirical evolutionary view--i.e.: humans are not meant to be attracted to prepubescent children. it is wrong in the same way a manufacturing defect on a part of machine would be wrong. it's "incorrect" or faulty. it's "wrong" in precisely the same way that homosexuality is "wrong", regardless of morality
but to say "there is nothing wrong with being a pedophile" in the sense that, proudly, one does not think there is anything perverse or blackhearted in trying to fuck a child, then such a statement is simply the gloat of a predator.
@Terry
@knhy @Terry Being a rapist or killer is an action, pedophilia is an attraction, and anyone can make up this meme
"Being a racist is just like being a murderer"
Society in general also vilifies racists, btw. People never saw pedos as a threat until media hysteria, same as racism
Age of consent in the US in 1880 was 7-12
Get something better
>humans are not meant to be attracted to prepubescent children
Wrong. Monopolising them before puberty is advantageous when you're monogamous, then their entire sexual life is yours
this is the talk of a predator, of a sociopath. you're talking about another human being and wanting their "life" to be "yours". if you are incapable of perceiving how wrong and fucked up this rhetoric sounds to literally every normal, well-adjusted person devoid of grotesque mental deviations then idk what to tell you.
>Being a rapist or killer is an action, pedophilia is an attraction, and anyone can make up this meme
being a rapist or a killer are also, just like pedophilia, compulsions. you can harbor deep-seeded desires to rape or kill, as most serial rapists and serial killers harbor. none of these groups may act on their desires or compulsions, but those desires and compulsions will no doubt always be there. the difference, as you stated (and the same applies to pedophilia) is action. most serial killers express heavy sexual elements to their attractions to killing. their actions are connected to sexuality and arousal. the same, needless to say, applies to rapists. it's all very sexual. --as is the pedophile's desire to have sex with prepubescent children. ADDITIONALLY, outside of sexuality, a common theme between all three is an aspect of control. be is killing, raping, or predating children, there is a clear dichotomy of control between the victim and the perpetrator. often, this aspect of control intertwines with the sexual aspects of the acts as well in a multifaceted, overlapping way (not altogether distant from things like domination and submission, bondage, sadomasochism, etc.). i think your statements about "their entire [sexual] life is yours" is very telling as it ties right back into this aspect of control/controlling totally another human being. what better contrast of control is there between an adult and a child? is it them being a child which is arousing to you? or the idea of "monopolizing" "entire[ly]" another person?
>Age of consent in the US in 1880 was 7-12
age of consent is a legal construct and not what i'm discussing. being sexually attracted to *pre-pubescent* children devoid of secondary sexual characteristics nor the biological viability for fertility or successful fertility is evolutionary incorrect. is it fucking creepy for a grown adult to be attracted to a 14 or 15 year old? sure. but is it "wrong" on a natural level? not really. the same cannot be said for someone who is attracted to a *squints* 7 year old.
>Society in general also vilifies racists, btw.
people fightfully don't like abject racists because they are offensive and create social toxicity. many might argue that i'm a bigoted racist and even i don't enjoy seeing "nigger" posted up all over the place. regardless, people being racist or whatever is not really relevant to the conversation. even with people's dislike for racists or bigots, their distaste is of a far different variety than their distaste for human predators. the comparative dislike would be like juxtaposing people's expression of nuisance to bugs vs. their fear and reaction to crossing paths with a venomous snake or large, carnivorous mammal.
@Terry
@knhy @Terry Nigger, I'm talking about evolution, and standard marriage language is belonging to eachother, this isn't odd
It's a compulsion, breathing is a compulsion, sex is a compulsion
6,000,000 words and 0 points
>age of consent is a legal construct
A legal construct that proves people in the past didn't care if you boned a 7yo. All your modernist arguments are as valid as misgendering a troon being immoral
A 7yo will be fertile. Fertility itself is just a promise that they *can in the future*
>people rightfully don't like abject racists
Because they're programmed for it by some kike on TV. You know what's natural? Liking your own kind. 40 years of kike science and yet 0 evolutionary explanation for blind altruism
> i don't enjoy seeing "nigger" posted up all over the place
Because you're a faggot. Nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger
he is obviously not based