# Will digital pedophilia be an acceptable sexuality in the future?



## Shchors (Nov 12, 2021)

The rise of VR technology,deepfake,animation,realistic sex dolls and other form of substitute medias that pedos can use to let loose their urge without causing any actual damage have given rise to a new twist to classic pedophilia i will refer here to as 'digital pedophilia'.And i'm not just talking about lolis here,but aimages of actual children turned into digital form not unlike what Shadman did.

After all,the only scientific basis for morality is utilitarianism,and since this cyber form of deviancy caused no actual irl damage and thus no loss of utility or happiness it is thus not immoral.(in fact,one can make the argument that this is actually a moral thing to do since it intergrate pedos to the consumerist economy and thus creating net value,similiar to how legalization of marijuana turned potheads into legitimate consumers that can be taxed and regulated by the state).

With this in mind one can see how society will slowly tolerate and open its wing to soft pedophilia before the legislations start rolling in.And before you called me a maniac or a pedo apologist,note that this is the exact same thing that happened to homosexuality;the advent of contraceptives and better medication against the ills caused by such sexual deviancies (like AIDS) turned gayness from a literal societal menace into a relatively harmless,if not disgusting sexuality.What happened after that is history.

Note that i am by no means thinking that people in the future will legalize marrying nine year olds.Actual,physical pedophilia will still be banned unless science somehow shows that kids can consent,and that is highly unlikely.

PS i make this thread mainly because i see people asking why 'certain draft dodging Swiss artist ' was not arrested  because he drew porn of actual kids.


----------



## Exigent Circumcisions (Nov 12, 2021)

So you're a pedophile.


----------



## Shchors (Nov 12, 2021)

Exigent Circumcisions said:


> So you're a pedophile.


Fag can you even read a post with more than one paragraph


----------



## Exigent Circumcisions (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fag can you even read a post with more than one paragraph


I only read the title.


----------



## Vingle (Nov 12, 2021)

Yes, they let troons groom kids to molest themselves.


----------



## Queen Elizabeth II (Nov 12, 2021)

Okay groomer.

There's a bit of a stretch in comparing potheads, gays and women on the pill to baby rapists. More than a bit of one.


----------



## YourFriendlyLurker (Nov 12, 2021)

I most cases if you just entertain youself whatching lollies 24/7, don't touch anyone irl and live somewhere in the west, nothing is gonna happen to you. I have never heard about anyone being jailed for watching/drawing shota, otherwise half of the twatter and 4chan was in prison.  In that regard, the thing you call "digital pedophilia" is actually legal.  Is it tolerated? Most people would simply cringe but in general they don't give a single fuck.

Shit starts when someone start doing staff irl or store real CP (like with real, not drawn kids), and that shit will hardly be ever recorgnised as legal (at least I hope so).


----------



## Shchors (Nov 12, 2021)

Dildo said:


> Okay groomer.
> 
> There's a bit of a stretch in comparing potheads, gays and women on the pill to baby rapists. More than a bit of one.


Fine,lets make a more acceptable comparison.Currently drunk driving is not acceptable because there is a high chance of you crashing into Mr.Katzenberg's house and turn 5 kids into orphans.
But in the future,when we have self-driving cars,society will be more tolerant of drunk driving because the AI can take over the car while the driver is passed out and prevent any tragic incident.Of course it is still an unhealthy and destructive hobby,but since it harms nobody (except the driver's liver)
Do you get what i'm saying here?


----------



## murph (Nov 12, 2021)

Pedophile training is still pedo shit


----------



## Recycle Bin (Nov 12, 2021)

I disagree, while for some weirdos this would be enough, I bet the lunatics one way or another will get bored of the fake thing and actually become a real pedo. Maybe with the delusion of being capable of handling the situation since they "trained" themselves on the virtual thing.

By being lenient on the virtual pedophilia then it will enable a slow process of being lenient on the real thing too, which is inexcusable and morally wrong. The best thing to do is to kill it on it's roots before it spreads everywhere.


----------



## Shchors (Nov 12, 2021)

murph said:


> Pedophile training is still pedo shit


Fair enough,but my question is whether society will accept pedophilia altogether in the future.Not that much of a stretch considering the last few decades


----------



## Exigent Circumcisions (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fair enough,but my question is whether society will accept pedophilia altogether in the future.


It will still be wrong, so don't fuck any kids.


----------



## Psychotron (Nov 12, 2021)

OP,
Please complete a high voltage circuit with your body each time you have these thoughts.


----------



## potato in mah painus (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fair enough,but my question is whether society will accept pedophilia altogether in the future.Not that much of a stretch considering the last few decades


Ill take a honest crack, since nobody else wants to step up to the plate.

I do _not _believe society will accept it, with evidence pointing to animal control and diaper/cub fetishes. Furries are the most degenerate of the lolcows and even then the majority of them are revolted by it. If they won't accept it, normies won't accept it either.


----------



## The Wicked Mitch (Nov 12, 2021)

Yes, not just digital either.


----------



## Finder (Nov 12, 2021)

Why qualify it with "digital"?

The slippery slope might be considered a fallacy, but it's correct in almost every situation. It is simple a matter of time before an honest attempt at paedo acceptance is made in western nations. You can see the very early forms of the movement right now.

Hopefully it's a bridge too far for regular people and they *finally* fight back, but I doubt it.


----------



## Grinrow (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fine,lets make a more acceptable comparison.Currently drunk driving is not acceptable because there is a high chance of you crashing into Mr.Katzenberg's house and turn 5 kids into orphans.
> But in the future,when we have self-driving cars,society will be more tolerant of drunk driving because the AI can take over the car while the driver is passed out and prevent any tragic incident.Of course it is still an unhealthy and destructive hobby,but since it harms nobody (except the driver's liver)
> Do you get what i'm saying here?


I didn't read ur post but drunk driving should be legal


----------



## Slap47 (Nov 12, 2021)

Finder said:


> Why qualify it with "digital"?
> 
> The slippery slope might be considered a fallacy, but it's correct in almost every situation. It is simple a matter of time before an honest attempt at paedo acceptance is made in western nations. You can see the very early forms of the movement right now.
> 
> Hopefully it's a bridge too far for regular people and they *finally* fight back, but I doubt it.





Finder said:


> Hopefully it's a bridge too far for regular people and they *finally* fight back, but I doubt it.


The future will be those who want to fuck digital underage characters VS those who want fuck real life underage children.

It will the final battle of western liberalism. You already see the battle lines being drawn.


----------



## HullDown (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fine,lets make a more acceptable comparison.Currently drunk driving is not acceptable because there is a high chance of you crashing into Mr.Katzenberg's house and turn 5 kids into orphans.
> But in the future,when we have self-driving cars,society will be more tolerant of drunk driving because the AI can take over the car while the driver is passed out and prevent any tragic incident.Of course it is still an unhealthy and destructive hobby,but since it harms nobody (except the driver's liver)
> Do you get what i'm saying here?


But the difference is that we disapprove of drunk driving because it leads to bad results, and we disapprove of pedophilia because it's inherently wrong. 

People are not, by and large, utilitarians or deontologists. Academia may be full of spergs trying to explain all of political life with the lens of Bentham or Kant, but they essentially have zero impact on the opinions of people aside from their fellow spergs.


----------



## Daisymae (Nov 12, 2021)

Op fucks kids. Film at 11.


----------



## Not Really Here (Nov 12, 2021)

Shchors said:


> my question is whether society will accept pedophilia altogether in the future


They already do, just look at female teachers fucking kids, and homos fucking boys.
Both are often excused by the current culture.


----------



## Un Platano (Nov 12, 2021)

Daisymae said:


> Op fucks kids. Film at 11.


This is a trap. DO NOT watch this film.


----------



## Homer J. Fong (Nov 12, 2021)

I once got to chat with a man who works the psychiatry side of my city's prison. Fascinating person.

Of course the subject went to what can be done with pedophiles, I suggested why can't we just chemically castrate them? No sex drive = no interest in wanting to rape children right? His answer surprised me, according to him Pedophiles cannot be cured and the ones that have been chemically castrated and put back into society will if given the chance find ways to abuse children.

There's no love in pedophilia, it is an act of abuse. The only reform that's acceptable are "Romeo & Juliet Laws" because no 20 year old should be marked a predator for sleeping with a 16 year old. For crying out loud such cases aren't even pedophilia.

The answer is a hard no and it's a national embarrassment that Shadman was allowed in the USA. We should have a Creeper No Flight List to ban anyone who peddles obscene smut.


----------



## Dufe (Nov 12, 2021)

Digital? My prediction is that in 10 years the first major metro area in the US (I'll say Seattle, San Fran or flloydville) will be the first to legalize possession of soft core cheese. Its already deep in politics and media, and its coming in the gusie of LGBT.


----------



## OldGuy (Nov 12, 2021)

No, when people find out you are raping kids in VR they will still want to kill you...


----------



## Spicboyskafan (Nov 12, 2021)

Not Really Here said:


> They already do, just look at female teachers fucking kids, and homos fucking boys.
> Both are often excused by the current culture.


exactly, this is the end goal of the sexual revolution, it just keeps becoming more blatant in the media


----------



## SSj_Ness (Nov 12, 2021)

Set it up so it fries their brains. Give away free VR and wait a few years to get as many users as possible online at once, maybe setup an annual cyber event.

Once the time is right, flip the switch.


----------



## What the shit (Nov 12, 2021)

Short answer: No.


----------



## No. 7 cat (Nov 12, 2021)

The answer is no.


----------



## Haim Arlosoroff (Nov 12, 2021)

IT HAS BEGUN.

​Minor-Attracted People and their pursuit of dignity according to merriam-webster.com:
Minor → not having reached majority : CHILD
Attracted → drawn by appeal to natural or excited interest, emotion, or aesthetic sense : ENTICED
People → human beings making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest : PERSONS
Pursuit  → the attempt to get or do (something) over a period of time : SEEK
Dignity → a way of appearing or behaving that suggests seriousness and self-control : RESPECT

People enticed by children, and their seeking to appear or behave in a manner that suggests seriousness and self-control.  There is no minor-attraction except to fetishize children.  There is no fetish except a strong and unusual need to sexualize.  The "not" pedophiles want to normalize sexualizing kids.  Not attraction, not love.  Sexualization.

There's no love in minor-attraction or whatever the next term after that.  I love my wife, I love her gardening and the need to nurture life into being.  I romance her, and she returns my affection.  We've fucked from time to time.  Its gone well enough that she's given me two children.  What do people, by contrast, who are enticed by children — it must be a difficult life having kids come on to you and lead you on — have in the way of love? If they could understand anything about love, civilization, and a sense of common humanity they would end themselves willingly.

But they never do.

They never have any humanity, just a naked desire to secure theirs and isolate children socially.  Time and again.  The answer is no.  If the pedophile, and I won't quibble about the terminology as everyone knows who I mean to include, had any of the _empathy_ they repeatedly ask of us they would end themselves in fire and pain.  As they would not, they are not human to me.  Simple as.

Burn them all, pain and misery.  Not a single hesitation from me.  I could fall asleep with a smile to the sounds of their horrified screaming, it would be as if a heaven on earth.  This is the moral line, any fancy terms for a fear of pedophiles will not deter actual human beings.  What goes on on twitter should be a jailable offense, yet nothing is done.  But, what more can dignity give?  Cover.  That, like Gay Marriage covered for touchy uncles and NAMBLA but for little girls.  That's what they want.  The answer is no.


A million deaths to those who sexualize children and childhood.  This was always the end of the sexual revolution, there was never a path or a choice not taken.





Six million to be exact, just look at the bio-leninism on display!


_weeeeeeeeeeeeeee, down the slope we go!_


----------



## Exigent Circumcisions (Nov 12, 2021)

"Uhhhhh hey guys in the future do you think it will be legal to, like, sensually remove a baby's diaper while listening to Adele?" 

- OP, basically.


----------



## FATTESTCUNT (Nov 12, 2021)

I don't think so.

For me, the issue is one of trust. If 2 gay adult men want to have sex, they can consent to that, so no matter whether someone finds it repulsive or not, the key point is that they're consenting adults. It's not my business what they get up to.

Even if there was strong evidence that showed that VR deepfake kiddie porn, child sex dolls etc. minimise real world harm and help reduce the abuse of actual children, I would still never trust a self-identified paedo because of the potential for them to be like "this VR stuff isn't doing it for me, and I want the real thing". For that reason, I can't see us getting to a stage where people are as accepting of paedos as they are of gay people today.

I watched a documentary series recently about a specialist police unit in the UK, where members of the unit pretend to be kids online in order to ensnare paedos who were trying to groom kids on social media and chat sites aimed at kids and teens. One common theme was how in denial the paedos were when caught. Even when they were on the way to meet up with someone they thought was a child and they had condoms on them, they were still like "oh, but I would never have sex with a child!". Fucking bullshit. I would never, ever trust a paedo.


----------



## Billy Beer (Nov 12, 2021)

I don't want kids shagged or sexually exploited. 

That said, the romans and greeks used to fuck young boys and they did a lot of shit right. Would i trade the ability for other people to 14 yr old boys, if they consented without pressure, for all of the technological, philosophical, societal and aesthetical advances seen during those periods? Sure.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Nov 12, 2021)

Cardenio said:


> We should have a Creeper No Flight List to ban anyone who peddles obscene smut.


But then how can the american political class go on diplomatic missions to other countries?


----------



## Snuckening (Nov 12, 2021)

"digital pedophilia"

You mean like, where you can be into kids, but you're only allowed to finger-bang them? Or where you're sexually aroused by children's fingers?


----------



## Marshal Mannerheim (Nov 14, 2021)

The KF software is being gay and won't let me quote posts, so:


> After all,the only scientific basis for morality is utilitarianism,and since this cyber form of deviancy caused no actual irl damage and thus no loss of utility or happiness it is thus not immoral.(in fact,one can make the argument that this is actually a moral thing to do since it intergrate pedos to the consumerist economy and thus creating net value,similiar to how legalization of marijuana turned potheads into legitimate consumers that can be taxed and regulated by the state).


This is why utilitarianism is really, really stupid.

Incest is wrong. Basically every religion that exists and has a moral code says it's wrong. Every successful civilisation outlawed incest. We know that having sex with our parents is wrong. Yet according to utilitarians, it's perfectly fine because muh consenting adults.
Some things are right. Some things are wrong. The role of a moral code, or of a moral society, is to (as the Muslims say) promote virtue and prevent vice. Incest and paedophilia are two of those morally wrong things and a society which prevents vice should hang paedophiles, regardless of whether their child sex dolls cause "no loss of utility or happiness".


> With this in mind one can see how society will slowly tolerate and open its wing to soft pedophilia before the legislations start rolling in.And before you called me a maniac or a pedo apologist,note that this is the exact same thing that happened to homosexuality;the advent of contraceptives and better medication against the ills caused by such sexual deviancies (like AIDS) turned gayness from a literal societal menace into a relatively harmless,if not disgusting sexuality.What happened after that is history.


You're right, but for the wrong reasons. The conclusion of LGBT ideology is and has always been "legalise paedophilia". Call me a "homophobe" or whatever other insults you want to throw around, but it's true; Foucault, a feminist and pro-LGBT ideology activist, supported abolishing the age of consent. Plenty of gays have their first sexual experience with an older man when they're underage - Grindr has a massive problem with kids joining it, and sex abuse cases in the Catholic Church are almost all cases of an older priest raping teenagers.

I don't know why so many gay men are also paedophiles; I'm not a psychologist. What I _do_ know is that there are far more paedos in the LGBT community than in society as a whole, and that activism to legalise the one invariably ends up legalising the other - heck, just look at "Drag Queen Story Hours", Johnny Yaniv, or the number of troons that think it's their God-given right to get showered with little girls.


----------



## Imaloser (Dec 5, 2021)

Accepted? Obviously never in our times? Common and widespread? Yeah, hell there is already tons of borderline psuedo - CP on the internet (traced hentai, 3d shit).


----------



## Tad Loaf (Dec 5, 2021)

Marshal Mannerheim said:


> The KF software is being gay and won't let me quote posts, so:
> 
> This is why utilitarianism is really, really stupid.
> 
> ...



See at the end of the day though, without religion it's very hard if not impossible to objectively determine morality outside of utilitarianism. What you use is your feelings "This FEELS really wrong to me, it makes me feel really uncomfortable, therefore I am against it" which is fine on a personal level but when it comes to dictating how society at large works it instantly hits a wall when you meet someone who FEELS the opposite of you, which will then result in fruitless bickering if not outright violence until one side is standing. This isn't diving into the fact that religion actually hasn't done all that much to stem the tide of incest/pedophilia and often includes them in whatever their holy book is (Mohammod marrying that 9 year old and the story of Adam and Eve implying everyone after them is the product of incest, etc) 

So it's either debate the effects actions have on people and what that does or shittalk about feelings until one side decides to get violent, those are our only real choices.


----------



## Dwight Frye (Dec 6, 2021)

Shchors said:


> Fair enough,but my question is whether society will accept pedophilia altogether in the future.Not that much of a stretch considering the last few decades


Hi SeniorLexmechanic. Still degenerate as ever I see


----------



## Ingmar Aspergman (Dec 10, 2021)

The first steps in attempting to normalize pedophilia would be coinciding with the rise of deep fake technology. They will argue that CP created with artificial intelligence does not require a victim in its production and therefore it should not be a crime to possess or distribute it. This technology already exists and is being used for that very purpose, so it’s only a matter of time before it becomes something that will be debated federally. Also they will argue it will prevent people from offending, because we all know rape doesn’t happen anymore because pornography is so widely accessible. But they will fail to consider that there will be a singularity, sooner rather than later, where it will become very very difficult to distinguish between an AI construct and a real video, and likely it will be easier to produce the real thing and pass it off as a deepfake because the technology will be inaccessible to those destitute enough to sell their children like that. Whether the general public will tolerate this issue becoming mainstream is something I can’t decide on whether they will outright reject it and that will finally become a line in the sand but my pessimistic side feels that it won’t be the case.


----------



## NoonmanR (Dec 10, 2021)

I refuse to even consider that a possibility myself. You'd have a better chance of seeing society destroyed than kid fucking being normalized. Hell, Gays and Trannies can't even get people to really accept them, people only tolerate them because nobody wants to be the one to rock the boat. That's with the might of  a massive propaganda machine and the government at their side. There's just no fucking way.


----------



## Jarch6 (Dec 12, 2021)

Yes, the arguments which enabled the prior sexual revolutions also apply here and the desire exists from enough people in power to push the position further down the slippery slope. Furthermore, remember at the end of the day, “without God, all things are permitted.”


----------



## Exigent Circumcisions (Dec 28, 2021)

Wait, does OP mean pedophilia only involving fingering?


----------



## Creepy Joe (Dec 28, 2021)

Finder said:


> It is simple a matter of time before an honest attempt at paedo acceptance is made in western nations. You can see the very early forms of the movement right now.



Luckily that's never going to happen. We had this dumb trans professor few weeks ago, who tried getting rid of calling pedophiles pedophiles due to the stigma attached to that word. He wanted to rebrand them as people attracted to younger age groups or some idiot shit like that. Motherfucker got shut down immediately, by the entire normal non-clown world. I hope someone spits on him, when they see him on the street.


----------



## Male Idiot (Dec 28, 2021)

Spiritually Sodomized said:


> Okay groomer.
> 
> There's a bit of a stretch in comparing potheads, gays and women on the pill to baby rapists. More than a bit of one.



Faggots are just pedos in disguise or pedo-adjecent so they deserve just as much a gassing.

That said, if we look at it utilitarianistically, why waste resources on pedos? Just shoot them in the head. Human life's only value is based on some religious hokey-pokey myths. 

The biggest cope is how liberals try to justify their christian values. There is 7 billion. Unless you are Biden, Xi or Putin, you are totally replacable.


----------



## WinnieTheJew (Dec 28, 2021)

Male Idiot said:


> Unless you are Biden, Xi or Putin, you are totally replacable.


----------



## Mukhrani (Dec 28, 2021)

This is a typical blinkered and dumb understanding of human nature/morality. The human psyche can't function forever jacking it to digital kids and holding that fucking kids is immoral. People have to square that circle for their own sanity, to understand themselves as 'in the right'. If social acceptance rises and they keep fucking digital kids, they will do that by convincing themselves that fucking kids is okay. Just like a guy who watches sissy hypno eventually cuts his dick off or a Catholic priest who's fucking guys on the downlow convinces himself that the church needs to 'evolve' on the issue of homosexuality. Another example would be someone starts working at an arms manufacturer and gradually convinces himself that the Saudis are bombing Yemeni school children for world peace and democracy, or a completely wretched drug addict telling themselves that they can 'stop whenever they want' and are only drugging themselves into a haze every day because they want to. To maintain that a behavior is immoral and to continue engaging in that behavior produces painful cognitive dissonance that you need to resolve in one of two ways: either stop the behavior or convince yourself that you're justified in continuing it. We are very good at telling ourselves stories that justify what we do, and we can weave a yarn to ourselves to justify just about anything. A functioning society gives people a prevailing, overriding narrative that everyone can agree on, and punishes people who deviate from it. That punishment is itself justified by this overarching ur-narrative. Dumb libertarian pipe dreams of some fair, utilitarian utopia that lets them fuck kids in the metaverse run counter to that basic function of human society. Just like utopian communists, their trying to implement this demented vision would eventually cause large-scale societal collapse by ignoring human nature.

I think that this ugly tendency is one of the hidden messages in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities represented the bottom of the pit of human moral depravity. Everyone in the city had told themselves a story that justified every sort of debauchery, to the point where when an angel was sent to save them they felt morally justified in not only raping said angel, but felt real outrage at Lot for daring to prevent them from doing so. Our capacity for self-justification is so immense that, left to reason out the morality of our own actions, we will fall to a point where we greet any morally righteous critic with howls of execration.


----------



## Secret Asshole (Dec 29, 2021)

> The rise of VR technology,deepfake,animation,realistic sex dolls and other form of substitute medias that pedos can use to let loose their urge without causing any actual damage have given rise to a new twist to classic pedophilia i will refer here to as 'digital pedophilia'.And i'm not just talking about lolis here,but aimages of actual children turned into digital form not unlike what Shadman did.



All of these (maybe the exception of sex dolls) are all entirely illegal. Deepfaking with children will 100% net you a child pornography charge as well as producing a child pornography charge. If you print out a pornographic model, and then print out a child, and then cut out the child's head and paste it on the model, congratulations, you are now guilty of producing child pornography. The legislation in the United States is that if something is so realistic that it is indistinguishable from the real thing (virtual child pornography) it is child pornography. The 'Protect ACT' already includes this, and pretty much any manipulation of a child's photo to try and make it 'legal' will guarantee you going down for child porn. Even if that child doesn't exist and you use AI pictures like NVIDIA put out recently that are just composites of thousands of people and don't actually exist.

The only illegal thing Shadman did was use 1) Real images of children as references and 2) Use a real child of someone he had a feud with who isn't a public persona. Even then, its just not enough to warrant a prosecution. Though drugs and felony assault certainly is lolol

There's no need to worry about any of the above, because its all already illegal and people have been convicted for a lot less. Its why you don't see any 'fakes' of celebrities that are below 18, because producing them constitutes producing and distributing child pornography.

The only thing that has federal protection are unrealistic and clear drawings and 3D Art that is Not Real. Mind you, this is only a FEDERAL guideline. States do have their own guidelines, and in some states (Texas is one, I think). Lolicon is not legal. Though it is incredibly, INCREDIBLY rare that you'll get prosecuted for it. Especially if you're not making money.



> With this in mind one can see how society will slowly tolerate and open its wing to soft pedophilia before the legislations start rolling in.And before you called me a maniac or a pedo apologist,note that this is the exact same thing that happened to homosexuality;the advent of contraceptives and better medication against the ills caused by such sexual deviancies (like AIDS) turned gayness from a literal societal menace into a relatively harmless,if not disgusting sexuality.What happened after that is history.
> 
> Note that i am by no means thinking that people in the future will legalize marrying nine year olds.Actual,physical pedophilia will still be banned unless science somehow shows that kids can consent,and that is highly unlikely.
> 
> PS i make this thread mainly because i see people asking why 'certain draft dodging Swiss artist ' was not arrested because he drew porn of actual kids.



Since everything you mentioned is already illegal and you can be prosecuted for, I don't expect much (if anything) will change. You cannot deepfake, use VR or do pretty much anything regarding real minors. This was already considered and people have already been prosecuted, convicted and jailed for 'virtual' child pronography that did not involve the victimization of  actual children.


----------



## Bad Gateway (Dec 29, 2021)

ITT: OP's barely-concealed fetish.


----------



## Bad Gateway (Dec 29, 2021)

Mukhrani said:


> This is a typical blinkered and dumb understanding of human nature/morality. The human psyche can't function forever jacking it to digital kids and holding that fucking kids is immoral. People have to square that circle for their own sanity, to understand themselves as 'in the right'. If social acceptance rises and they keep fucking digital kids, they will do that by convincing themselves that fucking kids is okay. Just like a guy who watches sissy hypno eventually cuts his dick off or a Catholic priest who's fucking guys on the downlow convinces himself that the church needs to 'evolve' on the issue of homosexuality. Another example would be someone starts working at an arms manufacturer and gradually convinces himself that the Saudis are bombing Yemeni school children for world peace and democracy, or a completely wretched drug addict telling themselves that they can 'stop whenever they want' and are only drugging themselves into a haze every day because they want to. To maintain that a behavior is immoral and to continue engaging in that behavior produces painful cognitive dissonance that you need to resolve in one of two ways: either stop the behavior or convince yourself that you're justified in continuing it. We are very good at telling ourselves stories that justify what we do, and we can weave a yarn to ourselves to justify just about anything. A functioning society gives people a prevailing, overriding narrative that everyone can agree on, and punishes people who deviate from it. That punishment is itself justified by this overarching ur-narrative. Dumb libertarian pipe dreams of some fair, utilitarian utopia that lets them fuck kids in the metaverse run counter to that basic function of human society. Just like utopian communists, their trying to implement this demented vision would eventually cause large-scale societal collapse by ignoring human nature.
> 
> I think that this ugly tendency is one of the hidden messages in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The cities represented the bottom of the pit of human moral depravity. Everyone in the city had told themselves a story that justified every sort of debauchery, to the point where when an angel was sent to save them they felt morally justified in not only raping said angel, but felt real outrage at Lot for daring to prevent them from doing so. Our capacity for self-justification is so immense that, left to reason out the morality of our own actions, we will fall to a point where we greet any morally righteous critic with howls of execration.


I really wish this was better pasta. I mean, it's OKAY, but it's not great.


----------



## RMQualtrough (Dec 29, 2021)

If the choice is between someone raping fake little girls or real little girls, it's not hard to choose the better option.

Another option, some form of pill that completely erases any sexual desire at all.


----------



## b0x (Jan 8, 2022)

> The rise of VR technology,deepfake,animation,realistic sex dolls and other form of substitute medias that pedos can use to let loose their urge without causing any actual damage



The problem with your assumption is that there are already IRL "alternatives".  There are already 18+ year old women out there making schoolgirl themed porn who are around 4 foot 3 to 4 foot 7 and weighing 80-90 lbs, and yet the pedophilia thing is still ongoing.  Which seems to suggest that pedophilia is about more than physicality.


----------



## Silverface (Jan 23, 2022)

The fact that pedophiles have an attraction to beings who cannot consent (children) is the exact reason that they cannot be trusted. Sexuality can be pretty potent, and I don't believe that they can abstain from assaulting children with moral conviction or drawn media. Even if they also have an attraction to adults and have an adult partner (which happens sometimes), the attraction to children itself always means there is a chance that they will try something. Imagine if you knew someone wanted to claw your eyes out, but they were on medication or whatever to help manage their anger issues. That wouldn't make you want to be around them any more, would it?


----------



## Retired Junta Member (Jan 23, 2022)

RMQualtrough said:


> Another option, some form of pill that completely erases any sexual desire at all.


It wouldn't work, just as chemical castration doesn't work with rapists and other non-pedophile sex maniacs.
The sexual impulse turns (I think the technical term is sublimated or incalated) into violence in a good number of cases.

To date, a cure for pedophilia does not exist. Constant therapy and drugs give good results in some cases but it is equally necessary to constantly monitor pedophiles, ergo the only cure is to lock them up and throw away the key.


----------

