Debate user BoxerShorts47 on "strawmans" and logical fallacies, definitions of ephebophilia, how to MAGA, religion, Sailor Moon and more

[Sped Xing]

I've known plenty of racists, but none of them has ever pulled me aside to tell me their detailed fantasies about slowly torturing people to death for being niggers.

But when it comes to pedos, people get really creative.

Come out to my overwhelmingly white West Texas county some time, Enrico. Compare the number of Confederate flags you see to the number of NAMBLA banners. Tell me you're more willing to admit your thirst for middle school minge than your distate for groids.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

@BoxerShorts47 Please log out and get a job. One at least five hundred feet away from a school or Chuck-E-Cheese's. I'm begging you.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

I've known plenty of racists, but none of them has ever pulled me aside to tell me their detailed fantasies about slowly torturing people to death for being niggers.

But when it comes to pedos, people get really creative.

Come out to my overwhelmingly white West Texas county some time, Enrico. Compare the number of Confederate flags you see to the number of NAMBLA banners. Tell me you're more willing to admit your thirst for middle school minge than your distate for groids.

I'm not supporting NAMBLA and the confederate flag is cringe. I doubt they fly the confederate flag because they want an ethnostate. Maybe I am wrong. Have you asked them?
Last I checked, The Confederacy was basically current United States of America except they had black slaves instead of Mexican guest workers and Indian H!B visas. Both use non whites and foreigners as cheap labor. It's not a nationalist symbol.

Go to a bar and ask people what they think about 18 vs 17 yr old. I think you'll find that many people would "understand" if a 17 yr old had a relationship with 20+ yr old. The support for 18 AoC is soft.

 

[draggs]

still doable to at least 14.

what did he mean by this

 

[Trigger Me Timbers]

I don't.

I think many people think 17 is the same as 18 and maybe 16 too.
AoC below 16 is a harder sell but still doable to at least 14.
If leftists were serious, they could easily lower AoC to 14-16 with little pushback, far less then they received for transgenderism.

White Nationalism or Nationalism in general in incredibly unpopular because most whites know good non whites and bad whites, compartmentalize the racial problems such as white flight and think we can ignore or overcome any racial tension.
Most Whites believe that rejecting people because of their race is wrong and America should be a nation of immigrants where everyone is given an opportunity to succeed. (Ronald Reagan vision)
Most White Americans don't care if they become a minority, don't care if their grandkids are mixed race, think crime and intelligence is cultural and think America will remain the same nation when whites are replaced.
Most White Americans are completely on board with population replacement and white genocide, they just want leftists to stop being mean to Whites, maybe not teach CRT?
Even the Whites who claim to support borders and think open borders is insane still want massive legal immigration to the point that Whites are replaced.
Most Whites have completely rejected biology and eugenics in favor of not hurting people's feelings.
Anti racism is the most successful propaganda campaign in recent human history.
These people are so weak that they can't even stop affirmative action and they're starting to lose on the reparations argument.

"Haha left is soo crazy" and even "left is anti white" is an easy sell but, "becoming a minority is a mistake" is an incredibly difficult sell. "well I have non white friends and everything is okay so who cares if we become a minority?" or "only leftists care about race. You must be a leftist." I think this convo shows the power of echo chambers and bubbles. Your perspective is inverted from reality.

@Pee Cola If I wanted to grift easily. Grifting AoC as a leftist would be the easiest grift. I bet a large percentage of them would support it and there would be no risk of deplatforming. WN despite being milquetoast online is incredibly unpopular IRL.

C’mon bro I’ve been here since page one, please answer my question.

What is it about what about far right extremists and arguing about age of consent?

 

[BoxerShorts47]

C’mon bro I’ve been here since page one, please answer my question.

What is it about what about far right extremists and arguing about age of consent?

>extremist
I prefer the term activist.

Demographic profile.
If you're, the type of person who is called a "sperg" on this website, the type of person who is willing to question social norms like anti racism then it makes sense that you're also likely to question other social norms like age of consent.
Do you identify as a sperg or a normie?

 

[AnOminous]

I prefer the term activist.

I prefer the term retard, or even better, corpse.

 

[Trigger Me Timbers]

>extremist
I prefer the term activist.

Demographic profile.
If you're, the type of person who is called a "sperg" on this website, the type of person who is willing to question social norms like anti racism then it makes sense that you're also likely to question other social norms like age of consent.
Do you identify as a sperg or a normie?

Ok, so because you question things like race and IQ .. you naturally progress to question “everything” and land on when children and teenagers can have sex.

I get race shit, I do, but what does this AoC have that needs to be questioned? And please note that your not the only (((activist))) who does this that’s why I ask.

 

[draggs]

>extremist
I prefer the term activist.

Demographic profile.
If you're, the type of person who is called a "sperg" on this website, the type of person who is willing to question social norms like anti racism then it makes sense that you're also likely to question other social norms like age of consent.
Do you identify as a sperg or a normie?

And yet the vast majority of users here are anti-anti-racist and also anti-pedophile, while anti-anti-racist but pro-pedophile is you and like 4 other people dumb enough to tell everyone else your deviant opinion, you sperg

 

[Stardust]

I think many people think 17 is the same as 18 and maybe 16 too.
AoC below 16 is a harder sell but still doable to at least 14.
If leftists were serious, they could easily lower AoC to 14-16 with little pushback, far less then they received for transgenderism.

Boxy, this is why 18 is the line. You want to talk it down to 17, then 16. Okay, retard, the same stupid question can be raised: "Age of consent is 16, but is 15 REALLY that different?", then it becomes "... but is 14 REALLY that different?".

That's why your argument is retarded. You can't grasp the idea of somebody splitting hairs, despite that exact tactic being the majority of your point.

 

[Sped Xing]

I'm not supporting NAMBLA and the confederate flag is cringe. I doubt they fly the confederate flag because they want an ethnostate. Maybe I am wrong. Have you asked them?
Last I checked, The Confederacy was basically current United States of America except they had black slaves instead of Mexican guest workers and Indian H!B visas. Both use non whites and foreigners as cheap labor. It's not a nationalist symbol.

Go to a bar and ask people what they think about 18 vs 17 yr old. I think you'll find that many people would "understand" if a 17 yr old had a relationship with 20+ yr old. The support for 18 AoC is soft.

You're the stupidest human on the face of the planet.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

Ok, so because you question things like race and IQ .. you naturally progress to question “everything” and land on when children and teenagers can have sex.

Inverse.
If you're the type of person who questions, you'll likely end up questioning race, IQ, AoC, the JQ, the fed, etc.

I get race shit, I do, but what does this AoC have that needs to be questioned? And please note that your not the only (((activist))) who does this that’s why I ask.

10 years ago, people thought the race stuff was crazy.
I remember when people on 4chan used to drive stormfags back to stormfront.

The reason AoC is being questioned is because people don't accept it.
Whether it's a college bro who hooks up with a high school girl "Dude she told me she was 18."
Or the occasional pedophilia story which turns out to be some 20 something with a high school age women.
Or maybe even the inverse of some high school "chad" that hooks up with his Stacey teacher.
AoC at 15/18 has only been the norm since ~1920, Romeo and Juliet loopholes for much less, Texas since 2011, Florida since 2007.
The Romeo & Juliet arguments "well if a 17 yr old has sex with another 17 yr old that's safe and wholesome but if they have sex with a 24 yr old that's evil and pedophilia because of power imbalance harm..." don't make sense. Especially because many of us saw toxic relationships where both people were minions.
Part of social change is people grew up and they question what they experienced in their younger years and generally massive social change occurs around the 4 or maybe 5 generation mark (so when the entire population has been replaced) so it makes sense that Age of Consent is being questioned now.

Did you watch the Destiny vs Lauren Southern panel? They constantly differentiated between statutory rape with a 17 yr old vs real pedophilia. The conservative women didn't think those 2 actions were equivalent. My own impression is the support for 18 is very soft. If we look at other nations in Europe, 14-16 is the range you typically find and that would solve most of the jailbait issues.

And yet the vast majority of users here are anti-anti-racism and also anti-pedophile, while anti-anti-racist but pro-pedophile is you and like 4 other people dumb enough to tell everyone else your deviant opinion, you sperg

I can't follow all those antis.
Most users on this website are center-left or center-right depending on how you define these camps.
Their views are on race are in line with the general US population.
"Racism bad. Coexist good. Let's just stop the anti-whiteness and get along."
If they use racial slurs, they've accepted that they're sinners and deserve punishment.

Boxy, this is why 18 is the line. You want to talk it down to 17, then 16. Okay, retard, the same stupid question can be raised: "Age of consent is 16, but is 15 REALLY that different?", then it becomes "... but is 14 REALLY that different?".

That's why your argument is retarded. You can't grasp the idea of somebody splitting hairs, despite that exact tactic being the majority of your point.

You iterate and eventually you'll settle on the range of 12-16 because that's when women go through puberty and that matches the behavior we see IRL.
11 is too low. 17 is too high. and you make, some degree arbitrary, arguments for where you think the best age is.

 

[KingCoomer]

They would both be prosecuted as perpetrators with maybe a mitigating factor.

No, they wouldn't. The case if it ever went to court would be thrown out by the Judge immediately. Romeo and Juilet Laws are not proof that the AoC doesnt work, it's to allow a 16 year old to legally date an 18 year old, which we covered earlier is ok because immaturity because of the infantilization of society.

No and yes it does. You can't redefine the law based on arbitrary justifications that you create ad hoc and then pretend there is a consensus on the subject.

The consensus IS that maturity and abuse of younger women is the main concern and it always has been. The feminist movement in America was inspired by a series of controversial articles published in the 1880s (these articles were the reason the AoC was raised to 16 in the UK) called the "The Maiden Tribute". Here is the table of contents so you can get an idea of their concepts.

• "The sale and purchase and violation of children.
• The procuration of virgins.
• The entrapping and ruin of women.
• The international slave trade in girls.
• Atrocities, brutalities, and unnatural crimes."

Ask anybody why they don't want you fucking 15 year olds as a 30 year old, because they are afraid of abuse that can occur in such a relationship. "MUH MINORS CAN SEE ABUSE IN RELATIONSHIPSANYWAYS". I saw a person die Infront of me when I was 15 years old. By your logic it doesn't matter if I see that again right? We shouldn't try at all to minimize the chance me seeing that or experiencing that again, is this what you actually believe?

Now you can finally stop saying it was just feminist babble that raised the Age of Consent, it has always been raised out of concern for a younger women's safety and her maturity. I finally eliminated one of your biggest memes.

 

[Stardust]

You iterate and eventually you'll settle on the range of 12-16 because that's when women go through puberty and that matches the behavior we see IRL.
11 is too low. 17 is too high. and you make, some degree arbitrary, arguments for where you think the best age is.

But is 11 REALLY that different? What if they'll turn 12 next week or tomorrow? What if, on their 12th birthday, they cross over the international date line, becoming 11 again? Do you admit your standard is retarded?

Edit: He ignored the date line part. Boxy knows his standard is retarded.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

No, they wouldn't. The case if it ever went to court would be thrown out by the Judge immediately. Romeo and Juilet Laws are not proof that the AoC doesnt work, it's to allow a 16 year old to legally date an 18 year old, which we covered earlier is ok because immaturity because of the infantilization of society.

Depends on the jurisdiction but the proper application of age of consent would be to charge both minors with a crime

In some jurisdictions (such as California and Michigan), if two minors have sex with each other, they are both guilty of engaging in unlawful sex with the other person.[39][40][41] The act itself is prima facie evidence of guilt when one participant is incapable of legally consenting.

The consensus IS that maturity and abuse of younger women is the main concern and it always has been. The feminist movement in America was inspired by a series of controversial articles published in the 1880s (these articles were the reason the AoC was raised to 16 in the UK) called the "The Maiden Tribute". Here is the table of contents so you can get an idea of their concepts.

• "The sale and purchase and violation of children.
• The procuration of virgins.
• The entrapping and ruin of women.
• The international slave trade in girls.
• Atrocities, brutalities, and unnatural crimes."

Ask anybody why they don't want you fucking 15 year olds as a 30 year old, because they are afraid of abuse that can occur in such a relationship. "MUH MINORS CAN SEE ABUSE IN RELATIONSHIPSANYWAYS". I saw a person die Infront of me when I was 15 years old, Boxy, by your logic, it doesn't matter if I see that again right? We shouldn't try at all to minimize the chance me seeing that or experiencing that again, is this what you actually believe?

Now you can finally stop saying it was just feminist babble that raised the Age of Consent, it has always been raised out of concern for a younger women's safety and her maturity. I finally eliminated one of your biggest memes.

Grasping at straws.
Your original argument was justifying the status quo, "minors can consent to sex but only if their is a limited age gap because of maturity or power imbalance or abuse or something."
My counter was

1) Proxies for maturity (real work experience or college degree) are not codified into the law and it was feeling bad for people that got charged with rape (or something similar) that caused the Romeo & Juliet exemptions, not a social critique of power imbalances and maturity in relationships.

2) This criticism is baseless because we can look at European nations that have AoC at 14 and 15 and we can see they don't have massive problems with abuse.

3) There are plenty of high school age relationships that are abusive. So I don't agree that 15+15 = safe but 15 +25 = unsafe. If that 25 year old is a better person, it could be a better relationship. That is the way people traditionally would view relationships. I'm not saying this was the most common but it also wasn't illegal.

But is 11 REALLY that different? What if they'll turn 12 next week or tomorrow? Do you admit your standard is retarded?

Yes. 11 is 100% pedophilia, no questions about it.

@Imaloser

If your argument was, "I don't think people under age 18 can consent to sexual activities period. They could enter harmful relationships. I am trying to protect them." That is to say something closer to the original 1880-1920 feminist argument, you would have a stronger argument. I don't think the argument would work because so many people do engage in sexual activities before 18 but at least the argument would be logically sound.

But when you've seceded ground and you've said, "well okay ya I think a 15 yr old can consent to sex BUT....." that really weakens your argument. Is a relationship between a 15 and 25 inherently harmful? What is the difference in actions between a 15 yr old dating another 15 yr old vs 21 yr old? The former can only bike to locations while the latter can drive?

Romeo & Juliet loopholes weaken your argument and once you internalize them, the logical slippery slope is, "well why don't we just decriminalize jailbait period?" Are you actually preventing harm? The answer is no because you believe these people can enter abusive relationships or pump and dump casual sex BUT ONLY WITH PEOPLE OF A SIMILAR AGE. The mental gymnastics to justify this is weak.

 

[KingCoomer]

Grasping at straws.
Your original argument was justifying the status quo, "minors can consent to sex but only if their is a limited age gap because of maturity or power imbalance or abuse or something."
My counter was

1) Proxies for maturity (real work experience or college degree) are not codified into the law and it was feeling bad for people that got charged with rape (or something similar) that caused the Romeo & Juliet exemptions, not a social critique of power imbalances and maturity in relationships.

2) This criticism is baseless because we can look at European nations that have AoC at 14 and 15 and we can see they don't have massive problems with abuse.

3) There are plenty of high school age relationships that are abusive. So I don't agree that 15+15 = safe but 15 +25 = unsafe. If that 25 year old is a better person, it could be a better relationship. That is the way people traditionally would view relationships. I'm not saying this was the most common but it also wasn't illegal.

You act like a flowchart. You said I'm backwards rationalizing and coming up with this narrative of "young women need the AoC to prevent abuse" post-decision to raise the AoC, I prove that the AoC was raised for the reasons I highlight even back then, and then you go back to your "Muh Europe AoC" laws even when it's already been discussed that yes their AoCs are lower but there is no 30 year olds fucking 15 year olds there because even they see as morally wrong. I already disproved your Romeo and Juilet laws too. Minors dont get charged for having sex with minor, and they aren't there because the "AOC LAWS FAILED" it's again, to let a 16 year old and 18 year old fuck because it's a two year difference which people realize is ok.

I'm tired Boxy. I feel like a broken record. If you like JB good for you, just look but don't touch.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

You act like a flowchart. You said I'm backwards rationalizing and coming up with this narrative of "young women need the AoC to prevent abuse" post-decision to raise the AoC, I prove that the AoC was raised for the reasons I highlight even back then,

Do you really think there was an international slave trade of young women in America in the 1800s?
If they wanted to enter child slavery or entrapment, they could do that directly without changing AoC laws.
It sounds like propaganda.
I don't believe it.
I think Age of Consent was raised to 18 was to ensure women would finish high school and enter the workforce rather than get knocked up and married which was the relatively common before AoC was increased.
Female liberation has been a feminist agenda.

and then you go back to your "Muh Europe AoC" laws even when it's already been discussed that yes their AoCs are lower but there is no 30 year olds fucking 15 year olds there because even they see as morally wrong.

Okay so why don't we copy their laws and if people think that's immoral they won't do it?

I already disproved your Romeo and Juilet laws too. Minors dont get charged for having sex with minor, and they aren't there because the "AOC LAWS FAILED" it's again, to let a 16 year old and 18 year old fuck because it's a two year difference which people realize is ok.

I'm tired Boxy. I feel like a broken record. If you like JB good for you, just look but don't touch.

> which people realize is ok.

Okay so why can't people realize that 17 and 22 is okay? or 14 and 24 (e.g. Elvis Presley and Priscilla)?

At the end, your entire argument is the status quo, "well people realize the status quo is okay therefore it's okay" and everything you've said has been backwards rationalizations to the justify the status quo.
Can you not see your behavior? You're not the 1st person I've met that has done backwards rationalization. It's a very common typical psychological defense tactic.

 

[Marshal Mannerheim]

White Nationalism or Nationalism in general in incredibly unpopular because most whites know good non whites and bad whites, compartmentalize the racial problems such as white flight and think we can ignore or overcome any racial tension.
Most Whites believe that rejecting people because of their race is wrong and America should be a nation of immigrants where everyone is given an opportunity to succeed. (Ronald Reagan vision)
Most White Americans don't care if they become a minority, don't care if their grandkids are mixed race, think crime and intelligence is cultural and think America will remain the same nation when whites are replaced.
Most White Americans are completely on board with population replacement and white genocide, they just want leftists to stop being mean to Whites, maybe not teach CRT?
Even the Whites who claim to support borders and think open borders is insane still want massive legal immigration to the point that Whites are replaced.
Most Whites have completely rejected biology and eugenics in favor of not hurting people's feelings.
Anti racism is the most successful propaganda campaign in recent human history.
These people are so weak that they can't even stop affirmative action and they're starting to lose on the reparations argument.

The KKK was a white nationalist organisation. It also had far more members than, say, NAMBLA.

 

[KingCoomer]

Do you really think there was an international slave trade of young women in America in the 1800s?

Boxy, there a secret underground slave trade of women even now. The was slave trade in the 16th century. Human trafficking has been around forever.

It sounds like propaganda.
I don't believe it.

Even though I have historical citations, you ignore it because it doesn't fit your narrative that it was screeching feminist hags who raised the AoC for women's rights and not to protect young woman.

Okay so why don't we copy their laws and if people think that's immoral they won't do it?

They dont. I also can't impose laws.

Okay so why can't people realize that 17 and 22 is okay? or 14 and 24 (e.g. Elvis Presley and Priscilla)?

Because, it's a maturity thing. Elvis was a great singer but he was an abuser.

 

[Open Window Maniac]

The KKK was a white nationalist organisation. It also had far more members than, say, NAMBLA.

It was also formed by Democrats so they could terroize black people during Reconstruction. Gun control laws were passed so black people couldn't fight back against the Klan.