Debate Jade Philosophies on the age of consent - We've got a live one

CallmeCicada said:
Cope. Even if your fanfiction is true 2 things. Reaction notifications don't exist so youre still stupid. And second your a dipshit faggot for typing an entire manifesto that no one will read.
Click to expand...
I'll admit, I haven't really used the site much since Josh changed the reaction settings, there used to be a notification option in your preferences the same as for reactions to profile posts and reactions to messages. I've had all mine turned off and just assumed I wasn't getting them for that reason but it's good to know that at least a little faggotry has been removed from this site by disabling them completely

You're still repeatedly mashing F5 to check though, so maybe less faggotry than intended.
 
  • Autistic
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: Mound Dweller, Seafarer and Hey Johnny Bravo
Luke-Warm Tampon Tea said:
I'll admit, I haven't really used the site much since Josh changed the reaction settings, there used to be a notification option in your preferences the same as for reactions to profile posts and reactions to messages. I've had all mine turned off and just assumed I wasn't getting them for that reason but it's good to know that at least a little faggotry has been removed from this site by disabling them completely

You're still repeatedly mashing F5 to check though, so maybe less faggotry than intended.
Click to expand...
That's a lot of words to say a lot of nothing. You seem to do that a lot.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Seafarer, Grimoire Canthari, Hey Johnny Bravo and 1 other person
Tablet County said:
You can't turn reactions on you dumb fuck.
Click to expand...
1731938114202.png
 
  • Autistic
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: Mound Dweller, Seafarer and Hey Johnny Bravo
Hardline Traditionalist said:
I'll just leave this here.
View attachment 6656559
View attachment 6656586
View attachment 6656589
Sources:
Click to expand...
Clearly these graphs prove that OP is right and it's okay for Jerry Seinfeld to have dated a 17 year old.

I'll say this: from a purely zoological perpective, pubescent teenage girls are likely at their "best" age, as in a natural caveman setting a male is likely to steal away a young girl in her "prime" and groom her into carrying his children. However concepts such as "rape" and "child grooming" are completely alien to the grug-brained early-modern human, and these things have no place in civilization. Even if your reptile brain sees a fourteen-year-old and goes "ZAMN!" you are not a caveman. Whether by the hand of an almighty creator or the viscissitudes of evolution you have been endowed with the power of higher thought and you should exercise that ability instead of trying to cope and sneed about your retarded urges.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Disagree
  • Winner
Reactions: Mound Dweller, Grimoire Canthari, Hey Johnny Bravo and 1 other person
Tablet County said:
I'll say this: from a purely zoological perpective, pubescent teenage girls are likely at their "best" age, as in a natural caveman setting a male is likely to steal away a young girl in her "prime" and groom her into carrying his children. However concepts such as "rape" and "child grooming" are completely alien to the grug-brained early-modern human, and these things have no place in civilization. Even if your reptile brain sees a fourteen-year-old and goes "ZAMN!" you are not a caveman. Whether by the hand of an almighty creator or the viscissitudes of evolution you have been endowed with the power of higher thought and you should exercise that ability instead of trying to cope and sneed about your retarded urges.
Click to expand...
Are you telling me to acknowledge that most if not all men are pedophiles to some degree?
 
Tablet County said:
Clearly these graphs prove that OP is right and it's okay for Jerry Seinfeld to have dated a 17 year old.

I'll say this: from a purely zoological perpective, pubescent teenage girls are likely at their "best" age, as in a natural caveman setting a male is likely to steal away a young girl in her "prime" and groom her into carrying his children. However concepts such as "rape" and "child grooming" are completely alien to the grug-brained early-modern human, and these things have no place in civilization. Even if your reptile brain sees a fourteen-year-old and goes "ZAMN!" you are not a caveman. Whether by the hand of an almighty creator or the viscissitudes of evolution you have been endowed with the power of higher thought and you should exercise that ability instead of trying to cope and sneed about your retarded urges.
Click to expand...
Statistically prime age for breeding healthy offspring without killing the mother in the process is between 20 and 35. Teenage mothers have higher chances for complications and their kids have higher chance for autism for some fucking reason.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Kiwisee, Mound Dweller, Seafarer and 6 others
Hardline Traditionalist said:
Are you telling me to acknowledge that most if not all men are pedophiles to some degree?
Click to expand...
If those stats are to be believed, perhaps. The less blackpilling take is that kiddie fiddling is significantly more common than it's believed to be.
That or I'm reading the graphs wrong. I am underslept and deeply retarded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whatevermancer
Hardline Traditionalist said:
I'll just leave this here.
View attachment 6656559
View attachment 6656586
View attachment 6656589
Sources:
Click to expand...
Why do 15% of men have erectile responses when seeing the picture of a nude male teenager? I really don't believe that 15% of them are faggot child rapists, and even if they were a kid at 12 looks world's apart from one at 16. Also, why does the study have a gap at 11? Outright omitting information seems like a terrible decision.

Also also, were the ones who did the study showing child pornography to the participants? Because that's extremely fucked up
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Seafarer, DickMain and Tablet County
Toji Suzuhara said:
Why do 15% of men have erectile responses when seeing the picture of a nude male teenager? I really don't believe that 15% of them are faggot child rapists, and even if they were a kid at 12 looks world's apart from one at 16. Also, why does the study have a gap at 11? Outright omitting information seems like a terrible decision.

Also also, were the ones who did the study showing child pornography to the participants? Because that's extremely fucked up
Click to expand...
Also also also, I'm like 99% sure you can't get a hard on at age 4. I don't know what they're defining as 'activity', but if it's as simple as tracking elevated bloodflow you can do that by just yawning without getting a boner. So I don't know what's up with their testing.

Also also also also, does this mean they're introducing pornography to children? I assume they're just nude models and it's not like a kid knows what's what so I wouldn't expect it to be necessarily sexual imagery by nature (think nude models for life drawing), but that's still concerning.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Mound Dweller and Tablet County
DickMain said:
Also also also, I'm like 99% sure you can't get a hard on at age 4. I don't know what they're defining as 'activity', but if it's as simple as tracking elevated bloodflow you can do that by just yawning without getting a boner. So I don't know what's up with their testing.
Click to expand...
No, that is the age that the subject in the pictures shown to the participants has, not the age of the participants, which is also somwthing to take into account, how old are the participants? Because if it's a bunch of guys in their late teens and early 20s it is not abnormal for them to be aroused when looking at teenagers, otherwise it's rather strange.

This is what the abstract says
Penis volume changes in response to pictures of nude females and males of various ages provided a basis for determining the order of erotic appeal or aversion in a group of 48 non-deviant, young adult males. Continuous measurement of volume changes permitted an assessment of an “acceleration” response and its latency. The acceleration score and a combined acceleration-volume score seems to be superior to the previously utilized volume difference score alone. The latency of response proved of no value in discriminating between the picture types.
Click to expand...
"Young adult males" @Hardline Traditionalist nigger, this info is practically useless for what we are discussing
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seafarer
Toji Suzuhara said:
No, that is the age that the subject in the pictures shown to the participants has, not the age of the participants, which is also somwthing to take into account, how old are the participants? Because if it's a bunch of guys in their late teens and early 20s it is not abnormal for them to be aroused when looking at teenagers, otherwise it's rather strange
Click to expand...
I need to reread those graphs then, because I had read one of the axes as the age of the participants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back