Urban Superstition
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 3, 2016
Nah, a 20 year old with a 17 year old is still creepy.
Plagued Pedophiles and pedophilia apologists - Dear NSA agent reading this thread: WE DON'T CONDONE THIS
- Thread starter Cosmos
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
Hey @Kifflom, it's almost 2018, not 1818.
Being attracted is one thing. Trying to act on it with others is quite another. @Kifflom doesn't seem to see the difference. (edit: ninja'd by @Medicated)
Sure looks that way. A 17 year old is still a minor under the law, can't vote, and it's pretty likely they still live with their parents as a dependent. "Half your age plus 7" is more of a general rule of thumb than a rigid ironclad rule.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
Really odd since platonic love also falls under family members, children, and pets. These are the same people demanding adults have no business talking to children and constantly remind everyone they hate their parents, probably because they want to make out with everything they become close to.
This isn't "queer culture" in the slightest, you're just horny with no morals or boundaries. :powerlevel:I'm saying this as someone who's attracted to both sexes:powerlevel:
I've seen these types of people get excited to hang out with "friends", when they're done hanging out, they'll update their social media with something along the lines of, "Had a good weekend laying in bed all day and smoochin' some cute friends!" The concept of friends doesn't exist to them, everyone is a potential lover, but they'll still use the word "friends" in denial. This honestly sounds more like incel culture.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2014
That kind of situation is a lot more grey I think. Any younger than that and it would get into creepy territory though.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
Q
QB 290
Guest
kiwifarms.net
The Monster the farms needsI've created a monster
And the monster Peadophiles deserve
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2016
One of the biggest problems in pedo logic is how they justify their sick shit with purely biology. Sure a 14 year old girl may be physically able and "ready" to have sex and even get pregnant (
). But is she mentally prepared for sex and knowledgeable enough to be able to assert herself and be treated as an equal with someone much older, with more life experience? No fucking way. It's always going to be predatory no matter what way you slice it.
). But is she mentally prepared for sex and knowledgeable enough to be able to assert herself and be treated as an equal with someone much older, with more life experience? No fucking way. It's always going to be predatory no matter what way you slice it.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
And now the thread is infected. Let's hope it doesn't get any worse.I've created a monster
Although if it does, I foresee some new halals.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2015
Completely lost on him is the wishes of the 14-year-old. What if she doesn't want to get married? He's one of those idiots who thinks if a woman isn't a virgin, she's worthless, and that's objectifying in the extreme. No one is required to save themselves until marriage. It's a myth that women with multiple partners aren't faithful once they marry. Yes, they're more likely to divorce, but that's because they've learned that the person they married isn't the only one out there they're compatible with. And it all goes back to the idea that women are supposed to be subservient to men. Guys who can't view women as equals are without fail, pathetic for some reason. Roosh V lives with his mom. Vox Day is a kept man, there's some loser who wants to make it illegal for women to go to college, and he's a registered sex offender who lives with his parents.
So @Kifflom, do you live with your parents?
And @Cosmos you are doing a hero's work in calling out sexual predators. Not just here, but in the Nice Guys thread too.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
Reminds me of how "124 IQ" thinks of the victim.
If girls were expected to remain virgin until marriage, then guys should be too.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2015
Yup, but expecting guys to play by the same rules as they impose on women is wrong because of reasons.
Oh, and Jimbo's sperging about how it's ok to fuck kids if they "consent" brings to mind a thought experiment. Let's say, for argument's sake, that the age of consent is abolished. Would the kiddy fuckers then support comprehensive sex ed for the kids, including the fact that they have the right to say no and they don't have to explain why? I actually asked this of an admitted child rapist on another forum (he was behind a VPN and gave no clues as to where he was or who he was, so we struck out on reporting him, best we could do was hound him mercilessly until he left). I asked him what would happen if he solicited a
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2014
That's not gonna be hard to do for these people
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
Maybe it was acceptable back then in 1920 when the life the expectancy was 54 and not 75, but times are changing. Also, in the 1920s, the leaving age for school was 14 and not 17-18 like it currently is.One of the biggest problems in pedo logic is how they justify their sick shit with purely biology. Sure a 14 year old girl may be physically able and "ready" to have sex and even get pregnant (
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
Just take off the "until marriage" part.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2015
And if we're marrying off 14-year-old girls, I guess we better offer up the 14-year-old boys to older women who've lost their husbands. Younger males have a higher sperm count.
And I laugh at these idiots who treat evolution like it's a moral code. It doesn't tell us HOW to behave, it tells us why we do behave the way we do. Furthermore, in the animal kingdom, it usually falls on the male to attract a mate. Peacocks have bright plummage, peahens don't. Male cardinals are a bright red and so on. So if we're going strictly by biology, your inability to woo a woman means you're not fit to reproduce, so women are actually helping the species as a whole by ending your unfit line by not fucking you. So really, all the women that have rejected MRAs, incels, etc are actually heroines to the human race. We should hand out medals.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2015
What? No one in 1920 was dying that young unless it was a tragic accident or poor life choices. Stop falling for that shit just because the average life expectancy was pulled down because of high infant deaths.
And even then, 14 year olds weren't even getting married, they were working if they left school at that age.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
These are quite often not advantageous traits. Part of why they're favored despite being anti-survival is if you can be a bright red cardinal and somehow survive long enough to reproduce despite your plumage being a bright red sign saying "FOOD HERE," you probably have other characteristics that are worth passing on.
MysticMisty
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2013
Nobody under the age of 18 should ever marry. And why would you want to? No 14 year old girl is going to take care of you, and willingly cook you dinner, and willingly clean the house. She expects you to do that, unless you pay her and let her hang out with her friends and play on the phone and on the internet all the time.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2016
Poor life choices? You mean basically every day in the roaring 20s, a decade and a half of sex and booze? Not that i blame them. After a couple events called world war 1 and the influenza epidemic that probably did way more to drag down average life expectancy than your "loads of infant deaths", I'd be fucking and drinking every night too.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2015
The 1920s was a decade and a half? Didn't know the 30s were encompassed in being part of the 20s now, considering Black Friday happened in 29. Anyway, I was referring to the statistic, you moron, not actual people doing retarded things that personally affected their life expectancy. I'd expect it to have gone down in the 30s compared to the 20s anyway. But this is off topic.
- Status