In short: No, I don't.
No, not really.
One day, in 2014, I received hatemail from someone who was offended by Yandere Simulator. It was actually the very first time anyone had ever sent me hatemail about Yandere Sim. Because I felt attacked, I started arguing with the person who sent the hatemail.
They said, "Your game is creepy because the characters are underage," and I responded, "The age of consent is different in every country, so does that mean the game is only creepy in SOME countries?" The reason why I responded this way is because I wanted to feel like I was slapping them with a witty comeback. I wanted to be contrarian towards them purely for the sake of being contrarian. I was pursuing the sensation of, "Ha ha! Got 'em! They must feel really stupid right now!" To cope with the fact that I had received hatemail, I wanted to feel like I had "defeated" the person who sent the hatemail.
They had a rebuttal, so I responded with a rebuttal of my own, and we kept going back and forth. I focused exclusively on trying to contradict everything they said.
Eventually, they started talking about pedophilia. In order to continue pursuing the sensation of, "Haha, I slapped them with an epic comeback!" I had to start contradicting whatever they said about pedophiles, which led to me making a series of statements that looked like I was defending pedophiles. For example, if they said, "Pedophiles are evil," I would respond by saying, "Pedophilia is involuntary, just like a mental illness or sexual orientation!" because I only cared about one thing: contradicting everything they said, in order to feel like I had "won" the arguement.
Eventually, the conversation somehow turned to the topic of "abolishing the age of consent." This was the first time in the conversation that I actually felt like we had arrived at an intellectually engaging subject. Some people mentally develop at different speeds than other people - this means that one "age of consent" doesn't work for everyone. For example, some people might be mentally developed enough to have sex at age 18, but other people might not be mentally developed enough to make that decision until age 19 or 20. For this reason, the concept of an age of consent is slightly flawed.
It was an interesting hypothetical thought experiment, so I actually put a bit of thought into it. If the age of consent had to be replaced by something else, what would it be replaced with? Instead of selecting an arbitrary number to permit people to have sex, what else could you do? Well, it would be convenient if there was a machine you could place on your head that would scan your brain and determine your current level of mental development. If this machine was 100% accurate, then it would be able to objectively determine whether or not a person is "ready for sex".
The way I phrased this was really stupid; I said something like, "What if there was a sex test, and if you pass it, you get a sex license? Wouldn't that be better than having an age of consent?" This was a stupid explanation, because it completely left out all of the nuance of what I was actually trying to say.
The person I was arguing with was mortified, and asked, "What if a 14-year-old passed the test? Would you permit them to sex?" It was an invalid question, because no 14-year-old could possibly mentally develop fast enough to pass the brain-scan test. It simply would never happen. But, because I was in "Contrarian Mode" and just wanted to contradict everything this person said, I simply responded, "Yeah! If the test is designed to prove something objectively true, then it must be objectively true!" Which has created a false narrative that I think 14-year-olds should be allowed to have sex.
In short, everything I said during that conversation was said purely to be contrarian and contradictory towards my opponent so that I could feel like I was "winning" the arguement. I don't stand by those statements; they are as meaningless as any other statement that you might make in a moment of anger when you're in a heated debate with someone.
After hearing this, my opponent expressed an intention to screenshot the e-mails we'd exchanged, and post the screenshots publicly in order to "expose" me as an evil pedophile. As soon as I was aware that this person was planning to spread bizarre propaganda and smear my name, I wrote
a pre-emptive response where I summarized the entire situation so that they couldn't create a false narrative about me.
Unfortunately, ill-meaning individuals cropped my post to create a false narrative that I want to abolish the age of consent and replace it with "sex licenses".
Please don't be gullible enough to be fooled by trolls who take my words out-of-context in an attempt to commit character assassination.
