What's worse: molesting a dog or molesting an underaged minor who had her papers I swear?

Molesting a human being will always be worse on the trauma/victim scale, but molesting an animal ranks so high on the disgusting/degeneracy scale.

Thankfully, Tommy made this argument less confusing by just opting to do both.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Dee Price, Lunete, SWETHORT and 19 others
The doggo. A teen girl having sex with such a degenerate signals to me that she is a broken person. Yeah, yeah, I get it, minors cannot give consent, but anyone, at any age, who would not have the instinct to stay far, far away from a creeper was already fubar. I mourn that fact that there are people who are already so broken at such a young age, through no fault of their own, but if it hadn't been Tommy, it would have been some other pervert.
 
  • Islamic Content
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Dee Price, Donny Cheese, Hongourable Madisha and 4 others
I'm not sure. Arguments could be made in both directions. On one hand, Tom should probably be fed feet first into a woodchipper. On the other hand, I can see real value in locking him & Yaniv in a cell with cheese graters & letting the winner eat the loser before being set on fire. Not sure if this conclusively decides the issue but the logic seems sound enough to me.
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Dee Price, Hongourable Madisha and Fanatical Pragmatist
Both. But for me is worse by just a margin molesting dogs.

Molesting a child has tremendous consequences, but with proper care, attention and treatment that person can still function, albeit scarred for life.

A dog is just gone mentally. Because dogs are trusting of humans, raping one is like destroying their core mentality forever and they will never trust another human being again, which is how domesticated animals survive. Plus how sick and fucked up you have to be to take advantage of the one animal who will always treasure you, protect you and will always be happy to see you? Dogs are perfect creatures. If I ruled society anyone who mistreat a dog should be punished the same way as if they mistreated a human, and if they committed a sexual act I would have put them against a wall alongside pedos.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Dumb
Reactions: Dee Price, eDove, No. 7 cat and 4 others
Lol this is the kind of question you don't answer, but I'm drunk so here it goes. Beastiality is always going to be an abomination worthy of death by burning at the stake. It doesn't particularly matter what the circumstances are behind it unless it's some inconceivable situation like someone holding a gun to your mum's head and demanding you shag a ______ (if the gun is to your head, just take the bullet). Pedophilia, while still an abomination worthy of burning on a pyre, is slightly more malleable. Scientifically, it's the age at which you reach sexual maturity, which is not a fixed thing but rather variable to a certain degree. To account for this variability the law has set certain limits in place, which are granted, somewhat arbitrary (they don't have a choice but to be arbitrary). Now let's assume that the law is just purely based on science. For both males and females it tends to take four years to complete puberty from start to finish. On average (there are a few outliers here) females begin puberty at 11 years, and males begin puberty at 12 years. This would make 15 the minimum for females, and 16 the minimum for males. Obviously, you run into some issues here since, for one, those are not even, and two, scientifically while you reach sexual maturity at these ages, you're not actually neurologically mature until much later (25 according to many neurologists). This creates a situation where on the extremes of either end, one could define under15F/16M, or under 25F&M as pedophilia. This leaves a gray zone in pedophilia, which is not really present in bestiality.

TLDR:
@Miss Tommie Jayne Wasserberg should burn at the stake, regardless of the text wall above.
 
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: Coldgrip, Dee Price and Fireman Sam
A child. Sure, molesting a dog is terrible, but it’s not like the dog was going to study neurochemistry or anything. The trauma of molestation can destroy a life and even lead to a cycle of abuse where the victim becomes an abuser.

In the specific case of Sabrina, Tom deliberately fudges many of the details, because he knows that what he did was evil. It seems that her life was already on a downward spiral when she had the misfortune of meeting him. Tom describes her as a runaway who’d already been raped. His version of how he came to sleep with her is missing many details - apparently she spontaneously went from total disinterest to willingly inviting this ugly, aggressive man into bed. The indication here is that coercion took place, if not outright force.

What happened afterwards? Tom has no details, other than lamely stating that she is a “grandmother.” Obviously Tom is a misogynist for whom the duty of a woman is simply to serve men and reproduce, but it’s strange that he won’t provide any information about her actual life beyond “at some point she had kids.”

Generally it seems that if you end up in Tom’s social circle, you’re already at rock bottom.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Dee Price, eDove and Hongourable Madisha
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back