Loli is for Pedophiles
0
Ok now that I have your attention do you think that extremist groups are the only real problem in the political world; and without them the world would be a much better place for everyone?
What I've realized is that all of the real problems in the political world seem to be caused by extremists and their ideals, ruining it for everybody else. It is the ones who scream for blood, who cannot see the other sides point of view, and who create bad images of their side driving people away, who are always creating the problems. Just think if the opposing sides of the loli debate could see each others issues they could understand them and actually find a compromise. Think no left or right wing terrorists.
When you put a person who is not neutral to the subject just not insane in to solve the problem they come up with a solution much faster and with less problems. For example I was browsing the CNN website and was reading up on the infamous "Rapelay Uproar" and there was a women who was talking about family and kid issue with it; I thought that she was gonna start spewing some bullshit, but instead she was quite reasonable about it all and I was agreeing with her. My point is that instead of claiming it was evil, and creating rapists, and needed to be destroyed to protect "our" children she gave good advice to parents so they could prevent young children playing games that may be to adult for them. Because she wasn't in the extreme category she proposed things that could be understood from both sides while maintaining and negative opinion of the subject.
I mean extremists hurt their causes by drawing followers away by being crazy. Feminists for example get a horrible name because of all the crazies that preach about unreasonable things and don't listen to the other side.
By this definition I'm a fucking feminist; I want women to have the same rights as men and I think most people do (well I hope they do), but still because of a few people acting crazy most people don't want to consider themselves feminists.
Just think about PETA if they weren't so crazy (and evil) the animal rights movement might actually move along faster. Though unwilling to understand that things don't change over night and that their opinion isn't the only one has made many including me "hate the movement" don't get me wrong I would like some animal rights but I find PETA disgusting.
Though the other side of the issue could be that when things really need to change drastically that only those with extreme ideals can change it for the better, but I disagree saying that only extreme methods can get extreme change is a little small minded I mean over time small changes can become quite big.
The point I'm trying to drive at is that if extremist groups didn't exist and only people who were closer to the middle of the political spectrum existed the world would be a much happier and productive place? Or do you think without them the world wouldn't ever have any big changes?
What I've realized is that all of the real problems in the political world seem to be caused by extremists and their ideals, ruining it for everybody else. It is the ones who scream for blood, who cannot see the other sides point of view, and who create bad images of their side driving people away, who are always creating the problems. Just think if the opposing sides of the loli debate could see each others issues they could understand them and actually find a compromise. Think no left or right wing terrorists.
When you put a person who is not neutral to the subject just not insane in to solve the problem they come up with a solution much faster and with less problems. For example I was browsing the CNN website and was reading up on the infamous "Rapelay Uproar" and there was a women who was talking about family and kid issue with it; I thought that she was gonna start spewing some bullshit, but instead she was quite reasonable about it all and I was agreeing with her. My point is that instead of claiming it was evil, and creating rapists, and needed to be destroyed to protect "our" children she gave good advice to parents so they could prevent young children playing games that may be to adult for them. Because she wasn't in the extreme category she proposed things that could be understood from both sides while maintaining and negative opinion of the subject.
I mean extremists hurt their causes by drawing followers away by being crazy. Feminists for example get a horrible name because of all the crazies that preach about unreasonable things and don't listen to the other side.
Merriam-Webster wrote...
Feminism- the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexesBy this definition I'm a fucking feminist; I want women to have the same rights as men and I think most people do (well I hope they do), but still because of a few people acting crazy most people don't want to consider themselves feminists.
Just think about PETA if they weren't so crazy (and evil) the animal rights movement might actually move along faster. Though unwilling to understand that things don't change over night and that their opinion isn't the only one has made many including me "hate the movement" don't get me wrong I would like some animal rights but I find PETA disgusting.
Though the other side of the issue could be that when things really need to change drastically that only those with extreme ideals can change it for the better, but I disagree saying that only extreme methods can get extreme change is a little small minded I mean over time small changes can become quite big.
The point I'm trying to drive at is that if extremist groups didn't exist and only people who were closer to the middle of the political spectrum existed the world would be a much happier and productive place? Or do you think without them the world wouldn't ever have any big changes?
Spoiler:
0
Let the governments die out, and let our generation have a go.
We'd invest our money in the internet and video games.
We'd invest our money in the internet and video games.
0
GinIchimaru_09 wrote...
Ok now that I have your attention do you think that extremist groups are the only real problem in the political world; and without them the world would be a much better place for everyone? What I've realized is that all of the real problems in the political world seem to be caused by extremists and their ideals, ruining it for everybody else. It is the ones who scream for blood, who cannot see the other sides point of view, and who create bad images of their side driving people away, who are always creating the problems. Just think if the opposing sides of the loli debate could see each others issues they could understand them and actually find a compromise. Think no left or right wing terrorists.
When you put a person who is not neutral to the subject just not insane in to solve the problem they come up with a solution much faster and with less problems. For example I was browsing the CNN website and was reading up on the infamous "Rapelay Uproar" and there was a women who was talking about family and kid issue with it; I thought that she was gonna start spewing some bullshit, but instead she was quite reasonable about it all and I was agreeing with her. My point is that instead of claiming it was evil, and creating rapists, and needed to be destroyed to protect "our" children she gave good advice to parents so they could prevent young children playing games that may be to adult for them. Because she wasn't in the extreme category she proposed things that could be understood from both sides while maintaining and negative opinion of the subject.
I mean extremists hurt their causes by drawing followers away by being crazy. Feminists for example get a horrible name because of all the crazies that preach about unreasonable things and don't listen to the other side.
Merriam-Webster wrote...
Feminism- the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexesBy this definition I'm a fucking feminist; I want women to have the same rights as men and I think most people do (well I hope they do), but still because of a few people acting crazy most people don't want to consider themselves feminists.
Just think about PETA if they weren't so crazy (and evil) the animal rights movement might actually move along faster. Though unwilling to understand that things don't change over night and that their opinion isn't the only one has made many including me "hate the movement" don't get me wrong I would like some animal rights but I find PETA disgusting.
Though the other side of the issue could be that when things really need to change drastically that only those with extreme ideals can change it for the better, but I disagree saying that only extreme methods can get extreme change is a little small minded I mean over time small changes can become quite big.
The point I'm trying to drive at is that if extremist groups didn't exist and only people who were closer to the middle of the political spectrum existed the world would be a much happier and productive place? Or do you think without them the world wouldn't ever have any big changes?
Spoiler:
You wrote out what I would have written cept much much longer. Anyway Yeah Extrenism is just asking people not to agree with you.
0
Flaser
OCD Hentai Collector
Already wrote all I wanted:
https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?p=839017#839017
https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?p=973969#973969
https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?p=839017#839017
https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?p=973969#973969
0
Extremism is a problem for any civilization but, in trying to find a solution to extremism we can inadvertently cause a larger problem for everyone. Lets take racists for example.
Most people quickly step to the idea of "shutting them up" since "nobody agrees with them". So they quickly demand that their representatives write legislation to silence these evil, vile, extremist bigots. At the moment they succeed in silencing the racists, they have opened Pandora's box. Who decides what is considered extreme? Is it the guy who doesn't apologize for being white? Is Sasha baron Cohen an extremist? Is Howard Stern an extremist? What about George Carlin? Don Imus? Sean Hannity? Micheal Savage? Stephen Donald Black? Me?
The problem with trying to find a solution to the extremist is what is called "mission creep" where a project or mission expands outside it's intended goals. Trying to silence the extremist we only have people trying to silence political dissent.
The best solution in my mind is to let them speak. Then engage them in debates all the while teaching the younger generations to not only listen to opposing views but, even protect those very views even if they don't agree with them.
Extremist groups and opinions collapse when they are faced with facts and information.
Most people quickly step to the idea of "shutting them up" since "nobody agrees with them". So they quickly demand that their representatives write legislation to silence these evil, vile, extremist bigots. At the moment they succeed in silencing the racists, they have opened Pandora's box. Who decides what is considered extreme? Is it the guy who doesn't apologize for being white? Is Sasha baron Cohen an extremist? Is Howard Stern an extremist? What about George Carlin? Don Imus? Sean Hannity? Micheal Savage? Stephen Donald Black? Me?
The problem with trying to find a solution to the extremist is what is called "mission creep" where a project or mission expands outside it's intended goals. Trying to silence the extremist we only have people trying to silence political dissent.
The best solution in my mind is to let them speak. Then engage them in debates all the while teaching the younger generations to not only listen to opposing views but, even protect those very views even if they don't agree with them.
Extremist groups and opinions collapse when they are faced with facts and information.
0
Fiery_penguin_of_doom wrote...
Extremism is a problem for any civilization but, in trying to find a solution to extremism we can inadvertently cause a larger problem for everyone. Lets take racists for example. Most people quickly step to the idea of "shutting them up" since "nobody agrees with them". So they quickly demand that their representatives write legislation to silence these evil, vile, extremist bigots. At the moment they succeed in silencing the racists, they have opened Pandora's box. Who decides what is considered extreme? Is it the guy who doesn't apologize for being white? Is Sasha baron Cohen an extremist? Is Howard Stern an extremist? What about George Carlin? Don Imus? Sean Hannity? Micheal Savage? Stephen Donald Black? Me?
The problem with trying to find a solution to the extremist is what is called "mission creep" where a project or mission expands outside it's intended goals. Trying to silence the extremist we only have people trying to silence political dissent.
The best solution in my mind is to let them speak. Then engage them in debates all the while teaching the younger generations to not only listen to opposing views but, even protect those very views even if they don't agree with them.
Extremist groups and opinions collapse when they are faced with facts and information.
You got that right. It's impossible to clearly define what is extreme is what is not. The world isn't as simple as dividing it into black and white. There's more gray than most people think.
I have no doubt that extremism has it's own uses. Lots of extremist acts that were done in history had their good points that lead to great things happening.
Unfortunately, I cannot say the same about today's extremists. They call for blood, but yet their views are hard to accept. Let's take PETA for example. I have no doubt that they do indeed have a noble cause. But their way in going about it is over the top to the point where people just think they're crazy.
0
The truth is if you are really afraid for those game to arrived at the hand of underaged children shouldnt you try to protect them. Didnt that was the use of parents to control and protect their children from bad influences?
(According to my oppinion loving loli doesnt meant that he is a pedophile. After all i love loli and i also love grown up woman so am i also a pedophiles?.)
(According to my oppinion loving loli doesnt meant that he is a pedophile. After all i love loli and i also love grown up woman so am i also a pedophiles?.)
0
I am a conservative but yet I don't agree with this anti loli law...
Having a loli material doesn't mean your a pedo...I got them because they're cute...and I'm perfectly normal...
Having a loli material doesn't mean your a pedo...I got them because they're cute...and I'm perfectly normal...
0
I think that it's unfair, but it was bound to happen eventually. The fact is, is that the majority of people don't actually know that most of the people that look at loli aren't actually bad people, but have been classified as such because of the relation to a major real-life problem. Loli will still be accessible, the internet being what it is, so it's not a worry really. I believe the best thing loli lovers could do is just shut up about the problem and not fight back. The more they fight, the more controversial it becomes, the more controversial it become the more people know about it, the more people know about it, the harsher the crackdown becomes. The real reason this even happened is because of certain sites and people that opened their big ass mouths and forced the government to do something about it.
We are out of the ordinary and must hide our lives, this is the basis of any underground society, and something general users have forgotten with the growing popularity of the internet. Illegal activities are done in hard to find chatrooms and generally unknown to the public eye ways. IRC for example, not a lot of people use it when you compare the user base with the amount of people that use the internet.
Nerds of all types need to improve the way they share things. I believe this is the only way to stop this and anymore crackdown. If we've made loli and othee types of material that any one with common sense should know that those types of material should not be seen by the general public. We've made it so accessible that even a 7 year old kid could find it. Do you see my point? Extremists aren't the problem, popularity is, just like it always has been for a large percentage of nerds.
We are out of the ordinary and must hide our lives, this is the basis of any underground society, and something general users have forgotten with the growing popularity of the internet. Illegal activities are done in hard to find chatrooms and generally unknown to the public eye ways. IRC for example, not a lot of people use it when you compare the user base with the amount of people that use the internet.
Nerds of all types need to improve the way they share things. I believe this is the only way to stop this and anymore crackdown. If we've made loli and othee types of material that any one with common sense should know that those types of material should not be seen by the general public. We've made it so accessible that even a 7 year old kid could find it. Do you see my point? Extremists aren't the problem, popularity is, just like it always has been for a large percentage of nerds.
0
Aethel makes it sound like loli is some dark secret that needs the be kept hidden away...
People need to just quit with the arguing and accept that most pedophiles don't go for the 2D when there are real kids out there. Liking loli doesn't make you a pedophile. Its liking real kids that does.
People need to just quit with the arguing and accept that most pedophiles don't go for the 2D when there are real kids out there. Liking loli doesn't make you a pedophile. Its liking real kids that does.
0
Most people that like loli probally only like it in hentai and not real life, like I like futanari but I don't like real life dickgirls.
and it depends really where the line is on what you consider loli, like I think any thing 16+ should be perfectly legal.
and it depends really where the line is on what you consider loli, like I think any thing 16+ should be perfectly legal.
0
I have a real loli fetish, yet I have no sexual urges when I see real life small kids. Being a loli doesn't mean anything, jsut that you like little kids. Anyways, pedophiles should be people who actually do something. Admiring shouldn't be a crime
0
Flaser
OCD Hentai Collector
Mangaexpert wrote...
I have a real loli fetish, yet I have no sexual urges when I see real life small kids. Being a loli doesn't mean anything, jsut that you like little kids. Anyways, pedophiles should be people who actually do something. Admiring shouldn't be a crimePedophiles aren't the people to prosecute. Child molesters are. A fine but important distinction. Even if someone is diagnosed as - or God forbid, admits to being - one, unless they molest a child there is no ground to prosecute them.
Also keep in mind, that most child molestation is done by relatives and family friends. It's time the soccer moms shut up and once again let professionals do their work. With their satanic ritual and childcare molestation moral panics they had set back child welfare and protection by 20 years.
We're back to "stranger danger" and "candy-men" and view children as incorruptible little angels (how their moms see them) instead sexually curious teens and preteens who can be co-opted into dangerous relationships that can forever skew and distort their view of sex and love.
0
Good stuff Flaser!
You're right - there is a real distinction between those who simply have an inclination towards youths, and those who'd satisfy themselves at the expanse of someone else's welfare. Urges are not an excuse for harming others.
You're right - there is a real distinction between those who simply have an inclination towards youths, and those who'd satisfy themselves at the expanse of someone else's welfare. Urges are not an excuse for harming others.
