/lit/ - Literature

Against, simply because a true libertine revels in the act of crime besides the other pleasures afforded by abominable acts. In a way, Foucault et al would bring about a society devoid of pleasure, when everything is permitted nothing is possible.

Please take your bullshit back to /r9k/ or /b/.

>>3729156
>if there's a law against it, it's morally wrong

>>3729153
As a reactionary peasant, I consider the effective power imbalance between children and adults to justify age of consent laws. So that side.

>>3729153
>>>/a/

>>3729163
>the government should regulate and equalize the interactions between free human beings

Statists please go.

>>3729165
>i was implying such
If you weren't illiterate you would understand my meaning to be that besides transgressing extant morality, breaking the law is an additional source of excitement and pleasure and will to power, etc.

>>3729171
>free human beings
ersatz christian posing as radical political shill plz go

>>3729179
Can't defend your viewpoint, statist?

>>3729171
Power is power, whether you call it government or something else.

>>3729186
>the government should stop people from doing things I don't like

AoC laws are ridiculous tbh, I'm not even a pedo.

>>3729185
My viewpoint is that you, claiming that human beings are free or even credulously accepting the notion of human beings as such is naive, and that your politics are a tough front for the weakness that you assuage with maudlin delusions of grandeur

>>3729194
How much did your fedora cost?

It should be to a reasonable age like 16-18. You dont want it to be legal for some asshole to coax your 8 year old into sucking his dick at the park.

>>3729199

>>3729200
>if a child and adult both want to engage in sexual activity, the government should stop it because it hurts my feelings

How's community college?

>>3729204
>I lost the argument so I'll call the other person a troll

>Implying children are truly sapient.

>>3729205
I take it you don't fully understand the naivety of children and psychological impact of sexual encounters on their minds.

psychological research indicates that there are extremely complex issues related to development of self and ability to create meaningful future relationships tied up in adult-child relationships.
best to leave it alone

>>3729192
>i'm not a pedo but

>Foucault
all gays are aids-spreading child rapists anyway so it doesn't really matter what he said

>>3729156
>when everything is permitted nothing is possible.
I have never heard a more brain-dead statement in my life.

What makes you think the society would be devoid of pleasure? Don't assume something you can't relate to or even imagine.

Why are you people responding? Why bother arguing with someone who is obviouly either a completely illeterate or a troll? Are you really not seeing those enormous glaring fallacies being poorly dressed as arguments? It's fucking absurd.

>>3729188
A government or armed group will stop people from doing things it does not like, or make them do things it does. There is no question of whether someone should do this, as the world is built on power struggles, but who should do it. All men will always be slaves so long as there are other men. That's how it works.

>>3729212
>>3729214
>children have sexual desires and masturbated often, but if human being over a certain arbitrary age touches them there, it's a literal holocaust and they're traumatized for life

>>3729214
>i think this group of human beings are naive, so the government should control and regulate their lives

>>3729217
Looks like someone is upset because I refuted his arguments while he was posting as anon. It's alright, chap, most humans aren't as smart as me.

>>3729217
*illiterate
ironic typo

>>3729220
I'd like to say you're not fooling anyone, but I'm afraid it might not be the case.

>>3729220
Animals have desires, doesn't mean that they should be granted.

>>3729214
Only because we've linked connotations of psychological trauma to sexual encounters.

You didn't understand >>3729205

What if, hypothetically, they both willingly wanted to engage and the child was aware of the act and what it entails? And don't say "that's not possible", since you have no idea of the people I've met and the encounters they've had (even with other children their age), which just accounts for any other cases you might be ignoring.

The world isn't black and white. It's a spectrum with a lot of dark grey and light grey inbetween.

>>3729220
you have some very effective reaction images

>>3729212
>sapient
They're wiser than any narrow-minded ignoramuses such as yourself give them credit for.

You'd be surprised.

>>3729217
because he's full of zany retorts and reacts like a little dog with a play-toy.

>>3729216
''brain dead statement'' is rather a nonsensical phrase, but i'll let it pass that you used it. A society with full permissiveness would necessarily be devoid of pleasure if you, like i, assert that pleasure is evoked by the act of transgression. Someone without my point of view would disagree but i was only asserting my point of view in the first place.

>>3729231
>ad-hominem

>>3729227
It's a mixed bag sure. But completely removing an age of consent regulation is basically waving the dinner bell for sexual predators, in this day and age people already do a shit job of taking care of their kids. It'd just be bad all around and there's really zero reason to remove the laws we have today, kids will still fuck under the table as you imply. But we don't need it out in the open.

>>3729225
>the government should protect people from their own desires


>>3729232
>>3729223
So, no argument, then? I can't wait to see the faces of bigots like you in 20 years when child-love activism becomes mainstream. You aren't progressive if your views don't get you shunned, you're status-quo.

>>3729220
> if human being over a certain arbitrary age touches them there, it's a literal holocaust and they're traumatized for life
sometimes, sometimes not. it's more of a physical and relationshipal thing

>i think this group of human beings are naive, so the government should control and regulate their lives
repeat-offender pedos should be castrated, yes

>>3729239
>people who do things I don't like should be castrated

This is pretty much the equivalent of uneducated retards chasing witches. History is going to laugh at you.

>>3729220
Don't bother with these delusional self-proclaimed "humans" who can't open their mind enough to think outside the box, let alone think outside the cascade of societal conditioning and cultural programming they've been indoctrinated with.

It's not easy to shed all the ignorance that our culture willingly feeds us and our children and if they're not even trying to shed any of the values or principles contracted by a morally decadent society they won't even understand why I would see them as brainwashed.

But regardless, the truth is they are.

>>3729238

define: desire.

>>3729243
>This is pretty much the equivalent of uneducated retards chasing witches.
not really because pedos exist

>History is going to laugh at you.
doubt it but as it is society's pretty much on my side.

>>3729238
Animal desires are not the same as sapient desires, objectively.

>>3729153
>Foucault, and many other prominent...
...homosexuals.

Yeah, pede == pedo, no surprise here.

>>3729227
>its matters whether your sexual partner consents

>>3729188
>Just because you don't like murder doesn't mean the government should stop people from doing it

Even greentexting will not excuse this absurd line of reasoning.

>>3729237
Unless done properly.

In our day and age, at this present moment in time I agree, removing the age of consent now would be devastating.

But I like to think that sometime in the future, sooner or later, when humans have become evolved and advanced morally and philosophically enough that we won't have to keep tabs on everyone, lest they do it themselves, then people will respect the child as a human being, not as a lesser being.

>>3729238
Child-love activism peaked in the 70's with NAMBLA supporting the gay community until feminists came in and whipped them into shape, and frankly the acceptance of homosexuals within a broader historical context is tenuous at best. Sorry you're on the losing side of history.

>>3729245
I can't hold all these buzzwords and pseudo-intellectualism.

>>3729246
You brought it up, I'll wait for you to define it.

>>3729250
False dichotomy.

>>3729247
>society's pretty much on my side.

And at one point most people supported slavery and abolitionists were shunned. Enjoy being status-quo.

>>3729255
>people pleasuring each other with their own bodies is the equivalent murder

Protecting you from yourself =/= laws against murder.

>the government is stopping my desire to desire.

>>3729254
What do you even mean you bumbling buffoon.

>>3729259
Don't pretend that you are somehow above all the other consentfags.

>>3729258
Child-love has been practiced throughout history, are you mentally retarded?

>>3729259
>disrespects me even though I'm speaking for his argument

Why would you do that?

>>3729262
Its not the government's business whether my sexual partners consent or not.

>>3729269
I quoted the wrong person, sorry.

>>3729156
>>3729157

Everyone here has seen the documentary "Chickenhawk", right?

>>3729270
The s after "it" threw me off as to what you were meaning.

>>3729259
Desire
/
noun
3.
a longing or craving, as for something that brings satisfaction or enjoyment: a desire for fame.
4.
an expressed wish; request.
5.
something desired.
6.
sexual appetite or a sexual urge.
Was foucault applying logic to the irrational?

>>3729266
>all throughout history
Ancient Greeks are not all of history, broheim
Even at that, slavery was as well and nobody's bringing that institution back (overtly)
Again, this debate is pointless because you're on the losing side of history. If the facts conflict with the progress of history, so much worse for facts, and for pedos

>>3729274
Haven't. Could you care to give me a gist of what it's about?
Just a sentence or two?

>>3729259
I was simply showing how, by your absurd logic, no laws could be made against anything. I wasn't comparing murder to child molestation, although the two are similiar in that they are both immoral.

>>3729280
>close-minded reactionaries trying to paint themselves as progressive

I can't stop laughing.

Statism is reactionary, society is trending more and more towards free interaction between human beings. I'm not surprised it was so easy to win this argument, because all the smart people on /lit/ agree with me and Foucault.

>>3729275
Don't pretend like you agree with me. You've already framed your arguments in terms of consent. Your arbitrary distinction between consent and non-consent is no different to the people claiming that an arbitrary age can do the same thing,

Don't listen to all that fascists, OP.

>people claiming that some sex habits can be "immoral"
>people believing that pre-mature sex hurts the child

LOL, how someone can be so medievial.

>>3729280
Don't conclude something without knowing the conclusion.

How would you know that we're on the losing side of history?
You barely know yours obviously.
Ancient Greeks weren't the only ones to otherwise practice child-love.

>>3729286
Agreed.

>>3729286
>believes human interaction should be free
>thinks it matters whether a child consents or not

all my lol

>>3729287
>arbitrary distinction between consent and non-consent

I'm not pretending to agree with you. I simply ignored you. Ofcourse there should be consent, I thought that was implicit in the
> and the child was aware of the act and what it entails?

I am hegel so i know state is necessary.

how 'bout that?

>>3729294
Consent is a social construct, to be honest. I just frame the argument this way because it's easier for plebs to understand, one step at a time.

>>3729294
>thinks a child can't consent and is a less sentient being for whatever reason.

>>3729295
>thinks there should be consent

>>3729299
This whole discussion is at least 20 steps ahead of them, why bother slowing down?

Not like they're going to suddenly become un-biased and start looking at the discussion from a neutral vantage point.

>>3729296
thinks it even matters whether the people he has sex with consent or not

ITT: a few people attack the concept of consent.

>>3729286
>pedos trying to paint themselves as progressive
someday you'll learn that "progressive" is a meaningless buzzword, son.

>>3729289
I know you're on the losing side of history within at least a local context because NAMBLA is a laughing-stock. Ancient Greeks weren't the only pederasts, to be sure, but the only significant ones within Western Civ. There were some attempts at resurgence, but mostly by people even you would consider child molesters. Mostly I just mean to deflate you by reminding that your desires are never going to be fulfilled within your lifetime.

Hello, Mr. Reactionarystatistbigot, it seems you have a very serious case off assdevastation. I'm sorry, but current medical science has not discovered a cure.

You have 10 minutes to live.

>>3729301
>thinks that one-way love is just as good as any love

That's a toxic relationship for both you and whomever you love without their consent. But alas I wouldn't expect you to relate to anything I say.

>>3729311
Someday you'll learn that progression is the only way forward. Progression isn't just a buzzword you mongrel.

Evolve, adapt or die.

>>3729311
And you ofcourse have premonitions of the future and can foretell events before they happen.

Right.

>>3729311
Abolitionists were a laughing stock as well, at one point. Your fear of people with different sexualities is amusing, such a scared little boy.

>>3729314
>I don't like how you have sex so it must be wrong

Nice argument there statist.

>>3729320
No, I'm simply telling you you're only hurting yourself by disregarding other people's freedom.

>>3729315
You've just defined progression with a tautology, I don't know how you could prove my point better.

ahem, i am hegel.

state is needed.

only rational is real.

I'll remember to link to this thread in the future, whenever a poster claims that pedophilia is morally wrong.

/lit/ has officially sided with the philosophers against the uneducated peasants.

>>3729324
>children
>not having freedom

What a fuck are you mumbling about.

>>3729200
I'd say 14. When I was 14, a lot of my peers actively sought out sex.

>>372932
If you ever do that, it will be ignored like dirt on a shoe.

Even lit doesn't want to see this tripe.

>>3729324
>We're only making you do this for your own good!

Are you even trying to be coherent, you moron?

>>3729326
Your point that progressive was a meaningless buzzword had nothing to do with my point. I was stating how progression is the only way we can go, or we die. Humans have to be progressive or we'll die. You think of progressive as a term or label, but it's just as much an action or state of mind.

>>3729317
Extrapolating evidence from the past is the only way of "telling the future," and it's literally what our economy runs on.

>>3729318
I'm trans tho

>>3729329
/jp/ and /lit/ both support pedophilia

they are the best boards

>>3729329
WORD

sage

>>3729341
/jp/ only supports up until the age of consent, ie. 14.

>>3729329
>thinking this thread isn't full of uneducated peasants who believe people should consent to sex

>>3729337
Your incomprehension of my statement is not my problem, it's yours.

>implying any of you are coherent

>>3729345
cuz girls are gross and busted after 14

>>3729337
Ms. Laughinggirlsjpg,

What if my desire was to have everyone agree with my state?

>>3729350
>I'm going to force everyone to believe the same things as me

>>3729347
>I've been out argued so I'll just say 'no u'

>>3729340
Don't kid yourself. The past is the past.
While I do believe in the "Eternal return of the Same" concept, we're not going to revert to aggressive mobs as seen in the past.
We're conscious enough to make better choices. You can't simply look at the past to foretell what to expect of the future.

And economy is literally the worse example you could give.

>this thread

>>3729352
I don't care what you believe, just what you do.
lrn2state

>>3729353
And I'll just sit back with a smug smile and say:

Ok, whatever makes you feel right.

>>3729352
yeah, so?

>>3729359
>thinks people should do what he says

>>3729361
>I got destroyed in an argument so I'll just pretend I'm right

>>3729358

Even though this thread has become a strange sorta sideshow, I want to reiterate the power-balance argument. We frown on it when bosses sleep with employees, and when professors sleep with adult students, because of the power balance issues at play. That issue is simply magnified when dealing with adults and children, as it is no stretch to imagine adults pressuring children into legal consent. In fact, this is what you would expect to happen.

>>3729165
>>3729185
>>3729188
>>3729199
>>3729205
>>3729220
>>3729238
>>3729254
>>3729259
>>3729286
>>3729299
>>3729301
>>3729308
>>3729320
>>3729329
>>3729337
>>3729341
>>3729352
>>3729353
>>3729366
Massive samefag
Take your pedophilia to >>>/tv/

>>3729366
why not?

>>3729372
>everyone should have to do what I say

Citation?

>>3729361
Maybe you should show this to your mom and she'll tell you that you were right.

>>3729354
>economy is literally the worse example you could give
how? Keynesian economics literally work on magic; it's not a matter of fixing the economy but fooling the public into thinking you're going to fix the economy, etc

We make choices based on experience. How else do you make your decisions? You appear to be arguing that history is entirely irrelevant to the present.

>>3729373
needs no citation

>mfw statists get destroyed ITT

>>3729370
So what now, employees cannot sleep with their bosses and adult students with professors? Is this some sort of American thing?

hegel

state is needed.

pls come one lissen' up.

>>3729377
>posting a laughing reaction image
>strawmanning constantly
Way to hide your weakness
see >>3729371

>>3729379
yes.

>>3729377
>mfw statists will continue to destroy you in the real world while you pretend to enjoy an impotent "spiritual" victory

>I would never give my consent to the state or any form of convention

what the fuck

>>3729371
Fail.

>>3729377
Good luck explaining that in court

>wow judge you statist fucking DESTROYED i mean the ancient greeks did it too

>>3729384
>>3729381
It's too late, this thread is already archived on warosu so all can see your shame.

>>3729386
>7 comments
>not samefag
fail

>>3729384
>>3729387

Fascists

>>3729377
>mfw you think you aren't a statist

>>3729386
>frankfaggotmind.jpg

Guys can I participate in this debate too?
Let me try

>implying you're not all statists

pic related: laughing man to show you I laugh

>2013
>be against child love
>siding with peasants and against philosophers

>>3729393
>statists are bad
citation?

>>3729396
>2013
>hur dur hur

>be 2039
>not engaging in oral sex with your newborn child.

let them suckle my clit if they want, jeez.

>>3729396
>2013
>be against child rape
>siding with consentfags

>>3729396
>>3729403
reported to the FBI

>>3729405
>not american.

>>3729407

back to >>>/pol/ perverts

>>3729407
>implying anywhere in the world isn't under America's jurisdiction

Maturity comes in various forms; age can only be necessarily determinant of the physical form. Regardless, general trends should be observed as a means of serving the greatest number of people and maximizing functionality while not hindering the remainder. To say adults should be allowed to have sex with little children (children, as distinct from teenagers) is absurd, ultimately, as an immature biology hasn't begun to lay the foundation for a sexual development in one's emotional or psychological facets. To synthetically preempt such a natural phenomena is to go against nature, not the Gov't, but the universal ruling body to which we all answer, which envelops us all, which cannot be escaped nor surpassed, and thus the action is objectively immoral and in the mind of an empiricist, repugnant. Many girls do become women by age 13, 14, and would not necessarily be damaged by such encounters should they willingly participate, but to prohibit such activity is in no way inhibiting anyone's true nature nor preventing their development as an individual, i.e., sexual encounters, especially those which involve those of a child's psychology (which include many, most adults) are meaningless and understood only insofar as they can yield pleasure.
- Wow Berries wins again

>>3729436
>immature biology hasn't laid foundation for a sexual development in one's emotional or psychological facets.

WRONG.

http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/sexual_health/development.html

READ IT, LEARN.

Now shut your ignorant ass. Don't discuss subjects you barely can comprehend, let alone research properly.

Now shed those morals, beliefs, principles and values you've contracted from societal conditioning and cultural programming.

Your brainwash is showing.

>>3729429
>implying it is

Sure is massive amounts of butthurt over child-love in here.

>>3729436
>thus the action is objectively immoral

You don't know what objective means, do you pleb?

>>3729520
The beginning of something and its complete coalescence are two different things. I appreciate you trying to be clever though.
>>3729532
Objective, as in universally accessible, immutable perception, as in the case of the perspective of nature, which is an expression of and in unification with the underlying principles of reality--who you callin' pleb, pleb?

>>3729384
my sides just exploded

>>3729609
You fail to understand how your bias clouds your definition of objectivity.

>>3729705
You fail to detect your own bias and thus project the resulting discord of your flawed sense of objectivity onto me. It's okay. You wear those water wings until you're comfortable in the deep end.

>>3729736
if i saw a man molesting any child under 12 i would probably kill him with my bare hands and this is true of most men, things change but that never will, sorry pedo fuck.

>>3729746
1) You're not capable of killing anyone with your bare hands.
2) I've never argued on here in favor of pedophilia; perhaps less time fantasizing about your bravado and more time focusing on basic literacy.

>>3729153
>while reactionary peasants

You mean the parents of those children they'd rather not see be taken advantage of by smelly old men?

There's a reason pedophiles have been despised throughout history.

>>3729227
>What if, hypothetically, they both willingly wanted to engage and the child was aware of the act and what it entails?

I don't care. Children are dumb and don't know what they want. If they "want" to have sex with an adult then they are wrong and their desires ought to be repressed.