Quote:

I've read that male dolphins try to have sex with humans, and female apes solicit sex from humans. What is wrong with giving them what they want, if that's what turns you on, or even just to gratify them?
A parrot once had sex with me.
I did not recognize the act as sex until it was explained to me afterward, but being stroked on the hand by his soft belly feathers was so pleasurable that I yearn for another chance. I have a photo of that act; should I go to prison for it?
Perhaps I am spared because this photo isn't "disgusting", but "disgusting" is a subjective matter; we must not imprison people merely because someone feels disgusted. I find the sight of wounds disgusting; fortunately surgeons do not.
Maybe there is someone who considers it disgusting for a parrot to have sex with a human. Or for a dolphin or tiger to have sex with a human. So what?
Is it worse to shoot someone while stroking that person's genitals than to shoot someone from a few feet away?
There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
Snow is so beautiful, it doesn't have to be useful.
Dutch pedophiles have formed a political party to campaign for legalization.
I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children.
The arguments that it [pedophilia] causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.
A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness — not necessarily with computers.
The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally — but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.
For incest, contraception could be mandatory to avoid risk of inbreeding.
For prostitution, a license should be required to ensure prostitutes get regular medical check-ups, and they should have training and support in insisting on use of condoms.
For necrophilia, it might be necessary to ask the next of kin for permission if the decedent's will did not authorize it.
Necrophilia would be my second choice for what should be done with my corpse, the first being scientific or medical use.
Once my dead body is no longer of any use to me, it may as well be of some use to someone. Besides, I often enjoy rhinophytonecrophilia (nasal sex with dead plants).
If Mr Holland had had a serious video depicting a tiger having sex with a woman, he still would not deserve to go to prison.
Andrew Holland was prosecuted in the UK for possessing "extreme pornography", a term which appears to mean porn that judges and prosecutors consider shocking.
Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That's not willing participation, it's imposed participation, a different issue.
The injustice is in the word "assaulting". The term "sexual assault" is so vague and slippery that it facilitates accusation inflation: taking claims that someone did X and leading people to think of it as Y, which is much worse than X.
The word "assaulting" presumes that he applied force or violence, in some unspecified way, but the article itself says no such thing. Only that they had sex.
We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates.
I’ve concluded from various examples of accusation inflation that it is absolutely wrong to use the term "sexual assault" in an accusation.
I think it is morally absurd to define "rape" in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17.
I generally ask, "Could I please be checked by a woman?" It's not fair that only gays get to enjoy this.
The UK is planning a censorship law that would prohibit "giving a (so-called) child anything that relates to sexual activity or contains a reference to such activity". This clearly includes most novels that you can buy in an ordinary book store.
As usual, the term "child" is used as a form of deception, since it includes teenagers of an age at which a large fraction of people are sexually active nowadays.
I think that everyone age 14 or above ought to take part in sex, though not indiscriminately. (Some people are ready earlier.)
It is unnatural for humans to abstain from sex past puberty, and while I wouldn't try to pressure anyone to participate, I certainly encourage everyone to do so.
...it's common practice for teenagers to exchange nude photos with their lovers, and they all potentially could be imprisoned for this.
The idea that there is something wrong with a woman if she doesn't have an orgasm in sex with a man seems so strange to me that I can hardly believe anyone thought that.
The idea that there is something wrong with a woman if she doesn't have an orgasm in sex with a man seems so strange to me that I can hardly believe anyone thought that.
Waking up your lover with sex is a tradition that has given pleasure to many, and prohibiting it by designating it as rape is absurd.
If Assange had sex with a sleeping woman, the morning after they had sex and then slept together, was that rape?
Normal teenagers don't use the net to talk with adult strangers. They mostly talk with people they know.
... if those teenagers can't flirt with adults in one way, they will do another way.
Some people say they want censorship of child pornography because making those movies was a crime. Well that may be so, but not always because sometimes when they say “child” they’re talking about people aged 16 and 17, who in parts of the US can legally get married.
those who simply redistribute [child pornography] are in the same position of people who redistribute the collateral murder video.

---

living_failure said:

This dude is just some next level autist. wtf are people considering him a pedophile lol

---

Really?

Take a good hard look at the picture of this guy. 



Now read the quote.  Now re-read why he got fired and tell me that’s not a red flag individual.

lowbrow said:

living_failure said:

This dude is just some next level autist. wtf are people considering him a pedophile lol

---

Really?

Take a good hard look at the picture of this guy. 

---

Bridgeburner said:

Bumholio said:

tyrannicalrex said:

I tried hooking up with a 50-60yo man when I was 15, didn't pan out though.

---

Dude, you cant say something like that and not tell the story. C'mon spill

---

---

living_failure said:

Edit: do you realise that the sharing quote is because of his work, right?

---

tyrannicalrex said:

LOL. I looked really young for a very long time too. When I was 17 a friend of my brothers thought I was 12. I was probably a pedos wet dream.

---

I'm pretty sure a pedos wet dream is a kid who's actually a kid

lowbrow said:

living_failure said:

Edit: do you realise that the sharing quote is because of his work, right?

---

Or cp.  He looks like he’s done some ‘trading’ in his time.

---

hes into digital freedom and strongly against copyright in general and patents in software, see

and too me he looks like every other computer nerd of the 70's, to me they look like geeky bikers


Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, inventors of C



Steve Wozniak co-creator of Apple

DJ_avocado said:

Headshot! What a clean kill lowbrow!

I was sympathetic and trying to understand Stallman until you took his head clean off!

Pedos are getting brave now days. Thinking it's time to "come out" as soon as netflix makes a documentary about them.

---