/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>291757
Reminder that children do not have bodies developed enough to safely bear healthy children and that this fact alone is reason enough to see all pedophiles fucking hang. Morally, you are in the same boat as the fucking yids and deserve to be shoahed. Here's a pre-emptive thank you to the mods for doing what they're about to do.

>>291757
Logical fallacy. By that logic
>birthrates
We should all embrace Islam, cuz it's all about birthrates right? No, OP is a child-loving faggot

>>291757
Do you know most predators are still alive because police and judges shield them?

>>291759
Unfortunately OP has broken no explicit rules nor violated any laws, so all there is to do is shame him for being a faggot and douse him in horsepussy

Remember to sage in the email field

Pedophilia itself wouldnt, but younger marriages would. They always have. Men have always (and do) liked younger girls, because then they get a head start and get to monopolise the girls for themselves. Plus you get stronger bonds.

>>291846
Mega based. Can confirm. Young female/older male marriages are optimal. 13 is when you should start taming her before she rides the cock carousel.

>>291864
t. married nigger btw not a "beta incel cuck" like you shareblue faggots

>>291865
>shareblue
I would love to see you validate that point
>married
Sure fgt
>nigger
Well that much is true

>>291869
stay mad roastie. we know why (((feminism))) was invented

>>291870
What are you even talking about? What is it with these newfags and an inability to have a discussion?

>>291885
The conversation derails into mud-slinging, insult-tossing, and dismissing everything the other person has to say without addressing/refuting/debunking it way too quickly.
>>291870
Feminism was invented to turn the white woman against the white man and lower white birth rates. It should be abolished. A small handful of smart creative women deserve props for being better than average but they sure as hell don't make up for the billions of unintelligent underperforming entitled whores who don't deserve a place in the workforce. Rare great women don't make up for common evil exploitative feminist women or low-IQ average thots. Women vote with their feelings and should not have the right to vote unless they earn it somehow by getting a stake in the country they could lose by voting badly. If women could only vote by owning sufficiently prosperous businesses, there would be no communist female voters.

>>291885
Why are you talking to yourself?

>>291903
It's the surest way to insure an intelligent conversation

>>291757
>>291846
>>291864
>>291902
The simplest way to increase birth rates is to completely overhaul the scamming family courts. That's really all that has to be done. Then incentives for having a family instead of importing can be done.
Because if the family courts are there it doesn't matter. Get ready to be a slave wagie to a cunt. Who will go ride cocks on your dime.
Marrying younger isn't the solution, removing the root problems is.
There has to be a high trust society with acknowledgement of real differences, and what options give the most fulfillment and purpose in life.

That means raking the (((pedophiles))) over the coals for all the atrocities and harm they have caused.
And rebuilding and growing stronger and better than before with a vigilant watch for the same roots. Not just that, but it's a start.

>>291931
Family courts arent a solution. The problem isnt that men dont want to get married, and women only gain from marrying in the court system. They fuck with marriages by making divorce easy and carefree for the woman, but that isnt the biggest thing.

Money is also a problem, but I think the root of that comes more down to people being too consumeristic instead of not earning enough. You can have a big family and live comfortably if you divide the labour and dont waste money on retarded new-age luxuries.

The absolute main problem is that women are encouraged to be whores their early lives, delay having kids to party, sleep around, get an education, "You can have a family later", and then it's too late.
Getting girls when they're young gets them to be wives before they can be programmed, forms a stronger bond than anything you can get with a 'regular' marriage, ensures they only experience a single relationship, and leaves their entire reproductive lives ready for use.
That's why it's been so common historically. Men literally evolved for it.

>The BMI men find the most attractive is about 17-20 which is the typical BMI for girls about 13. Women naturally get fatter when they start having babies so a low BMI is another sign of nulliparity and youth.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_Reddit_communities#Jailbait
>Communities devoted to explicit material saw rising popularity, with r/jailbait, which featured provocative shots of underage teenagers, being chosen "subreddit of the year" in the "Best of reddit" user poll in 2008 and at one point making "jailbait" the second most common search term for the site.

>5 more phallometric studies indicating proportion of men more or equally sexually aroused by children (up to 13 years old) than by adults:
>27.7% (Firestone et al. 2000)
>14.3% (Marshall et al. 1986)
>18.3% (Fedora et al. 1992)
>19.4% (Freund et al. 1991)
>25% (Seto et al. 2000)

>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/147470491301100209
>Faces and voices, but not body odors, of young girls and adult women were perceived to be significantly more attractive and feminine than those of circum-menopausal women. These data suggest that facial and vocal cues may be cues to women’s reproductive value, but that body odor cues do not necessarily advertise this information.

Second thing to get is that Jew's are pedos, but they want it for themselves. The natural state of almost every other place and time in history has been vastly more okay with young marriages, even having it as normal, but its only after Jewish feminist influence that the west made a crusade against it. And thats why they attacked it so early.

Third thing to get is that pedophilia is hugely misunderstood by the average person.
The average child molester isnt a pedo:
>Estimates for the rate of pedophilia in detected child molesters generally range between 25% and 50%.[105] A 2006 study found that 35% of its sample of child molesters were pedophilic.[106] Pedophilia appears to be less common in incest offenders,[107] especially fathers and step-fathers.[108] According to a U.S. study on 2429 adult male sex offenders who were categorized as "pedophiles", only 7% identified themselves as exclusive; indicating that many or most child sexual abusers may fall into the non-exclusive category.[10]
And as I mentioned, majority of men are hebephiles, with a large portion of them bell-curving into pedophilia
>Okami, P., & Goldberg, A. (1992). "Personality Correlates of Pedophilia: Are They Reliable Indicators?," Journal of Sex Research, 29(3), 297-328.
>". . . most data suggest that only a relatively small portion of the population of incarcerated sexual offenders against minors consists of persons for whom minors (particularly children) represent the exclusive or even primary object of sexual interest or source of arousal (Freund, Watson, & Dickey, 1991; Gebhard et al., 1965; Howells, 1981; Lang et al., 1988; Langevin, 1983; McCormack & Selvaggio, 1989; Marshall, Babaree, & Butt, 1988; Marshall & Eccles, 1991; Mohr et al., 1964; Quinsey, Chaplin, & Carrigan, 1979; Righton, 1981; Rowan, 1988; Schofield, 1965; Swanson, 1968)."

Teenage pregnancy myths are a thing because its largely blacks:
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219236/
>Although blacks were overrepresented in the entire sample
>These sample hospitals served a primarily black, low SES area of their respective cities. Thus the results from Marecek and Hardy may differ from those of the other studies.
>Among whites, in contrast, first born children of mothers 20 to 25 scored lower on the average than children of mothers 18 to 19; children of mothers under 18 did not differ from the other groups.
>Marecek also failed to find a difference on the Stanford-Binet by age at first birth among whites.
>In the Marecek study, no difference in intelligence by mother's age at first birth was found for whites.
>These models were developed only for blacks, since the white samples were too small for meaningful analyses
>Belmont el al. found the contribution of maternal age in years to be very small, contributing less than 1 percent of the variance explained in intelligence.
>In general, the results from the three data sets were very similar. The authors' (Belmont et al.) conclusion was that the offspring of teen mothers suffer IQ depression only because of associated social disadvantages and not because of any “immaturity of the mother.”

And pedophilic relationships dont always cause long term harm:
>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9670820/
>https://www.srmhp.org/0402/child-abuse.html

>>291939
In fact, children often have to be coached into thinking anythings wrong with it, and much of the harm comes from the stigma:
>https://www.apa.org/releases/online_sexabuse
>"The authors also recommend training for law enforcement since some of the targeted youth may not initially see themselves as victims and may require sensitive interviewing in order to cooperate with investigators."

>https://web.archive.org/web/20120424054108/http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/psycorr.htm
>"Secondary consequences include reactions of others, such as parents and peers, to the sexual contacts. Feelings of guilt and shame regarding the sexual contacts, which are based on perceived violation of one’s own and others’ norms, are also addressed here.
>Emotional responses of guilt were related to outcomes, with greater guilt associated with more negative responses, Haugaard and Emery (1989) and Okami (1991) both reported guilt feelings to be associated with negative evaluations of experiences. Stein et al. (1988), in their study of unwanted experience in a community sample, noted that feelings of guilt and shame were common. Risin and Koss (1987) reported that guilt feelings were more common in experiences involving fondling, which were also associated with more force and greater levels of other negative feelings. Finally, Sandfort (1984) reported that when the boys interviewed in his study were asked about negative aspects of their relationships, many cited concerns about possible negative reactions from others, such as parents, peers, and authorities.
>The role of socialization in these reactions may be very important. Finkelhor (1979) and Fritz et al. (1981) both suggested that boys’ reactions may be more positive than those of girls because boys are socialized to regard sex in a more positive fashion, whereas girls receive more negative messages. Fritz et at. (1981) stated that although girls typically regarded their experiences as sexual violation, boys often regarded their experiences as sexual initiation.
>Clearly, feelings of guilt and shame and concerns about negative reactions from others are associated with negative responses to early sexual contacts with adults. These responses, however, are not inherent in the sexual contact per se but rather stem from social taboos and condemnation (cf. Constantine, 1981). To the extent that boys receive more positive messages regarding sexuality, they are less likely to experience these negative emotions and to react negatively to sexual contacts."

>>291757
Shut up pedo.

>>291757
Once heard about a /pol/ operation to infiltrate kid-filled Amino forums and redpill people while they're young and in "I hate school and society and seek refuge in fantasies but don't know why" mode.
Always wondered what happened to it.

>>292053
Cool story bro

>>292054
You got any better ideas? Gen Z's supposedly the most conservative generation yet. Everyone's joking about their broken homes and desire to die. Edgy jokes are popular because the alternative is commie faggotry. A proper campaign to educate them about the Jew couldn't be easier.

>>292061
Are you making a suggestion or are you blogposting? It sure looks like the latter

>>291757
gas yourself

>>292061
Gen Z is more pozzed than millenials look at the percentage of them that are faggots or trannies.

>>292073
Gen Z is split along extremes. Zoomers either get turned into faggots or they realize who's turning them into faggots. There is a strong counter-culture streak.

>>291939
>>291941
I don't fully trust you, Iceland. You were cool for a while with the bank and all, but then you got a rabbi and I hear you are all degenerate fornicators.

Your first point is right on. You should really go more into detail on your second point, though, as it ties into the first. The Jew corrupts our youth to destroy our people. He compels them to fuck and miscegenate for that purpose. It renders them useless to the 14 words and reduces them to state-dependent breeders for the slave race. It turns them into incapable, broken creatures whose only value is to be-- and to produce more-- chattel. And of course he does not wish to limit his own access to young women. Just take things things down to the individual level and it is easy to see why. By fucking your child, he doesn't only add to his progeny, but he co-opts yours. He helps himself in the immediate and harms you in the longer term. It is all about racial self-interest, and it is in the interest of any species to see its competitors reduced or destroyed.

Age of consent serves that end-- and this, I think, is the only place were one can make any sort of argument in favor of the crime that is known as pedophilia. The wonderful thing about age of consent from a jewish perspective-- or indeed, the perspective of anyone who wishes to undermine and destroy a people-- (beside the fact that it facilitates the use of human flesh in blackmail and extortion) is that it gives them time to indoctrinate your children uncontested. Sex and sexuality occur naturally. Your children do/will have a sexual nature to them. In a healthy setting, that nature can be nurtured and allowed to blossom in such a way as to serve the end goal of all life: to secure the existence of a species and a future for its children. But age of consent makes this absolutely taboo. It is completely illegal to actually affect the sexual development of anyone under 18. To do so will bring down the full force of the state. You will be destroyed. But the time someone turns 18, their sexuality has already been fully formed. Kids don't stop being sexual creatures just because the law says you cannot interact with them in such a way.

Do you remember puberty? For 3 to 8 years, from the onset of puberty to the age of 18, it is completely illegal to take action to ensure that a young woman lives a healthy, functional, and fulfilling life. In the brave new world, children are to be allowed unlimited access to sex. It is thrust ^:) upon them in schools, glorified in media, plastered all over the internet, and celebrated in popular culture. It is vulgar, it is sterile, it is dirty and completely selfish; it is evil. It is perverse sex that only serves to destroy us. This is what shapes our children into 18-year-olds. By the time they are old enough that the state sees fit to permit you sexual access to them, they are completely useless to the race. They have no interest in faithful, procreative sex. The very idea may be completely foreign to them, and they are not capable of it at any rate. For 3 to 8 years, from puberty to age 18, it is effectively illegal for a child to have any sort of constructive or healthy sexual relationship. All they can do is fuck around. There may be no law that says a 15-year-old girl cannot be a mother, but there is law to ensure that she cannot bear a child to a man inside the context of a stable, long-term relationship. No 17-year-old has the wherewithal to be a good and stable father. All that is possible is sterile and indulgent sex. By the time they are 18, they are no longer desirable as wives or mothers, husbands or fathers. Virginity is long lost, and with it the ability to form the kind of deep and meaningful sexual relationship necessary to keep a couple together in support of their offspring. With this promiscuity also comes disease, which can be harmful not just to the individual and potential mates, but to any children that may result as well. All of this serves to lower the number of our people.

Age of consent not only robs us of our next generation, but it also gives them to others to use for theirs. The rich hollywood jew is not bound by age of consent. He has the power to fuck whatever he wants, and he is protected-- even supported-- by the state in doing so. Neither is the nigger or the illegal immigrant concerned with age of consent. What does he have to lose? Another stint in the pen? Free food and housing? There is a whole bureaucracy designed to support his bastard children, and he wouldn't give a fuck about leaving them to die even if there wasn't. Meanwhile, any of us middle-class schlubs who actually could and would support a young mother and a healthy family would immediately be robbed of all our means and imprisoned to ensure that we could not.

Age of consent is part of a wider conspiracy to destroy the white race, and reduce us-- those of us that are left-- to the level of goyim cattle along with the lesser and more maleable peoples. It is all a part of creating the one unified slave race under the rule of God's chosen. It is the elite trading in flesh as they have always done.

I guess all that said, I don't want to sound like a child-fucking apologist. OP is a fag and I should have saged. Which to my embarrassment I am not %100 sure how to do here since there is no "options" field.

>>292218
Sage goes in the email field just as it did on old 4chan, but sage in all fields is a good way to tell the OP to eat a dick.

>>292217
What if it was a multi-staged thing where at a certain age(14 perhaps?), parents are allowed to start educating their children on these topics?
I don't think it should go further than that until they're old enough. What are the arguments for and against the age of consent being 16/18/21?

>>291773
lol this

>>292225
I don't even want to have to think about that nightmare. I'm not really sure you can legislate such a thing. I think what we need is a homogeneous, high-trust society that isn't constantly plied with jew subversion. At that point I think it comes down to the family unit.

And even then, there will of course be exploitation and abuse. People in general are selfish, and there will always be shitty parents. Things will never be fairy tale perfect. After all, we are-- at the end of the day-- talking about claiming ownership over another person's body; in the short term to make your dick feel good, and in the long term for progeny. It is vulgar and selfish, no matter how much we may talk of love and marriage and family, and there will always be terrible people prepared to abuse even the most vulnerable and important for their own vulgar pleasures.

The world is a shitty place full of pain and suffering. Truly this must be Hell if you think about it. But laws like age of consent that only aid in destroying what little good we do have are not going to make this place into Heaven. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions and all that.

>>292217
Our children have been the primary target of corruption for a very long time, the schools are at the forefront of this as they are the primary place of perversion of children, they are the ones who teach children to be gay or that homosexuality is normal, not their parents, the school serves the higher ups to preach their plans because it is the easiest way to indoctrinate the youth into decay and corrupted attitudes, the school helps no one but themselves and their personal interests, they do not care about the family structure or to help children, they only have one goal in mind which is to destroy the spirit of the youthful when they are young to ensure their mind is dumb and corrupt, the schools teach nothing useful other than an example of how not to teach.
They are the ones who shove perversion onto children and make them worship orgasm, they are the ones who have degenerated the youth and they are nothing but an enemy of the population as they are the right hand of the people in power, the government are the ones who fund all this perverted propaganda and decide what is taught inside schools, you know how trustworthy (((they))) are.

The age of consent is a truckload of trash, it prevents fertility from being used to it's fullest extent and hampers the birthing ability of girls in their mid teens, a girl is fully capable of giving birth at the age of 15 or 16 so it is a waste of their womb to not allow them to procreate, it is inefficient to prevent a girl in her prime to fulfill her role as a woman as it denies her from being a mother, it is a law enforced by those who have control over the people so it is not in favor of us.
The age of consent does not matter as measures should be taken to prevent pedophilia before denying teens from having procreative sex because pedophilia is inherently a detriment to society, the priests are notorious for being sick cunts who do a bunch of shit to children and look at what happens to the victim, they are forever fucked in the head because they were exploited by someone they trusted, it is a disgrace to allow these things to keep happening without intervention, the priests are allowed to do as they may like the kikes in Hollywood are able to do the same things as the priests, they should both be gassed in the same chamber for the diabolic deeds they have committed.

Puberty serves as the start of a girl transitioning into womanhood so to do anything sexual to one before puberty is a waste of time as it is not for the purpose of procreation but instead an immoral form of lust, a girl cannot be utilized fully until her mid teens as before then she is still growing, it is wrong to be impatient and take advantage of a girl before letting her body develop, she is not yet fertile so it is a form of sex that is just for pleasure, there is times for it but not with a non pubescent adolescent.
Pleasurable orgasms should be enjoyed by willing participants but should never be forced because it only causes misery as a result.
>>292231
>I think what we need is a homogeneous, high-trust society that isn't constantly plied with jew subversion.
Yes, this is how a good society should exist, the lesser amount of governmental interference in a family the better, family's are able to grow and live normally without the worry of law to dissuade them from existing, trust has to exist within a family for it to work properly as without any trust the family order falls apart rapidly, homogeneity helps the family grow quicker as men are faster at giving seed than a woman is at giving birth so he is able to impregnate multiple women easier this way, it increases efficiency in how they are able to birth more children and the women should help each other together to make taking care of children easier as they are all bound to the same man, it works better than being stuck in a contracted marriage where a man is prevented from impregnating other women.
I agree with you anon.
>Truly this must be Hell if you think about it.
Correct, this is hell on earth, we are trapped within the lower world while the spirits inhabit the higher realm, this is the underworld and we are trapped inside eternal torment as there is no hell worse than the 4 corners of this place, this world is full of every form of treachery and evil yet everyone pretends it's a paradise while not realizing where they are, we live within the 9 circles already and they are endless.
This is also heaven too, but it is only achievable through your own exploration.

toasting in an epic bread
check 'em

George Mason University - Center for Humanities and New Media - Children & Youth in History: Age of Consent Laws by Stephen Robertson, University of Sydney, Australia

https://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/items/show/230

https://anonfile.com/X9y24aq7n8/George_Mason_University_-_Center_for_Humanities_and_New_Media_-_Children_Youth_in_History_-_Age_of_Consent_Laws_pdf

"In western law, the age of consent is the age at which an individual is treated as capable of consenting to sexual activity. Consequently, any one who has sex with an underage individual, regardless of the circumstances, is guilty of a crime. Narrowly concerned with sexual violence, and with girls, originally, since the 19th century the age of consent has occupied a central place in debates over the nature of childhood, adolescence, and adulthood, and been drawn into campaigns against prostitution and child marriage, struggles to achieve gender and sexual equality, and the response to teenage pregnancy. This module traces the shifting ways that the law has been defined, debated and deployed worldwide and from the Middle Ages to the present.

An age of consent statute first appeared in secular law in 1275 in England as part of the rape law. The statute, Westminster 1, made it a misdemeanor to "ravish" a "maiden within age," whether with or without her consent. The phrase "within age" was interpreted by jurist Sir Edward Coke as meaning the age of marriage, which at the time was 12 years of age.

A 1576 law making it a felony to "unlawfully and carnally know and abuse any woman child under the age of 10 years" was generally interpreted as creating more severe punishments when girls were under 10 years old while retaining the lesser punishment for acts with 10- and 11-year-old girls. Jurist Sir Matthew Hale argued that the age of consent applied to 10- and 11-year-old girls, but most of England's North American colonies adopted the younger age. A small group of Italian and German states that introduced an age of consent in the 16th century also employed 12 years.

An underage girl did not have to physically struggle and resist to the limit of her capacity in order to convince a court of her lack of consent to a sexual act, as older females did; in other words, the age of consent made it easier to prosecute a man who sexually assaulted an underage girl. However, since the age of consent applied in all circumstances, not just in physical assaults, the law also made it impossible for an underage female to consent to sexual activity. There was one exception: a man's acts with his wife, to which rape law, and hence the age of consent, did not apply.

In trials, juries were often unwilling to simply enforce the law. Rather than focusing strictly on age, they made judgments about whether the appearance and behavior of a girl fit their notions of a child and a victim. It was not only that relying solely on age seemed arbitrary to them; at least until the end of the 19th century, age had limited salience in other aspects of daily life. Laws and regulations based on age were uncommon until the 19th century, and consequently so was possession of proof of age or even knowledge of a precise date of birth.

Near the end of the 18th century, other European nations began to enact age of consent laws. The broad context for that change was the emergence of an Enlightenment concept of childhood focused on development and growth. This notion cast children as more distinct in nature from adults than previously imagined, and as particularly vulnerable to harm in the years around puberty. The French Napoleonic code provided the legal context in 1791 when it established an age of consent of 11 years. The age of consent, which applied to boys as well as girls, was increased to 13 years in 1863.

Like France, many other countries, increased the age of consent to 13 in the 19th century. Nations, such as Portugal, Spain, Denmark and the Swiss cantons, that adopted or mirrored the Napoleonic code likewise initially set the age of consent at 10-12 years and then raised it to between 13 and 16 years in the second half of the 19th century. In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Behind the inconsistency of these different laws was the lack of an obvious age to incorporate into law. Although scientists and physicians had established that menstruation and puberty occurred on average around age 14 in Europe at this time, different individuals experienced it at different ages -- a fluid situation at odds with the arbitrary line drawn by whatever age was incorporated into law.

At the end of 19th century, moral reformers drew the age of consent into campaigns against prostitution. Revelations of child prostitution were central to those campaigns, a situation that resulted, reformers argued, from men taking advantage of the innocence of girls just over the age of consent. W. T. Stead's series of articles entitled, "The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon," published in the Pall Mall Gazette in 1885, was the most sensational and influential of these exposés.

>>293402
The outcry it provoked pushed British legislators to raise the age of consent to 16 years, and stirred reformers in the U.S, such as the Women's Christian Temperance Union, the British Empire, and Europe to push for similar legislation. By 1920, Anglo-American legislators had responded by increasing the age of consent to 16 years, and even as high as 18 years.

While those ages were well beyond the normal age of menstruation, proponents justified them on scientific grounds that psychological maturity came later than physiological maturity. They also argued that the age of consent should be aligned with other benchmarks of development, such as the age at which girls could enter into contracts and hold property rights, typically 21 years. Opponents remained focused on physiological maturity, however, and argued that girls in their teens were sufficiently developed not to need legal protection. Moreover, they argued, by late adolescence girls possessed sufficient understanding about how to use the law to blackmail unwary men.

Historians have argued that increasing the age of consent also gave the law a more pronounced regulatory dimension. In practice, these laws were often used to control the behavior of the working-class girls. Yet reformers at the time saw no distinction between protection and regulation: in making it a crime for girls to decide to have sexual intercourse outside marriage, the law protected them from themselves and from the immature understanding that led them to behaviors reformers considered immoral.

In addition to class, the intersection of race and age also gave the law a regulatory character. In India, for example, the prevalence of the custom of child marriage among Hindus led the British colonial authorities to apply the age of consent to married as well as unmarried girls, thereby creating a crime of marital rape that did not exist in British law. The 1860 Indian Penal Code set the age at 10 years; in 1891 the age of consent but not the age of marriage was raised to 12 years. As a result, the age of consent regulated the consummation of marriage, ensuring that it was delayed until an age when Indian girls were considered likely to have begun menstruating.

A furious debate preceded the enactment of the 1891 law, focused in large part on whether the law violated the commitment the British government had made in 1857 not to interfere in native cultures. That Indian law set the age lower than British law reflected ideas that non-white races "matured earlier," in part because of the environments in which they originated. In the U.S., those who opposed resetting the age of consent to 16 made similar arguments about African-Americans, Mexicans, and Italian immigrants. Australian legislators even claimed that white girls living in subtropical climates "ripened" into women earlier than those in Europe.

The behavior of underage girls gave support to both proponents and opponents of the increased age of consent. Increasingly living in cities and working in factories, offices and stores, working-class girls with a new freedom from the supervision of family members and neighbors cultivated a flamboyant, sexually expressive style that extended to consensual sexual activity, usually with men only a few years their elders. Their new freedom brought girls danger as well as pleasure: subordination at work and dependence on men for access to leisure, limited their agency and ability to consent, and sometimes exposed them to sexual violence. Girls involved in age of consent prosecutions came in roughly equal numbers from each of those groups.

In the 1930s, support for setting the age of consent at 16 years or older began to weaken. Characterized by growing economic, social, and cultural independence, girls in their teens assumed a place in western societies quite distinct from that of younger children. New concepts of adolescence and specifically of girlhood normalized sexual activity during the teenage years, at least within peer groups, as "sex play" necessary to achieve adult heterosexuality. Emboldened and influenced by such ideas, girls more often talked of being "in love" with the men charged with having sex with them, and expressed sexual desire. Prosecutors and juries increasingly refused to treat such cases as rape.

Legislators, however, did not reduce the legal age of consent. The resulting tension was reflected in slang, most notably the American term "jailbait," dating from the 1930s, that registered cultural recognition of teenage girls as sexually attractive, even sexually active, but legally unavailable. American legislators did amend laws to take account of the offender's age during the 1940s and 1950s as teen culture expanded and female adolescents exercised their sexual autonomy. During and after World War II, if both the male and female were underage (or between two and six years above the age of consent), the punishment was reduced.

By the 1970s, feminist rape law reform campaigns had helped to expand age of consent laws. Aiming to challenge stereotypes of female passivity and growing concern about male victimization, they made it clearer that the laws concerned all youth—male and female—and that the laws protected them from exploitation rather than ensuring their virginity. European nations in general did not follow suit. Only Britain, in 2003, revised its legislation, making an act committed by an individual under 18 with one under 16 a separate, lesser offense.

>>293403
A more broadly adopted element of feminist rape law reform was the application of gender-neutral language: instead of referring to "females" the law referred to any "person." Unchanged, however, was the nature of the act addressed. Age of consent laws applied only to heterosexual intercourse. The new language criminalized acts between underage boys and women, but not those between boys and men. Promoted as a means of formalizing equality between men and women, gender-neutral language won support as a means of protecting boys. The treatment of such cases, however, was not gender neutral and drew upon gender stereotypes. In practice, boys were imagined as sexual agents, not victims, and as sexual agents, the prevailing assumption was that they would not be harmed by sexual acts with adult women.

In the U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional to apply the age of consent only to girls. The ruling found a new, "modern" basis for the law: the consequences of pregnancy for females. Although out of line with a broad shift toward formal legal equality between males and females, the decision fit the circumstances of the small number of cases still being prosecuted. And despite this ruling, gender-neutral laws were still enacted around the country.

This debate foreshadowed a new link between the law and teenage pregnancy in the 1990s. Conservatives seeking to control adolescent sexuality joined with welfare reform activists. They promoted claims that the enforcement of the age of consent could prevent teenage motherhood (and rising welfare costs) that resulted from girls' exploitation by adult men. Few cases actually fit that pattern, but campaigns to publicize and enforce the law on that basis were implemented in at least 10 states.

At the end of the 20th century, outside the U.S., age of consent laws were expanded to include same-sex acts, due in part to growing tolerance of homosexuality and desire to reach those at risk of AIDS. In the first half of the 20th century, all the European nations, other than Italy and Turkey, that had followed the Napoleonic code in treating heterosexual and homosexual acts alike had recriminalized homosexual acts, either establishing a total ban or an age of consent higher than that for heterosexual acts. In the last quarter of the century, arguments that boys developed later and needed to be older to appreciate the social consequences of homosexual acts began to fade.

European nations began establishing a uniform age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual acts in the 1970s. Under pressure from the European Commission on Human Rights, the former Soviet states and the United Kingdom were the last to revise their legislation at the beginning of the 21st century. In 2003, New South Wales became the final Australian state to adopt a uniform law. In that same year, a U.S. Supreme Court decision decriminalized consensual sodomy, opening the way for the invalidation of unequal laws, a process started in 2005. As of 2007, Canada, Cyprus, and the British territories of Gibraltar and Guernsey were the only western nations without a uniform age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual acts.

More than 800 years after the first recorded age of consent laws, the one constant is the lack of consistency. Laws around the world define the socially appropriate age of consent anywhere from 13 to 18. Some differentiate between heterosexual and homosexual acts while others do not. Some apply to young men as well as young women and others remained focused on the lives and actions of girls. And beyond the legislation lies the world of practice, an even more complex story."

TLDR: The aliens that controlled Napoleon, hate gays, and made him fuck that little girl on that island so there would be a secret royal bloodline only the aliens knew about. The aliens that control me got me into lolitas, and are going to decriminalize all of it, the normies will be zapped into submission.

>>293402
>>293403
>>293404
Okay flat/tard. Age of consent laws/rules/regulations were not adopted to prevent judeo-xtian cuckstains from getting their faux-tribal secret kike microdicks into their slaves. The original laws and hysterically inept pigfucklatin terms are sourced as following: in 50BCE Greece the age of consent laws were part of a massive anti-slavery movement originating against the bastardized kiked judeo-roman lines of thought which enroced a belief that !!!(((having sex with a female human at the age of 7 is a (((holy))) virtue)))!!! For as much as you cuckolds love to cite """consent isn't mutual, it's restricted becuz m-m-muh reeeeeeeeeeeligush lawlz""", you sure don't even bother to mention the entirety of exodus 21 as follows:

Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.
2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. That's slavery, fuck you jewcuck.
3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. Yep, still slavery, fuck you jewcuck.
4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. Oh, generational kike slavery is (((okay)))? Nah, fuck you again, jewcuck.
5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. WELP, so generational slavery as a jewcuck is gay-oh-kay! according to you.
7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. The (((goyim men))) cattle are free to go, but the (((goyim wymynz))) aren't? Wow, how sacrilegious!
8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. Oooooh, so it's FINE to rape a ((((goyim wymynz))) of another culture even though the kike's freinds say otherwise?
9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. More generational rape-slavery? YAY, HOW (((JUDEO-XTIAN))) OF YOU!
10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. YAY, MORE (((JUDEO-XTIAN))) RAPE-SLAVERY OF YOU!!!
11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money. It's fine for a kike to abuse and whore out (((his))) slaves, but if the kike doesn't accept he can beat her to death so long as she doesn't die in 3 days. WOW, MUH !!!EQUALITY!!!
12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. Who fucking cares. According to kikes: goyim life is the cheapest currency of all, don't bother trying to preserve it.
13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee. Who gives a shit about your superstitious nonsense, kike-lover pedophile.
14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die. Yaaaawn, who cares.
15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. Again, more kike-loving nonsense!
16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death. Yeah okay, that old (((manstealer))) yarn where only kikes had the (((legal authority))) to make/buy/sell/trade slaves. More judeo-xtian cuckoldry excuses.
17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. Wow, this SURE smells like the 613 noahides alllllllll over again!
18 And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with his fist, and he die not, but keepeth his bed: More judeo-xtian cuckoldry excuses.
19 If he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote him be quit: only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed. It's okay to beat your goyim slave because muh judeo-xtian slavery mind virus sez so!
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 'kay.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. GOYIM ARE CURRENCY, JUST LIKE WHAT YOU'VE BEEN ADVOCATING!
22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. GOYIM ARE CURRENCY UNLESS THE MASTER-KIKE HAS SOME BIAS AGAINST SUCH!
23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. !!WOW!! !!AGAIN!! This case tests absolutely POSITIVE for microdick huwhite muttness AND is also the horrible plot to a body-bending torture story!

1/2

>>293402
>>293403
>>293404
26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. It's just FIIIIIINE to torture a (((servant))) becuz ur gud buddy tha kike mstr sez so! And if ur servant gits damaged, gotta let'em go!
27 And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake. Same as above.
28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. No one fucking cares, kike-lover.
29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. Again, only a kike-lover gives a shit since you love your crypto-kike noahide lawls.
30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. Killing a slave using a bovine isn't wrong? OH WOW, SO NEITHER IS CHILD SLAVERY! BIG THOKN THERE, CUCKBOI
31 Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him.
32 If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.
33 And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein;
34 The owner of the pit shall make it good, and give money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his.
35 And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide.
36 Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.

How about leviticus 19:20-22, leviticus 25:44-46, deuteronomy 20:10-13, 2 samuel 13:31? From there, exodus 21:7-8 ENDORSES the direct rape of slaves, especially including child slaves, "so long as they were not wedded (before their capture)". Then we can get into luke 12:45-48 where yehoshua pisscunt the zombie rabbincal apocalyptic narcisstic kike reeeeeee's about slaves (re: goyim like you) being punished for not doing "something they weren't instructed to do". There's also ephesians 6:5-9 where Saul/Raul/Paul/the philistine namechanged kike reeee's about slaves that they should be obedient or face the "utmost punishment" [depending on translation accuracy]. Oh, what about colossians 4:1 which directly states that all slaves (including cattle-goyim such as you) must obey their (kike) masters or exodus 21:7-8 that there is no punishment for RAPING A SLAVE sinc ethey are considered PROPERTY of the owner, which is furthermore approved by numbers 31:17-18? Funny how you ignore aaaaaallllllllllllllllllll of that. Then there's the epissle to philemon wehre Paul/Raul/Saul/the super-kike forcefully returns a runaway (apostate) goyim to their kike master. What about 1 timothy 6:1-3 where judeo-xtian goyim are commanded to respect their kike slavemaster(s), which goes into graphic detail of how non-judeo-xtian goyim should be abused IF they refuse? For a further, much more laughable citation, 1 timothy 1:10 was HYSTERICALLY mistranslated throughout your (((originally translated))) judeo-cathocuck babble. It either uses the word "manstealer" or "kidnapper", which the second is hilarious since that implies SOMEONE THAT STEALS A YOUNG GOAT AND FUCKS IT, whereas the real meaning refers to """illegal slave traders""", that is to say: NON-KIKE SLAVE OWNERS.

tl;dr: (You): [I'm a GUD GOYIM and I LOVE to force my unwilling, nonconsensuals slaves into having sex which is akshully rape with me becuz I luv zionism since I'm a microdick cuckold that can't sneed without the benefit of judaism[

>>293405
>dropping that pathetic leftybunker/pol/ judeo-marxist pedophilia meme
You approve of actual kike-endorsed chattel slavery while at the same time excusing kike infiltration into standard judeo-xtian degeneracy since 250ACE? Huwow. Poor showing, dickless shekelgoy. Make all the reee's you can, you aren't special and neither is your insane tankie-supremacist ideology. In fact, you're even worse than Nigel the britcucked mutt. Either go dilate some more or go neck yourself.

>>293456
>"Make all the reee's you can"
>several schizophrenic reeeeeeeee sperges
Is this bait? Are you okay, friend?

>>293698
Not to deny that poster is sperging a bit, but his point that the historical breeding of younger women began with the old jews is pretty well established by their own scripture.

>>293699
So, it's the general Jewish pattern. Whats good for us, whats bad for you. Ethnostate for us, diversity for you. Make pornography for the Goy, but ban it in Israel. Traffic children for Jewish elites, but ban traditional white marriages. Jews cry out in pain as they strike you.

>>293700
That's one way of looking at it, but allow me to suggest something altogether different.
If the jews think it's a good thing, in practice or principle, then no good will come of it.

>>293702
If the jews think it's a good thing (for you), in practice or principle, then no good will come of it.

>>293703
By that logic, then what the jews think is good for them is in reality good for (you). That idea works if one is or wants to be unscrupulous.

>>293703
The thing is, normalizing such an act would directly benefit (((the chosen people))) more than prohibiting it, unlike the others items they so cherish that would reject all of (((their))) influence just as the rest have done in the past. While it seems to be a solid tactic to groom the female of your dreams in order to secure loyal, moldable coochie, it would open the floodgates for degeneracy akin to normalizing homosexuality. After all, there has been attempts to normalize pedophilia in the MSM already by the same people that follow the other 'rules for thee, not for me' mindset already. Why would they try to risk that if it would supply the goyim with the power to reject (((their))) influence?

>>293706
The point isn't coochie, its marriages. Why do you think the occasional MSM attempts to normalise it only have to do with sex, and the vast vast majority of the time its about male-on-male.

>>293707
That is what I mean.

If they actually succeed in normalizing pedophilia at a sexual level, even if it's just only on male on male, it would soon spiral towards other venues like how homosexuality reached the point where two men can actually marry eachother. The fact there will be less restrictions and qualms about the act itself means that it'd soon allow the goyim to effectively utilize (((their))) tactics against them, which seems like a poor idea if it's really a tactic (((they))) don't want them to use. It seems counterproductive overall.

>>293707
You seem to be neglecting how differently society operated 100+ years ago. Men marrying younger women is just the tip of the iceberg when analyzing how vastly different the social norms of then and today are. Any attempt to revert to such a framework without addressing social justice, LGBTWTFE, trans in particular, and an endless list of other deviations that would be met with frontier justice, seems naive at best.

>>293709
More to this point, you're also neglecting the vastly different population density and racial makeup and the consequences of race and psychology as attested by you, if I'm not mistaken in >>293695 → >>293696 → and >>293697 →

>>293708
No. Take the pedophilia out of it. What are they doing? They're pushing promiscuity and homosexuality. It's another vector to get at people, but in the same way that its good when done for good reasons, its extra bad because it fucks with them early.

Saying it would lead to promiscuity and homosexuality doesn't make any more sense than saying normal, straight, adult marriages lead to promiscuity and homosexuality.

If the Jews own the media, and they think it would overall be good for them, why would they have pushed it to be the biggest stigma around to begin with? Why was the first thing the feminist movement did raising the age of consent? Because in the way it was done, its bad for them.

But, if you reach the point where being *phobic gets you even more stigma, and tolerance becomes the highest virtue, then suddenly you have an in to corrupt kids in the worst way possible, even if you still never want proper White marriages. Dressing boys up as girls, letting gays molest kids, and teaching them to be hedonists and whores.

>>293709
>>293710
I don't disagree. In fact, the posts you linked are mine. It's not plausible now, but neither is convincing people about ZOG, niggers, or anything else. Regardless of whats plausible to get going or what you personally think is right, you don't ever get anywhere without understanding whats true.

>>293711
>Take the pedophilia out of it
>It's another vector to get at people
I get it also promotes those same two values, but why would they risk going against such things as age of consent if they really wanted it to be barred off everyone but them? Like I said, giving people the justification to pursue romantic affection with any group would lead to thoughts of marriage, akin to homosexuals getting that same right soon after homosexuality was normalized.
The fact (((they)))) even toyed with the idea of pedophilia coupled with what we can both agree to be other ills gives me enough of a reason that it is not the greatest tactic as it is being promoted in this thread. After all, it's not like they are tacitly encouraging others to build their own ethnostate, or hinting that it'd be better not to watch porn. At worst, this is actually a way to cement (((their))) commandments as the new norm, allowing themselves to following their religious teachings more closely rather than a secret technique to ward off (((their))) influence away.

>>293711
That's a fair point. Legitimately speaking, the only way to address this within the existing legal framework is for children to be raised to accept arranged marriages between children at a young age, but even that has pitfalls and obstacles.

>>291757
How? Even if we go by the logic of, kids becoming sexualy mature at 12, pedos will still try to justify fucking a baby.
Even going by a pure scientific/animalistic standpoint how is fucking a prepubescent going to help our birth rates?

>>293698
It IS bait if you ARE cucked judeo-xtian trash that is willing to swallow all the race-traitor mixing propaganda currently being vomited out. Also that's pretty funny coming from Iceland, after all your sister-estate Shitzerlund is demanding you accept rapefugees.

>>291757
How fucking young? Ten year old girls can get pregnant and normal age of consent is 16 so thats 6 years of peado-fun that fails to deal with your premise.

>>293764
You should read some of the other posts in the thread. There's a clear line between fucking a baby and a girl around puberty, it physically hurts the baby. We evolved for girls to first start giving birth at around 14-16, bonding before then, and marriages were commonly young because it was useful.

>>293767
Judging by how irrationally angry you are at a stigma that was ingrained in you by the media around you, it's pretty clear who's following the propaganda.

I remember saying "pedophilia is a work of art" on derpibooru. Then I was banned for life.

I remember when I was 17 I was under the impression that legalizing such a thing would be okay. But now I see the implications of that as an 'adult' (who I hardly resemble by my degenerate infantilism and lack of clear thought) and I've changed my mind. Pedophilia is, generally speaking, a sickness. If it was okay by middle-ages's standards doesn't make it okay by today's standarts. Yes, we don't have God or a big entity behind it all to come and tell us for SURE it's bad. But we have a brain to figure this one out ourselves. And luckily we also have the experiense of some extremely fortunate ones.

When I was a child I lived my carefree life. And never did I ever wonder how is it like to be engaged in somewhat sexual. On the other hand, I discovered fapping at the age of 8. By myself. Children were making fun of me for demonstrating what 'fapping' is. Caretaker of my kindergarten often pushed my bed on wheels out of a room during sleep time so I won't cause trouble. I had to lie to my mom that my friend has taught me fapping because noone believed me I learned that by myself. I bet you look back to your childhood with joy and nostalgia but my memories of it make me want to kill myself. But that's not the point. When I was a child I didn't have any inclination of having sex, as other people often try to misintepret. During your young age you are still in development. Why the fuck someone keeps telling that at this time of life the organism is ready to pass his DNA to continue the reproductive cycle? Oh, I know. Since homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles it is never about continuing the cycle. It's about raping young boys to one's content without giving a flying fuck about how badly it will impact their mindset. Perversion is what makes us animals, not humans. And it is the responsibility of a human to make decisions that will benefit the world.

But with decisions like these it's the world that will benefit without us.

First of all: Gratian, an influential founder of canon law in the 12th century, accepted the age of puberty as the minimum for the age of marriage, and declared that consent was "significant" if the girl was older than 7 years. Not to mention the Islamic tradition, where the engagement could happen before puberty, but the girl would have to have her first period before getting married. Throughout this period until more or less the 18th century,the age of consent did not exist, or it was too low by current standards (9-11 years). Until, guess what, fucking "Christian" feminists started to protest in the Jewish States of America to increase the age of consent. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman%27s_Christian_Temperance_Union#History_and_purpose) https://web.archive.org/web/20080928120836/http://www.faqs.org/childhood/A-Ar/Age-of-Consent.html

>>293799
Okay race traitor. I don't consume media, never have. You, however, yes, you are SUCH a good goyim, always horfing down the kike loads whenever, wherever the (((masters))) tell you. Keep on cucking on.

>>291757
>>291759
Why shouldn't sixteen be the global age of consent? Women are supposedly able to bear children healthily at that age. If they weren't, jewish propaganda about "the tragedy of teen moms" wouldn't be necessary.

>>293858
>women are supposedly
supposedly not by my recconing.
If you have any information that contradicts the body damage studies in regards to natal care, nevermind the fact that cessarian section pregnancies didn't exist in the old days, fork them over. I personally am wholely behind abolishing the age of concent no matter the outcome though

Pedo haters: for thousands of years you had a perfectly servicable prevention measure for pedophilia, the rod and the noose. Even more effective, the father of the daughter, whom may intercede in who his daughter may be engaged to. Those who are frothing at the mouth against the degenerates who fuck kids, don't and have never needed, the age of concent law. It helps no one but (((them)))

>>293892
>>293858
It's the same meme as usual. Record some stats and dont control for the most obvious things, eg, race.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219236/
>however, recent evidence from the Danish Perinatal Study and from the Collaborative Perinatal Project in the U.S. show a linear relationship between maternal age and perinatal mortality with low rates among young women, and increasing rates with maternal age (Mednick and Baker, 1980)—or that there is no relationship (Broman, 1981), at least for ages 12–29.
>These sample hospitals served a primarily black, low SES area of their respective cities. Thus the results from Marecek and Hardy may differ from those of the other studies.
>Among whites, in contrast, first born children of mothers 20 to 25 scored lower on the average than children of mothers 18 to 19; children of mothers under 18 did not differ from the other groups.
>Marecek also failed to find a difference on the Stanford-Binet by age at first birth among whites.
>In the Marecek study, no difference in intelligence by mother's age at first birth was found for whites.
>These models were developed only for blacks, since the white samples were too small for meaningful analyses
>Belmont el al. found the contribution of maternal age in years to be very small, contributing less than 1 percent of the variance explained in intelligence.
>In general, the results from the three data sets were very similar. The authors' (Belmont et al.) conclusion was that the offspring of teen mothers suffer IQ depression only because of associated social disadvantages and not because of any “immaturity of the mother.”

>>293892
>the rod, the noose, and the father
Here hear. And the absence of the former reinforces the importance of the latter. Unsurprisingly (((they))) have compromised all three
>it helps no one but (((them)))
The same could be said for most laws. This is why traditional white culture, before the proliferation of the kike on a stick, didnt have laws to subvert. They had things that would get a person killed, and they had an understanding of what was naturally conducive to the development of their communities and what was not.
Take a look at the festival of Beltane, where young but post puberty boys and girls were encouraged to erm,... celebrate with one another in a manner that over time was easily monitored and guided by the parents and community to ensure a generative and viable result in the event of pregnancy, while conditioning and encouraging peer bonding and preparation for adult/parent-hood at an integral level.
Now compare that to 'dating' in the modern family structure and one can see how (((laws))) are and have been easily and readily fouled.
When the standard (law) is "what a king or kike will or wont allow" the agency of the parents and community is subverted and eventually eliminated.

>>293912
So white girls should have 16 as their numbers?
It just doesn't make sense that you can drive a car and join the military at sixteen but can't fuck until you're 18/21.

>>291846
Sneedville, lol

>>293715
As I understand, you are asking why they would push for sex with minors if sex with minors could actually be a good thing for the goyim. I think I can shed some light on his one. I was thinking of race when I originally conceptualized this, but I think it applies just as well to a number of other subjects. It seems to me that the jew likes to subvert healthy, normal behaviors, and turn them into something destructive.

Let's look at race, as I did:
When the colonies rebelled and created for themselves a new government, africans were not even considered people. Surely this must have been the case, as the negro-- even he who was not bound as a slave-- was not guaranteed the privileges of citizenship until 1868. If "all men are created equal" and "endowed... with certain unalienable rights", and the negro has no such rights, then he must not be a man. Clearly then, there was a sense that the nigger was not the equal of the white man, and that he was in fact less than he. This, I hope, we can all agree is generally true. There are clear differences between the average negroid and the average European which demonstrate the superiority of the one over the other. To put it bluntly, niggers are dumb and incapable, and people back then knew it. There was a warranted and healthy sense of superiority. Niggers lived in huts and sold their own into slavery, while the white man conquered the world and fought for his freedom in the New World. The negro was not capable of being a citizen as the white man was. Everyone person knew this, even as they professed their hatred for the evil institution of slavery. This healthy, proper sense of difference was (more or less) preserved up until the 20th century.

At this time, the jews, having built most of the institutions of power within the American government, and infiltrated those they did not, began to really push for the destruction of the European. The end goal is, of course, to destroy the white man and turn him into a malleable slave, as the lesser races are. He has to be subsumed into the colored hoards, but in order to do so, he must first be demoralized. They began this process by pushing for racial equality. How absurd is it to look at a nigger and think him your equal? And yet the jews accomplished this by demonizing and shaming the normal, healthy sense of racial difference held by all reasonable people. They propagandized the people of the United States into thinking that their instinct was evil and misguided, rather than proper and healthy. After many long decades, there finally emerged the ideology of "colorblindness", which I myself was taught in school as a child.

Now finally we come to the present (a few months ago when that book about white fragility was released amid the newest round of nigger riots). I was listening to the woman who is credited as the author talking about it to some kike media personality, and I was struck by the way she spoke of white people. She was not colorblind, of course, as that has not been in fashion for some time-- but she was not at all shy about the superiority of the white man. Instead of lauding it, however, she lamented it. She knew that white people were better than the colored hoards, but she regretted it, as if it were a sin. And it was not just her. Look at 1st pic related from the National Museum of African American History and Culture. They emphasize the ways in which white people are better than niggers, and attack them for it. No one, not even the dumbest of niggers believes in a colorblind society of racial equality. Just as they did at the founding of this country, white people now know themselves to be superior, but rather than take pride in that fact, they hate themselves for it. Their healthy instinct has been subverted and perverted to be used against them.

white people are better and that is good -----civil rights movement-----> racial equality/colorblind society -----indoctrination/propaganda-----> white people are better and that is bad

Do you follow? Am I even making sense here? The point is, I think that in the same way the kike has used the racial instinct against us-- first by putting a stop to it, and then by perverting it and reimplementing it-- he seeks to use the instinct to breed. First he stops us from doing what is beneficial and healthy, and then he sets us up to act in a self-destructive manner.

sex with healthy young women is good -----feminism-----> age of consent -----indoctrination/propaganda-----> sterile, damaging sex with prepubescent children is good

The kike pushes for pedophilia today because violently fucking little children in the ass is the very opposite of healthy and normal. Who do you see advocating for marriage and motherhood? NAMBLA? Is that what they fight for? You have no doubt seen the Amazing Desmond? 2nd pic-- celebrated child drag queen You have heard of Drag Queen Story Hour, yes? 3rd pic-- drag queen flashes children The sex with "minors" that the jew pushes now is nothing at all like the healthy sexual relationships of the past. It is immensely destructive, and that is why he advocates it for the goyim.

>>293946
Like 12+. One thing you wont often hear is how much age of first child matters for *actual* birth rates. It's literally a multiplier.

A white girl that has 2 children at 16 leads to more white kids than a woman that has 3 at 32.
2 * (32/16) = 4
3 * (32/32) = 3

The birth rates the Jew shows you are massively downplayed. Browns don't just breed more, they breed faster.
And so it's no wonder how much the Jew focuses on it. See attached pics of birth rate reduction measures ZOG takes, and:
>https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/352.html
>This entry provides the mean (average) age of mothers at the birth of their first child. It is a useful indicator for gauging the success of family planning programs aiming to reduce maternal mortality, increase contraceptive use – particularly among married and unmarried adolescents – delay age at first marriage, and improve the health of newborns.

>>294233
Part of that's probably true. But I think the bigger abuse of white interest in young girls is simpler, it's just porn. Jews sexualising kids comes more from tolerance than anything else. That's why its so interlocked with gay rights, like in the pics you posted. But doubtless some of it's coomer-brains+instinct that cant be let out in any non-degenerate way.

Either way, the Jew wants anything other than young girls getting married, and that's the point of all of this. Sabotaging white birth rates and stealing happy white relationships.

This is what happends when you start discussing this topic. It works like a magnet, really. I am not even fucking suprised.

>>294262
Correlation =/= causation
That bot has been around for a while. Its activity has increased since the doxx thread, but doesnt seem to reate to this one

>>294262
That's hardly fair. This place hasn't exactly been low-key recently. There were people advertising the shit out of the antifa social network thread on /pol/, and no doubt that attracted some unwanted attention. Not that this thread isn't shitposty garbage. You can tell by the OP.

>>294262
Censor the image more, you forgot the tits on the right

>>294269
I think tits on the right is an adult.

>>291757
delete yourself from life you subhuman

>>294273
I think he can't do it by himself and needs some assistanse. I'd be happy to tear his fucking scull open and shove the brains of this motherfucker up his fucking ass. Such beings deserve no place in this world. No, they are better off being sculped alive for crowd to see.

Or, at a bare minimum, put into an asylum. I am unsure if pedophilia is considered to be a proof of insanity. But I am sure. Feel free to correct me.

Anyway, back to the point. Fuck pedos.

>>294281
First they came for the kiddy fidlers....
.... then they came for me.

In reality the best place for these people to exisit is twitter and facebooke. If you truly wanted to do something to remove this type of person killing Mr Zucker would be a much better option. Much better to cut off things a sorce.

>>294263
Okay jewboomer. Have fun being your own canecer, you dickless cuck.

>>294273
If he doesn't, there's always this great Key Item called a 50 Foot Rope. You can find it almost anywhere.

>>294281
*skull
*scalped
Other than your minor spelling flaws, good statement there Anon, however: there are FEW greater purposes other than killing all pedokiked scum, pedos, kikes, scum, or kiked scum. The OP and 3 other cucks that have posted in this thread are retardedly obvious "!!hurrdurr muh qgaynon plan!!" glowniggers whom have pushed for the same kiked shit over and over.

>>294289
>Okay jewboomer. Have fun being your own canecer, you dickless cuck.
I see. So anyone who even slightly contests your point is a,... all that. Should I stop banning and deleting the cp then? That is what I do here after all, and when I speak about the cp bot its with experience and authority. Alot of staff do that, we only cap code when it's necessary. Is that what its gonna take for you fragile fucking snowflakes to stop jumping at shadows and chimping out all the time, the moment someone refutes your precious widdle posts?

>>294307
>Durr should I stop banning da cp den?

If you let such threads as "pedophilia is BENEFITIAL to the human race" exist then it's clear on which side you're on. Don't even bother deleting cp since you are clearly loving it so much.

Hope the edge in my comment didn't distract from my point. I appreciate what you do but maybe, just maybe allowing less threads encouraging child pornography is something you might want to consider? There can be no direct correlation but it will become one if more sick fucks will glance at this WONDERFUL thread and assume this place endorses raping little white boys.

How about making a thread "Pedophilia redpills"? Or "Pedos hating thread"? Or "Those kid raping cocksuckers deserve to die" thread? This way it will be at least 'clear' to those motherfuckers that mlpol does not encourage their shit.

>>294311
Aside from being in obvious poor taste, OP is not violating any laws or rules. As such, it is beholden on users to BTFO OP with facts, logic, and reasoning, rather than expecting mods to cater to their every whim. If staff deleted everything that was objectionable to sensibilities, (and let me tell you, some of the reports are just plain asinine, with 0 understanding of the purpose/intent behind the rules) we would be creating an echo chamber and conditioning an inappropriate sense of entitlement in the site users.
You're a big boy, you can handle it.

The reason why jews are pushing so hard for legalization of pedophillia is to start up Weimar sex trades. Those that have children for welfare checks would have them to put them into the sex trade for money.
This ties into making everyone poor that engaging in the sex trade and hard labor is the only way to stay afloat in (((their))) system.
It's just another piece to shatter the spirit of people. Growing up abused by school systems, whored out by people driven to despair, sex experimenting would begin younger and younger pregnancies would happen. Either the parents already strained take them in or they go to orphanages where they can get 'lost' into trafficking.
China and its 'reeducation' camps would be a nearing point for the US.
So it would be a bad time. Vigilantism would increase especially from criminal elements, where hits with fabricated evidence will get innocent people killed.
>>294313
/)

>>294311
>How dare people discuss something I'm too emotionally invested in to consider

>>294307
>>294313
Thank you for your service and understanding <3

>>294314
If Jews make it legal, the price drops to zero. Unfounded and obviously dumb.

>>294314
>>294320
And thank (you) both (as well as the majority) for your understanding. We aim to please, but our guidelines are uncompromising, and we wont over step them.

Now, back to shitting on pedofilth

>>293454
So age of consent is anti-slavery? And it was the Greeks who created age of consent to fight against the evil decadent Jewish-influenced Romans? Because Jews invented slavery? And so to question the current age of consent makes you a Jew-xtian, whatever that is? And age of consent is a good thing, because it keeps the Jews who pushed for a very high age of consent from owning slaves? Are you like some anarchist or something? Do you believe that marriage is akin to chattel slavery? You are hard to follow.

>>294342
What's with the "microdick huwhite" line?
Has he fallen for some lefty "whites are like niggers too" meme?

>>294320
>If Jews make it legal, the price drops to zero. Unfounded and obviously dumb.
What that means is that sex slavery and abuse have a layer of protection.
The price doesn't drop to zero. The demand for porn, services, and camwhores is high and the price isn't zero.
They desire Weinar conditions. They want to be the haves, and the have nots are content.
So legalizing pedophilia in any case as the circumstances are right now is an awful idea.
People that want that will go and seek it to whatever extent, those more neutral and apathetic will gladly have new material to slake their depraved desires.

Your points about why pedophilia and hebephillia should be legal is addressed by the laws being absolutely shot for having a family at all.
Then it's family courts (which fuck you over).
The divorce costs as well.
And lieing is nearly cost free for cunts, and it's profitable.
Then they import illegals, and hostile invaders.
Solving any of that and the (((root))) problem would fix birth rates
Even if pedophila was legalized it doesn't actually help with these things.

>>294346
>Legalise your underground monopoly for universal "protections" you already provide yourself
>This somehow gains you

The way you're supposed to make a point is that you make an observation and draw a conclusion. You and Mr. Sage are ranting schizophrenic stories.

>>294362
In what way is Pedophilia overwhelmingly helpful in any of the current issues today?

>>294367
You can look at what we've already said.

Traditionally white men did marry young girls, and have for a very long time, but was pushed against by jewry. See: >>291846 >>293402

It's not harmful. See: >>291939 >>293912

The Jew at the very least allowed it to become taboo, but likely pushed it. See: >>293711

It's very important for birth rates and successful marriages. See: >>294235 , the fact it was common, and the fact that the Jew pushed so hard against white child marriage

But, I'ts not immediately helpful: >>293711
>I don't disagree. It's not plausible now, but neither is convincing people about ZOG, niggers, or anything else. Regardless of whats plausible to get going or what you personally think is right, you don't ever get anywhere without understanding whats true.

>>291759
12yo girl can give birth without any problem, chance that the child will be healthy is the highest of all ages, this is a fact.

>>294504
That has to be bullshit because people that age are tiny.

>>294511
And fertile.

>>294504
Do you remember yourself at 12 years? Now imagine a girl of that same age being forced to shit out a huge fucking melon out of her ass and then raise it while she still attends school. For fuck's sakes, man.

>>294504
Here's another fact. Human meat contains nutrients in higher amounts than any meat you get from other animals. Should we become cannibals now?

>>294531
But they do manage to have kids, and when they do, it's largely a positive experience.
>Duncan, S. (2007). "What's the problem with teenage parents? And what's the problem with policy?," Critical Social Policy, 27, 307–334.
>In fact there has been a tradition of statistical studies that do try to take account of these selection effects. This type of research began in the USA, and found that the social outcome effects of mother’s age at birth were very small, or as Saul Hoffman (1998: 237) put it in his systematic review of the US research ‘often essentially zero’. Indeed, by their mid/late 20s teenage mothers in the USA did better than miscarrying teenagers with regard to employment and income and this meant, ironically, that government spending would have increased if they had not become young mothers (Geronimus, 1997). [...]
>Since the publication of the SEU report, however, a number of British studies have taken up the ‘natural experiment’ approach, with the same results as in the USA. John Ermisch and David Pevalin (2003), using the British Cohort Study to assess differences between miscarrying and successful teenage pregnancies, found that teen birth has little impact upon qualifications, employment or earnings by 30 years of age. While teenage mothers’ partners were more likely to be poorly qualified or unemployed, and this then impacted on the mothers’, and their children’s, standard of living, this is also akin to a selection effect. In itself, age of birth has little effect. A complementary study using British Household Panel data to follow teenage mothers over time came to similar conclusions (Ermisch, 2003), as does a study by Denise Hawkes (2004) on twins, where only one became a teenage mother. Finally, Karen Robson and Richard Berthoud (2003) used the Labour Force Survey to assess the link between high rates of poverty and high rates of teenage fertility among minority ethnic groups, particularly for the extreme case of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis where both variables are particularly high. They concluded that teen birth has little effect on future poverty, and does not lead to any further disadvantage beyond that experienced by the ethnic group as a whole. [...]
>What these qualitative studies find is that many mothers express positive attitudes to motherhood, and describe how motherhood has made them feel stronger, more competent, more connected to family and society, and more responsible. Resilience in the face of constraints and stigma, based on a belief in the moral worth of being a mother, is one overriding theme (Graham and McDermott, 2005). For some, this has given the impetus to change direction, or build on existing resources, so as to take up education, training and employment (see Graham and McDermott, 2005 for review). [...]
>Not surprisingly, therefore, two of the themes identified in a meta-synthesis of US qualitative studies undertaken during the 1990s are ‘Motherhood as positively transforming’ and ‘Baby as stabilizing influence’ (Clemmens, 2003)."

>>294535
I don't think that confused metaphor disguised as a point is even true to begin with.

>>294531
Women shouldn't go to school for anything besides lessons in how to be a good housewife for a good man. And maybe entertainment and writing. A womans eggs are the single most precious resource possibly conceivable and women lack the brainpower to be trusted with sole custody of them.

>>294539
It really doesn't matter all that much. Majority of school is a waste of time you wont make use of, and women can (and should) go the route of studying and making carriers after having kids rather than the other way round.

>>294541
>school is a waste of time
It's actually a bit more of an indoctrination center that mainly teaches you what is good or bad according to the establishment. It's still useless to a degree, yes, but it also harbors the danger of messing up the moral values of its students and change them in ways the parents don't want them to.
>women studying and making careers
I don't see the point of women having actual jobs when they could be at home, nurturing the children instead. In fact, making them unable to work would lead to higher salaries for the other half, making it far more plausible for a single man alone to prop up an entire family.
They can always do their thing recreationally, by their own volition. No need to shackle themselves to an employer for it.

>>294539
>Women shouldn't go to school for anything besides lessons in how to be a good housewife for a good man.
Girls should be taught by their mothers how to take care of kids so they have an understanding of how to do it from someone who has experience rather than some government funded school, there should be a greater emphasis on motherhood.
>And maybe entertainment and writing.
Maybe but what sort of entertainment? You know movies are Jewish but what would the industry look without them? Should the movie industry be handled by white women or would it be best for men to dominate the scripts and have women be the actors? I think all forms of modern media would be better if they weren't Jewish or feminist.
>A womans eggs are the single most precious resource possibly conceivable and women lack the brainpower to be trusted with sole custody of them.
That is why society pushes women to be self centered rather than serving her role, by polluting the brains of young women it kills the opportunity of having offspring and with the addition of brain altering vaccines for babies it ensures that children are the number 1 enemy of the state, women are obedient as well as submissive which is exploited by the media and government, they are more likely to follow a set of beliefs faster than any man would.
>>294541
>It really doesn't matter all that much.
Entertainment and schools are a distraction from what people should be focusing on, it diverts the gaze of the masses away from direct problems on their doorstep.
>Majority of school is a waste of time you wont make use of, and women can (and should) go the route of studying and making carriers after having kids rather than the other way round.
They should learn how to become good mothers from an early age then after succeeding in their main goal should be able to do as they please when their children reach their teens, the feminine role and masculine is currently reverted which is why the world is so dysfunctional, revert the changes made to both sexes and remove restrictions then the world will be a better place for the Aryan race.
>>294550
>It's actually a bit more of an indoctrination center that mainly teaches you what is good or bad according to the establishment.
This.
It is the main tool of the government to teach whatever they want to impressionable kids so that their mind is full of thoughtless thoughts, schools teach dumbness and advocate it.
>It's still useless to a degree, yes, but it also harbors the danger of messing up the moral values of its students and change them in ways the parents don't want them to.
It pollutes the mind of children from an early age so that they revolt against the family order, they are disobedient to elders because they were told to do so, it teaches them beliefs that are not their own and neither are they the beliefs of their own parents, most English generation Z kids around the age of 10 do not even know who Guy Fawkes was but know about the Quran, that is an example of how the parliament wants to erase history and replace it with one that is not our own.
Schools should be burned.
>I don't see the point of women having actual jobs when they could be at home, nurturing the children instead.
Women SHOULD stay at home, all jobs for them are a distraction from family and that is why they are so pushed to take up jobs that do not help them, it furthers the industry by having women be working slaves for the government thus destroying the opportunity for child rearing.
>They can always do their thing recreationally, by their own volition.
Recreational activity is the best thing they are able to do, women are uniquely creative and art is their strong suit rather than work or manual labor.
>No need to shackle themselves to an employer for it.
Yes, you're right, they willingly put those chains upon themselves because they were told it is good for them ever since they were girls.

>>294539
EGGS have to be stored in Nitrogen and although there is tonnes of nitrogen to be had it could be argued that the vaccine panic is taken supplies away from EGGS just to transport it around the world. It may not make the big news media but it is becomming very clear that there will be a shortage of Nitrogen next year and decisions will need to be made on WHO gets it.

>>294550
That's the point. Once they're 40-50 and the kids have all left home, they might as well get educated and get jobs if they want.

>>294538
>But they do manage to have kids.

Mothers with drug addiction also 'manage' to have kids. What's your point? If it exist then it automatically makes it okay?

>it's largely a positive experience.

Hitting you in the head would also be largely a positive experience.

>I don't think that confused metaphor disguised as a point is even true to begin with.

Of course. When information benefits your belief it's a fact but when it derails from that it becomes a confused metaphor that instead of debunking you simply dismiss. If you are uncapable of thinking this through, fucker, here's some help:

By your logic, since little girls, in fact, can give birth then it is okay to fuck her. And here I am applying the same reasoning. Since human meat, in fact, is nutritious and full of vitamins then it is okay to eat humans. Again, every part of human body, excluding the brains, is perfecty edible. So why the fuck not?

If you haven't noticed a paradox over here then I wash my hands.

I know that pedophilia is unstoppable. By the time I am writing this there are kids being tied up and forced to suck someone's cock. It's in our nature to be this fucked up. But luckily, we have an understanding (at least the majority of us has) of what is fucked up, unlike degenerates like you. And when you step in with your bullshit, explaining your delusions to less degenerate people, don't be suprised why they react with hostility. You think fucking children is okay? No problem. Just get the fuck out and don't try to convince others to obsess it as much as you do.

>>294576
I hate pedophiles but man instinctively avoids eating human meat because there are some fucking nasty diseases out there you can only get from eating human meat. Also for man to eat man requires at least one dead man. Think of how big the pork-killing industry is, now imagine that but for various man meats.

>>294577
That's the whole irony of this situation.

Person A: There are some nasty diseases out there you can only get from eating human meat.

Person B: But it's full of vitamins. It's a fact.

It's morons like ((these)) who come up with bullshit reasons to defend taboo actions. You can't reason with their idiocy. They will use facts on you thinking they discovered a new fucking continent.

Person A: If small children are penetrated, or otherwise raped, they have a significant chance of being physically harmed.

Person B: But they can give birth. It's a fact.

>>294576
>What's your point? If it exist then it automatically makes it okay?
No, like is said in my source, its the norm. They manage to have healthy kids just fine, and then live happy and fulfilling lives, even with the social negatives associated with it (by irrational people like you).Youngest mother ever was five years old when she gave birth to a healthy baby boy and lives a happy life to this day. Unlike that Chernobyl kid in your picture.

Rest of that post basically derails to "I am morally righteous, you are dumb peepee poopoo".

>>294577
We think it's wrong because were not animals and because human diseases tend to be in humans that died. We didn't need the Jew to make it taboo.

>>294578
Small children do get harmed by sex. Tween and above don't. There's no inherent reason it would, physically or mentally, outside of the shame inflicted on them from outside. The fact they often need to be actively coached into thinking of themselves as victims is proof of that. The meme that it does comes from the same Jewish environmentalist pseduo bullshit as the race "science", and was pushed at around the same time.

You would love to do as your ancestors did. Find a cute girl, marry her, and make her the happiest wife there is. This is what the Jew took from you.

>>294578
That makes sense.
As a kid I was taught the age of consent was once 10 in victorian england but little girls as young as 7 and 8 got sold until Charles Dickens demanded we ban public hangings and also raise the age of consent to 16.
That was probably a lie since schools love lying to kids about the past.
Anyway 16 sounds like a good age to me. At that age she should be big enough to handle giving birth without any major risks. Waiting for 18... why? Does any significant development happen between 16 and 18? It cant be like the difference between a car crash at 20 mph vs 40 mph. If you tell her to wait until 18 before she can have relationships with adult men she will cry in the arms of the nearest teenage guy and fuck him if hes hot. Kids are not taught conflict resolution or maturity or realistic expectations for relationships in sex ed classes. It begins and ends at sluttiness normalization training. I remember being told to put condoms on dildos but everyone hears rumors of some mythical awful schools out there where kids are taught to succ the peanut butter off bananas. Once overheard two old ladies yapping at each other saying their 9 year old went through that at school. I remember thinking they were faggot pathetic old women who failed their kid if this is true because what kind of scum knowingly lets their kid rot in such a shithole? If I ever have kids I will homeschool them whether the wife likes it or not. Hopefully men will have rights by then.

>>294576
Man, nobody but OP is talking about fucking children. I hope. But the current state of things is fucked. We can't live in a society where people are waiting until their late 30s, early 40s to have one kid. It isn't sustainable. Part of being a healthy, happy grown human is having kids. Putting off having children forever is putting off being an adult. Not good. There is a whole lot that contributes to this, but age of consent doesn't help. As has been said before ITT, removing it would not fix the problem, but it still isn't a good thing. Age of consent is exclusively, %100, only about retarding adulthood.

Kids want to have kids. Why do you think girls love baby dolls so much? It is instinct. I don't mean to imply that this should be used as justification to send little girls off to the breeding mills-- just that denying them even the chance to fulfill this instinct can be in no way good for them, or society at large. Does that instinct just go away? She turns whatever-- 13, 14, 15 maybe-- and all of a sudden kids are gay lmao. Or does she have to be propagandized day in and day out in? "Kids are a pain in the ass, you need to go to school and get a career, wouldn't you rather party and have fun?" As I said earlier, age of consent just gives the powers that be several years to indoctrinate and corrupt youth. That's all it does. You remember being a kid? When I was 14, I wanted nothing more than to be a dad. Surely I can't be the only one? Or does having a child really suck that fucking bad and everyone should just live the cool wine aunt life?

I understand your visceral reaction. It's like when a normalfag hears someone say something mean about niggers or jews. Bad news. And you are right to be suspicious. People are nasty and selfish. But this isn't about the image you have painted in your head of fat, smelly, deplorable pedophiles sitting behind their keyboards, plotting for a world where they can unleash their sadistic lusts on defenseless 8-year-olds with impunity. This is about the health of our sons and daughters. The health of our very society.

>>294313
this. Go to reddit

>>291759
>children do not have bodies developed enough to safely bear healthy children and that this fact alone is reason enough to see all pedophiles fucking hang

Even supposing you're right that mid-pubescent girls could not bear healthy children (debatable) this could just mean that you stop cumming inside their pussies once they begin to have monthly menstruation cycles.

At that point you cum in their mouth until you're ready to procreate.

Ironically, the claim that 13-16 year old girls should be having sex with adults necessarily implies that boys of that same age should be celibate until adulthood. Teenage boys need to cultivate relationship skills in order to develop as normal men, and girls their own age are the ideal proving grounds for this. It's worth noting that your average teenage boy cannot compete with a 35 year old man with a high paying job, a car, social experience, and a fully developed body. Thus, if those 35 year old men go for teenage girls, the vast majority of teenage boys are essentially out of luck until they're established 35 year old adults as well, by which point many of them will have become embittered and fallen for bizarre incel ideologies which are every bit as harmful to our race as radical feminism.

>>294868
Men don't turn into incels because they didn't date before they were 20. Men's role is to provide, which is something a teenager can't do well. A girl's is to create and raise the kids, which girls are apt for a bit after the start of puberty.

>>294869
It's hard for any teenaged boy to become a man when jewed society sabotages his development and encourages failure in whites and lies to him about reality and makes traditional society's rewards for self-sacrificing men unattainable for most men.

>>294871
I don't disagree. It took me a long time to realise the failures I was being lead to as a teenager too.

>>294342
I am an eco-fascist that finds immense commonality with NatSocs whom has been forced to learn how:to deal with kikes, willing judeo-xtian goyim, useful judeo-xtian goyim, willing judeo-xtian sheeple, useful judeo-xtian sheeple, and the judeo-xtian (((sheepdog))) amerimutt cult over the past three decades. There can be no common ground with the (((!!b-b-b-but pedophilia is gud fer da jewz so itz gud fer uz!!))) mentality that too many have, and will continue to be, fooled on. It is a fact that kikes did not invent slavery, incest, nor pedophilia. It is a fact that kikes propagandized, incentivized, and brutalized the recognition of slavery, incest, and pedophilia for their own (((useful margins))) when it was necessary to clear themselves of their >250 population bottleneck which was deliberately caused by their own actions in challenging a vastly superior force based solely upon faux-tribal syncretic messianic delusions.

tl;dr: maturity of the body and mind is of grave importance, far more so than the stereotypical "but she's of good age, GOYIM, so you should have her" ridiculousness.

>>294345
Nice job outing yourself, britcuck. Keep horfing down the kike shit propaganda, you'll become an excellent (if literal) commie sjw gatekeeper in under a year's time if you keep on keeping on.

>>294362
>>294400
>>294513
>>294538
Good job trying to poison the well against your betters, icecuck. It's flattering to know that calling your shariablue ass out into the open has resulted in kicking the so-called hornet's nest, which is in reality a bunch of pathetic dick-cut slaves. It's hilarious to know that you are still nothing more than a pathetic gatekeeping pro-kike. Go back to fucking reddit, you basic bitch soyboy manwhore.

>>294577
Now you're starting to understand why the literal gatekeeping pedophiles have been, and are, trying to spread their filth across cultural lines. In order to "maintain birthrate supremacy", there is ONE necessary event that must occur before all others: the complete, utter destruction of all kike and judeo-xtian propaganda. Until that time both kikes and their willing/unwilling/useful judeo-xtian slaves still have a near-complete dominatino on what the term "breeding age" means, regardless of the dangers presented via biased (((studies))).

>>295061
Your braindead seethe makes me happy and validates my opinions.

>>295754
Shouldn't you be busy wondering about something else? Personally, I am not in the mood to hear your retarded sperging as there are currently far more pressing matters hitting the word at an alarming pace. Noone is interested about fucking children right now. Get a fucking clue.

>>295758
This is a horsefucker website, friend.

>>295758
Indeed, there are far more pressing matters at hand.
>>295763
That means we're dealing with higher level issues. Removing the root of corruption would actually solve the problems instead of your asinine suggestion.
Because this is a place for horsefuckers with politics, issues can be fully explored with various solutions.
The happening is coming day by day closer and closer.
>>291931
Just a few points of many many more.

The fuck is up with the shill lately? There is a whole thread dedicated to college degrees as requirements for voting, and now this one, legit pushing pedo shit.
I don't get it. Who is going to believe these posts are coming from actual members of the community here? This is so low effort stuff it's actually hilarious.

>>295765
On a personal level, there are elements to this thread discussion I wasnt aware of, that make sense in a historical context; specifically the nature and timing of historical american marriage. Imo, that bears consideration in analyzing modern marriage and birthrates, and the manner in which traditional households have been undermined through social pressure.
However, OP either used the wrong wording or his premise is agreeably unsupportable. Pedophilia can never be tolerated or supported, either in a historical OR contemporary sense, and a return to more historical models of marriage and households is naive and unrealistic.

So why shouldn't the age of consent be lowered to 16?

>>295775
Outside of a stipulation wrt 'in case of marriage', it would be used to validate increased and earlier levels of degeneracy.
However, within a marriage context, theres a case to be made that it should.

>>295061
I just now figured it out! Xtian like xmas, lmao. Let me ax you a question? Do you think anybody gon take you for real u talk like dat?

>>295776
If you marry a 16 year old to legally gain the right to bugger her but she divorces you at age 20 can she cry pedorape over you fucking her at 16?
Marriage would only be any good if marriage was un-ruined. And that would only be possible if feminists started getting locked up in padded rooms for their societal crimes against men.

>>295785
Agreed. It would only be viable within insular communities. The amish come to mind

>>295767
Do you enjoy talking in circles?
OP used the terms he wanted to use. And even if he meant it some other way (which he didn't), you yourself proceed to point out how, even in your own opinion, the premise falls flat. What's the point of this thread again, and why are you so keen on keeping it alive?

>>295789
I dont see what is difficult to understand. The written premise is absurd. The later inferences were informative. A discussion has developed around that kernel of information. What's your problem?

>>295789
Is "you should stop keeping this thread alive" a shill thing to say?
Returning the age of consent to 16 means men can be with women before she's lost everything at college orgies.
Growing from child to adult means learning to be an adult. This shit society gives teens terrible advice while sabotaging them at every turn.

>>295805
>Is "you should stop keeping this thread alive" a shill thing to say?
When did he say that?
>men can be with women before she's lost everything at college orgies
So, college orgies bad, therefore they should be fucked even sooner? Yeah, flawless logic. And when high school orgies increase in number, we should just lower it to 12 to fix the problem.

>>295790
isnt that obvious? pretty much the whole thread had beaten the chafe from the wheat. Now the chafe is back and screetching that we have to toss the kernal of the truth in with the chafe. the thread wasnt even getting replies because everything was settled one way or another.

>>295818
Speaking of the screeching chaff,....