I want to make a serious attempt at trying to convince you of something controversial.
You're going to have a strong emotional reaction but bear with it.
Think of how retarded leftists look when they talk about racism as an inherent undefendable evil, anyone arguing against it is de facto wrong even before they open their mouth.
They've been psyoped over generations into thinking that loving your own people is an inherent evil, they see it as an axiom, and they're 100% emotionally and morally invested into it.
Don't be like that. Everything is open to question.
Child marriage was an historical norm. It was always seen as acceptable.
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/child-marriage-rationale-historical-views-and-consequences.html
>Child marriages involving only one marriage partner below the age of 18, usually the female, are also quite common. Throughout history till the 20th century, child marriages were the norm in most parts of the world
>Girls were usually married off as soon as they reached puberty or sometimes even prior to that
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States&oldid=1104610475
>In 1880, the ages of consent were set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v16n02_03
>Age of Consent throughout history has usually coincided with the age of puberty although at sometimes it has been as early as seven. Early on age of consent was a familial or tribal matter and only became a legal one in the Greco-Roman period. The Roman tradition served as the base for Christian Europe as well as the Christian Church itself which generally, essentially based upon biological development, set it at 12 or 14 but continued to set the absolute minimum at seven
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): C84223160403ACA222A7C46A798CBEB9-526114.png (513.8 KB, 1600x2602, scootaloo_pony_heart_by_pyrestriker_d4fhaak-fullview.png)
File (): A11DA3AFC8875AC559C64EAA7055EB80-372989.jpg (364.2 KB, 1785x1165, ElXLLa7XgAAEokA (3).jpg)
Things that are harmful don't evolve into universal norms. There's every excuse made for it after the fact but it's as ingrained in us as something like racism.
Loving your own is a feature. It's a good thing. It's evolved.
The benefits of it are that when you're monogamous, picking early means that you get first dibs. Her entire sexual history is yours.
Sure, you could pick when they're more mature but you're competing against everyone else.
Think of it as buying a stock early at a low price. It's an investment, you have to wait, but it pays back dividends
It became taboo started with feminism. It was actually the very first feminist act.
It was the first act of female sexual "liberation."
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-raising-age-sexual-consent-taught-women-about-vote-180975658/
>The very first bill ever proposed by a female lawmaker in the United States came from Colorado state representative Carrie Clyde Holly in January 1895. Building on a decade of women’s activism, Holly’s ambitious legislation sought to raise the age of consent in the state to 21 years old. In 1890, the age at which girls could consent to sex was 12 or younger in 38 states. In Delaware, it was seven.
>By petitioning legislators in dozens of states to revise statutory rape laws, these women forged interracial and cross-class collaborations and learned the political skills they’d later use to push for suffrage.
The consequence was that girls did not get married young, they're supposed to idle for 6+ years when they've become sexual, and so they have one time stands at a young age and ruin their future.
They're supposed to go to school and get a job, or "experiment" with their sexuality, nothing good, nothing natural, and we know how that turned out.
The age at which you have kids acts as a multiplier. When you're competing with other groups this is extremely important.
When you look at jewish fertility reduction measures such as the Jaffe Memo, the first thing they list is delaying marriage.
Almost everything on this list has been implemented. They all followed that first step in feminism. Do you think they just so happened to do us a favour?
The criminalisation and demonisation of young marriage was a calculated step in White-genocide
Loving your own is a feature. It's a good thing. It's evolved.
The benefits of it are that when you're monogamous, picking early means that you get first dibs. Her entire sexual history is yours.
Sure, you could pick when they're more mature but you're competing against everyone else.
Think of it as buying a stock early at a low price. It's an investment, you have to wait, but it pays back dividends
It became taboo started with feminism. It was actually the very first feminist act.
It was the first act of female sexual "liberation."
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-raising-age-sexual-consent-taught-women-about-vote-180975658/
>The very first bill ever proposed by a female lawmaker in the United States came from Colorado state representative Carrie Clyde Holly in January 1895. Building on a decade of women’s activism, Holly’s ambitious legislation sought to raise the age of consent in the state to 21 years old. In 1890, the age at which girls could consent to sex was 12 or younger in 38 states. In Delaware, it was seven.
>By petitioning legislators in dozens of states to revise statutory rape laws, these women forged interracial and cross-class collaborations and learned the political skills they’d later use to push for suffrage.
The consequence was that girls did not get married young, they're supposed to idle for 6+ years when they've become sexual, and so they have one time stands at a young age and ruin their future.
They're supposed to go to school and get a job, or "experiment" with their sexuality, nothing good, nothing natural, and we know how that turned out.
The age at which you have kids acts as a multiplier. When you're competing with other groups this is extremely important.
When you look at jewish fertility reduction measures such as the Jaffe Memo, the first thing they list is delaying marriage.
Almost everything on this list has been implemented. They all followed that first step in feminism. Do you think they just so happened to do us a favour?
The criminalisation and demonisation of young marriage was a calculated step in White-genocide
File (): 35F96C257DCB0CE8E52430E13BB9AD76-100120.png (97.8 KB, 1120x780, Purple at the library.png)
Now we get into reproductive health
>But a teen can't bear a child, that's unsafe, we get told this constantly!
TL;DR is that it's confounding with CSE (race). It's another psyop.
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.”
>The evidence is consistent that perinatal problems increase among mothers above age 30; 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.
>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.”
>Although these relationships appear to hold in the population as a whole, there appears to be little difference between children of adolescent and non-adolescent mothers in special samples where prenatal and postnatal care are good. Sandler et al. (1981) evaluated the relationship between the age of mother and two measures of newborn behavior: 1) the Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale (Brazelton) and 2) a measure of infant temperament (Carey “My Baby” scale). No differences were found on the Brazelton Scale or Carey scale between children of adolescents and post adolescents (age not defined) within the first few days after birth.
>A number of recent studies failed to find any difference by age of mother in health status of neonates at birth (Apgar score, birth weight, prematurity, birth trauma, etc.) once initial differences such as differences in SES between adolescents and non-adolescents were controlled (Zuckerman et al. 1983; Rothenberg et al., 1981). Net of SES, Broman (1981) found older women to have higher birthweights among blacks, but not whites. Also net of SES, Broman (1981) found the youngest adolescents (12–15) to have lower Apgar scores than older adolescents among whites and blacks. The differences were very small, however.
There is much more to it, but I don't want to make it any more of a dump. I'll discuss it more as it's brought up. Thanks if you bothered to read even a part of it
>But a teen can't bear a child, that's unsafe, we get told this constantly!
TL;DR is that it's confounding with CSE (race). It's another psyop.
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.”
>The evidence is consistent that perinatal problems increase among mothers above age 30; 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.
>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.”
>Although these relationships appear to hold in the population as a whole, there appears to be little difference between children of adolescent and non-adolescent mothers in special samples where prenatal and postnatal care are good. Sandler et al. (1981) evaluated the relationship between the age of mother and two measures of newborn behavior: 1) the Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale (Brazelton) and 2) a measure of infant temperament (Carey “My Baby” scale). No differences were found on the Brazelton Scale or Carey scale between children of adolescents and post adolescents (age not defined) within the first few days after birth.
>A number of recent studies failed to find any difference by age of mother in health status of neonates at birth (Apgar score, birth weight, prematurity, birth trauma, etc.) once initial differences such as differences in SES between adolescents and non-adolescents were controlled (Zuckerman et al. 1983; Rothenberg et al., 1981). Net of SES, Broman (1981) found older women to have higher birthweights among blacks, but not whites. Also net of SES, Broman (1981) found the youngest adolescents (12–15) to have lower Apgar scores than older adolescents among whites and blacks. The differences were very small, however.
There is much more to it, but I don't want to make it any more of a dump. I'll discuss it more as it's brought up. Thanks if you bothered to read even a part of it
Colleges prey on kids too stupid to know what gender they are, what role they want to fill in society for pay, and how the world really works. I do not think these people have the mental capacity to consent to sex now or ever. You and I both know that whether the age of consent for the commoner is 16 or 18 or 21 or 14 or 12 or 25, the jews will still rape kids.
File (): 15094918E6AC1926885028AB59E499FA-686188.png (670.1 KB, 1115x1388, clipart1861510.png)
>>352490
Yes, girls are not smart enough to make their own decision. Neither at 12 nor 18. The parents were always involved
Being able to consent means you're able to make a decision and say yes. You can argue whether they should be allowed to or not and that's a less obfuscated way of talking about it
>jews will still rape kids
Well, yeah. So long as they exist. That's kinda separate from anything here
Yes, girls are not smart enough to make their own decision. Neither at 12 nor 18. The parents were always involved
Being able to consent means you're able to make a decision and say yes. You can argue whether they should be allowed to or not and that's a less obfuscated way of talking about it
>jews will still rape kids
Well, yeah. So long as they exist. That's kinda separate from anything here
>>352468
>Child marriages involving only one marriage partner below the age of 18
Everything is fine as long as women return to their natural status: they are kinda property with rights similar to ones conceded to domestic animals. No more, no less.
>Child marriages involving only one marriage partner below the age of 18
Everything is fine as long as women return to their natural status: they are kinda property with rights similar to ones conceded to domestic animals. No more, no less.
I remember the last time a thread like this was made on this site. It was full of people saying "No, it's wrong to do what Jews do to kids". But it was screenshotted by faggots from another site the second the most recent replies lacked a post that said "I don't think the age of consent should be lowered to 12".
File (): 74BE9AFD837F7C61AD1E7A2231B8C48B-277750.png (271.2 KB, 980x1000, HbgDGOu.png)
File (): 559542D82098464D05AC689CE4387670-82074.jpg (80.2 KB, 600x706, women.jpeg)
File (): BE2213026AA65C9462E4726667C83E26-90093.jpg (88.0 KB, 600x799, women2.jpeg)
>>352548
You can fake screenshots to begin with and if it was a frame job it wouldn't make sense to put actual arguments forth. And if we're remembering the same thread, there were plenty of people agreeing
>>352554
The way the actual rule is worded it sounds like they were forced to ban it but didn't want to. I don't get what you mean but you're not banning anyone
You can fake screenshots to begin with and if it was a frame job it wouldn't make sense to put actual arguments forth. And if we're remembering the same thread, there were plenty of people agreeing
>>352554
The way the actual rule is worded it sounds like they were forced to ban it but didn't want to. I don't get what you mean but you're not banning anyone
>>352556
>You can fake screenshots to begin with
A screenshot is not the same as having the link of an active bread.
>And if we're remembering the same thread, there were plenty of people agreeing
And later on, there was a huge fuss about CP on this site. The consensus was that breads like these should be nuked on sight.
>I don't get what you mean
Keep the same energy, simple as that. Tbh I don't even care about lolicon, it's just a very compelling argument to remove both things off this site.
>You can fake screenshots to begin with
A screenshot is not the same as having the link of an active bread.
>And if we're remembering the same thread, there were plenty of people agreeing
And later on, there was a huge fuss about CP on this site. The consensus was that breads like these should be nuked on sight.
>I don't get what you mean
Keep the same energy, simple as that. Tbh I don't even care about lolicon, it's just a very compelling argument to remove both things off this site.
File (): 4249D72CE5659F9D164ADE7D7C63A0FD-511895.png (499.9 KB, 1428x849, Screenshot (500).png)
>>352564
>>352561
>>352560
I was mistaken. It was not deleted. I found the thread >>326515 →
For the record, I do not wish to ban or suppress any opinion or thought, but I have a strong distaste for this particular topic, and I think anyone else is justified in expressing their distaste.
>>352561
>>352560
I was mistaken. It was not deleted. I found the thread >>326515 →
For the record, I do not wish to ban or suppress any opinion or thought, but I have a strong distaste for this particular topic, and I think anyone else is justified in expressing their distaste.
>>352565
That wasn't the thread I was thinking of, the one I was thinking of I actually can't find in the archive though
Either way, my thread is legit
>I do not wish to ban or suppress any opinion or thought
Cool and good
>I think anyone else is justified in expressing their distaste
Sure, but it's an important topic and so far the only real discussion is about trying to associate the thread with something else
That wasn't the thread I was thinking of, the one I was thinking of I actually can't find in the archive though
Either way, my thread is legit
>I do not wish to ban or suppress any opinion or thought
Cool and good
>I think anyone else is justified in expressing their distaste
Sure, but it's an important topic and so far the only real discussion is about trying to associate the thread with something else
>>352561
>We've had the CP posts way before that thread and way after that thread. They're not in any way related, that's just well poisoning
If you can't see how CP, lolicon and this absolutely vital thread/topic can go together. You are either disingenuous or an absolute retard.
These threads were specifically brought up.
>We've had the CP posts way before that thread and way after that thread. They're not in any way related, that's just well poisoning
If you can't see how CP, lolicon and this absolutely vital thread/topic can go together. You are either disingenuous or an absolute retard.
These threads were specifically brought up.
>>352569
You wouldn't say that a thread that promotes heterosexuality or marriage is linked to heterosexual porn. That's what this is
You wouldn't say that a thread that promotes heterosexuality or marriage is linked to heterosexual porn. That's what this is
we should just do the norm age of consent in medevial times which was 12-14 yrs old and if approved by the father of the wife. all else is philosophy cringe larp
>>352570
Absolute genious equivalence.
What you, staff or I consider as related doesn't matter.
Still, if Anons decided to make a fuss out of this earlier this year. But no longer give a fuck, I guess I'll just cringe at it.
Absolute genious equivalence.
What you, staff or I consider as related doesn't matter.
Still, if Anons decided to make a fuss out of this earlier this year. But no longer give a fuck, I guess I'll just cringe at it.
Wouldn't it make more sense for OP's picture to be something more related to the topic than that particular pic of Scootaloo? Something seems off.
File (): C53186F45DA63AD7507EC26D0D3FAA06-74875.jpg (73.1 KB, 520x512, woman-define-1909-1919-2022.jpg)
Concern trolling pedo bait thread is concern trolling pedo bait thread.
File (): 917836B6F4B0CA6A1516700FB276FA4C-293644.png (286.8 KB, 610x435, 883880_20221024161337.png)
Sage
This thread has been made before. It always goes the same way. No matter how many active users on this site say "No, fuck you, 18 is the perfect age for marriage and breeding, 16 minimum, and anything lower than that is pedo shit. Letting women get married at 14 or 10 won't undo what feminists did to turn marriage into a womans way of extorting men during and after the relationship, and it won't make white females unwatch all the electric jew propaganda that says white man bad, black man good strong protector who will save you from the loathsome irrational racist hateful bigoted cowardly evil whites. Muslims rape little girls, niggers rape women of all ages, jews are to blame, the salvation of whites will not be legal so talk of legality is a waste of time" this thread and threads like it exclusively exist to be screencapped by the libtard pedos who made them.
This thread has been made before. It always goes the same way. No matter how many active users on this site say "No, fuck you, 18 is the perfect age for marriage and breeding, 16 minimum, and anything lower than that is pedo shit. Letting women get married at 14 or 10 won't undo what feminists did to turn marriage into a womans way of extorting men during and after the relationship, and it won't make white females unwatch all the electric jew propaganda that says white man bad, black man good strong protector who will save you from the loathsome irrational racist hateful bigoted cowardly evil whites. Muslims rape little girls, niggers rape women of all ages, jews are to blame, the salvation of whites will not be legal so talk of legality is a waste of time" this thread and threads like it exclusively exist to be screencapped by the libtard pedos who made them.
File (): 7909778B03F23B765DDBA07FC7189859-247745.png (241.9 KB, 577x765, 7909778B03F23B765DDBA07FC7189859-247745.png)
>>354491
>No, fuck you, 18 is the perfect age for marriage and breeding, 16 minimum, and anything lower than that is pedo shit
Why is it the age set by US/UK? Modernity just so happened to get it right? Why that number? If you were born just 200 years in the past you'd say that 7-12 is a perfectly fine age
This can't be solved by what feels right to the culture around us right now, we're products of modernity like any libtard that "feels in his soul" that racism is bad and that humans are blank slates. This has to actually be thoroughly thought about. Humans are evolved. Our brains, our happiness, our bodies are evolved. When nature was allowed to pick, it picked young. When the jews in congress were allowed to pick, they picked 16-18, and from them you adopted it
>it won't make white females unwatch all the electric jew propaganda
That's kinda the point. It's not undoing it's giving them a life before they would
>Muslims rape little girls, niggers rape women of all ages, jews are to blame
Muslims, niggers, and jews all have racial preference. jews have a walled ethnostate. Muslims want to kill jews. You can lightbulb brain to make anything bad and that's part of the conditioning we need to get over. Left v. right, blue v. red, conservative v. liberal
Because they hate Trump we should love Trump
Because libtards support Palestine we should love israel
Because antifa and blacks use violence we should be better and vote harder
White people had young marriage before jewish control. The first step in feminism was removing it. From the Vikings to the English to the French to the Americans to the Romans to the Greeks, White men married girls 12-14 and things were better. Don't blindly do the opposite of your enemy, do what your ancestors actually did that worked
There are also important racial differences in this. White and Asian people are overreprisented in younger attraction. Blacks are more promiscuous, they don't care as much about bonding for life so there wasn't the same competition. Whites and Asians aren't, they cared about getting lifelong partners and younger girls are always more available
This is why Whites and Asians are much much more neotenous than blacks
This is why niggers want and have fat tits and asses, really pronounced sexual characteristics
And this follows the typical Jensen pattern
>the salvation of whites will not be legal so talk of legality is a waste of time
Legality does matter in practise just not in spirit. Doing anything illegal with this issue is a very bad idea. What isn't is marrying as young as you can, and either way, the truth of it is important even if it wasn't applicable right now. It's like saying that talking about race realism is a bad idea because it's illegal to deport them right now
>this thread and threads like it exclusively exist to be screencapped by the libtard pedos who made them.
Libtards can't argue like this. You know how they are. They'd spam memes and retarded shit like "ur a cuck if u dont agree haha"
>No, fuck you, 18 is the perfect age for marriage and breeding, 16 minimum, and anything lower than that is pedo shit
Why is it the age set by US/UK? Modernity just so happened to get it right? Why that number? If you were born just 200 years in the past you'd say that 7-12 is a perfectly fine age
This can't be solved by what feels right to the culture around us right now, we're products of modernity like any libtard that "feels in his soul" that racism is bad and that humans are blank slates. This has to actually be thoroughly thought about. Humans are evolved. Our brains, our happiness, our bodies are evolved. When nature was allowed to pick, it picked young. When the jews in congress were allowed to pick, they picked 16-18, and from them you adopted it
>it won't make white females unwatch all the electric jew propaganda
That's kinda the point. It's not undoing it's giving them a life before they would
>Muslims rape little girls, niggers rape women of all ages, jews are to blame
Muslims, niggers, and jews all have racial preference. jews have a walled ethnostate. Muslims want to kill jews. You can lightbulb brain to make anything bad and that's part of the conditioning we need to get over. Left v. right, blue v. red, conservative v. liberal
Because they hate Trump we should love Trump
Because libtards support Palestine we should love israel
Because antifa and blacks use violence we should be better and vote harder
White people had young marriage before jewish control. The first step in feminism was removing it. From the Vikings to the English to the French to the Americans to the Romans to the Greeks, White men married girls 12-14 and things were better. Don't blindly do the opposite of your enemy, do what your ancestors actually did that worked
There are also important racial differences in this. White and Asian people are overreprisented in younger attraction. Blacks are more promiscuous, they don't care as much about bonding for life so there wasn't the same competition. Whites and Asians aren't, they cared about getting lifelong partners and younger girls are always more available
This is why Whites and Asians are much much more neotenous than blacks
This is why niggers want and have fat tits and asses, really pronounced sexual characteristics
And this follows the typical Jensen pattern
>the salvation of whites will not be legal so talk of legality is a waste of time
Legality does matter in practise just not in spirit. Doing anything illegal with this issue is a very bad idea. What isn't is marrying as young as you can, and either way, the truth of it is important even if it wasn't applicable right now. It's like saying that talking about race realism is a bad idea because it's illegal to deport them right now
>this thread and threads like it exclusively exist to be screencapped by the libtard pedos who made them.
Libtards can't argue like this. You know how they are. They'd spam memes and retarded shit like "ur a cuck if u dont agree haha"
>>354543
I wish that Writefag General thread was on the front page. It's a good fucking thread. Better than this gay pedo shit bait thread.
I wish that Writefag General thread was on the front page. It's a good fucking thread. Better than this gay pedo shit bait thread.
>>354533
The reason it is wrong is because of the massive power difference between adults and children. And no, vaush ending capitalism won't change that difference by much.
The reason it is wrong is because of the massive power difference between adults and children. And no, vaush ending capitalism won't change that difference by much.
>>354545
That's in every relationship between children and adults. Parenthood? The parent basically owns the child? Imagine the possibility for abuse
That's in every relationship between children and adults. Parenthood? The parent basically owns the child? Imagine the possibility for abuse
File (): A1BF21DF69E0C940C71E238A5325FB54-15693.jpg (15.3 KB, 252x291, 20z4mg.jpg)
>>354546
>The relationship between parents and their children is totally the same as subhumans that want to rape them! I mean, parents could totally fuck their kids, so why can't I?
You're at least two of four things: a diversity hire fed, a concern trolling bunker tranny performing a gay op, an actual pedophile, or a faggot, all of which deserve to be burned alive. And you're absolutely a faggot.
Kill yourself and livestream your suicide.
>The relationship between parents and their children is totally the same as subhumans that want to rape them! I mean, parents could totally fuck their kids, so why can't I?
You're at least two of four things: a diversity hire fed, a concern trolling bunker tranny performing a gay op, an actual pedophile, or a faggot, all of which deserve to be burned alive. And you're absolutely a faggot.
Kill yourself and livestream your suicide.
This whole thread is one big glowie bait fest. Kys glowpedo fags. Everyone else post more pone.
>>354546
Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids and I feel like I shouldn't have to explain that. Find someone that is between 7 to 12 years old that has the same knowledge, desires, and intelligence as an adult and the situation might be different but that isn't our reality.
Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids and I feel like I shouldn't have to explain that. Find someone that is between 7 to 12 years old that has the same knowledge, desires, and intelligence as an adult and the situation might be different but that isn't our reality.
>>354566
>Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids and I feel like I shouldn't have to explain that.
Not taking his side but he does kind of have a point. Statistically the overwhelming majority of sex abuse cases involve a parent or a close relative, not some random person approaching the kid trying to marry her.
>Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids and I feel like I shouldn't have to explain that.
Not taking his side but he does kind of have a point. Statistically the overwhelming majority of sex abuse cases involve a parent or a close relative, not some random person approaching the kid trying to marry her.
>>354610
I fail to see how that fact is supposed to make the glowie's point sound like the right thing to do.
I fail to see how that fact is supposed to make the glowie's point sound like the right thing to do.
>>354566
>Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids
What's the point supposed to be? The guy said it was wrong because of the power difference
>Parents usually aren't trying to have sex with the kids
What's the point supposed to be? The guy said it was wrong because of the power difference
>>355088
I think he's saying that the power difference is also true in the father-daughter relationship.
Why would anyone bump this thread tho?
I think he's saying that the power difference is also true in the father-daughter relationship.
Why would anyone bump this thread tho?
>>355089
You're right I should have saged.
But a father daughter relationship exists to make the daughter into a functioning adult, not a play thing. The OP is a tard.
You're right I should have saged.
But a father daughter relationship exists to make the daughter into a functioning adult, not a play thing. The OP is a tard.
>>354533
truth has been spoken. anyways when i was 12 i was in love with my teacher , she was 22. and if she asked me to marry i would have done it and work hard and study to have a nice family. Age of consent in Argentina is 13yo with supervision of parents and no marriage of a 13yo person has been prohibited or divorced. during victorian era was 15 years old the age to present girls in society and was very desirable for teens to want a fairy tale marriage and a princess and blue prince charming fantasy as we see in movies like Pride and Prejudice. Nowadays childhood has been extended with entertainment so you can find guys being childish at their 40s and not knowing how to rise kids or have a functional family. while people in the past used to marry then go to war at 17 and come back to her wife and home to continue farming and rising a traditional family and even if the wife was several years younger there was no pedophile intentions or pornography addicted guys doing this. there were deviants in all eras but it was not a common ocurrence or the family would have seen it unless it was a poor family making a girl get married by force to an old rich guy, but even in those cases many girls saw them as modern era sugar daddys equivalent. i remember old ladies talking about how rich a guy was so they married them at 12 and then fucked the young workers at the ranch. damn, even Gene Simmons wife told on tv that she used to scape to parties until she lost her virginity at 12, so it means she started going to parties at 10 or 11. and when Simmons asked her wtf?.. she just said, ï was tall and guys thought i was older" .So she was very aware of what she was doing like lots of women. but we tend to thing women are immature innocent creatures that don't know about stuff at 12.... and when you are 15 or 16 and fuck a 15 yo girl she is already very active and knows a lot about sex. But when society started to live in tribes started to protect their children from rapists and groomers and thieves etc. so we created laws against the use of "my poor inoccent girl" (we believe our daughter is that little baby that plays with dolls and don't know shit. but in fact most of them masturbate as early as 9. Just we don't accept it. because we love our daughters, sisters etc, and don't want them to be sexually active with strangers that can lie to them and then fuck and get them pregnant and run away. And that's why in the past people invented the DOWRY.. as an insurance in case he was not a responsible person capable of taking care of his wife and family. All this is real. but difficult to swallow nowadays due to the brainwash and social constructions.
At least you can marry an Amish girl that didn't had contact with jews brainwashing or similar and have a trad family
truth has been spoken. anyways when i was 12 i was in love with my teacher , she was 22. and if she asked me to marry i would have done it and work hard and study to have a nice family. Age of consent in Argentina is 13yo with supervision of parents and no marriage of a 13yo person has been prohibited or divorced. during victorian era was 15 years old the age to present girls in society and was very desirable for teens to want a fairy tale marriage and a princess and blue prince charming fantasy as we see in movies like Pride and Prejudice. Nowadays childhood has been extended with entertainment so you can find guys being childish at their 40s and not knowing how to rise kids or have a functional family. while people in the past used to marry then go to war at 17 and come back to her wife and home to continue farming and rising a traditional family and even if the wife was several years younger there was no pedophile intentions or pornography addicted guys doing this. there were deviants in all eras but it was not a common ocurrence or the family would have seen it unless it was a poor family making a girl get married by force to an old rich guy, but even in those cases many girls saw them as modern era sugar daddys equivalent. i remember old ladies talking about how rich a guy was so they married them at 12 and then fucked the young workers at the ranch. damn, even Gene Simmons wife told on tv that she used to scape to parties until she lost her virginity at 12, so it means she started going to parties at 10 or 11. and when Simmons asked her wtf?.. she just said, ï was tall and guys thought i was older" .So she was very aware of what she was doing like lots of women. but we tend to thing women are immature innocent creatures that don't know about stuff at 12.... and when you are 15 or 16 and fuck a 15 yo girl she is already very active and knows a lot about sex. But when society started to live in tribes started to protect their children from rapists and groomers and thieves etc. so we created laws against the use of "my poor inoccent girl" (we believe our daughter is that little baby that plays with dolls and don't know shit. but in fact most of them masturbate as early as 9. Just we don't accept it. because we love our daughters, sisters etc, and don't want them to be sexually active with strangers that can lie to them and then fuck and get them pregnant and run away. And that's why in the past people invented the DOWRY.. as an insurance in case he was not a responsible person capable of taking care of his wife and family. All this is real. but difficult to swallow nowadays due to the brainwash and social constructions.
At least you can marry an Amish girl that didn't had contact with jews brainwashing or similar and have a trad family
File (): 0D885EA804850D5AD803A28C2C5705AC-76976.png (75.2 KB, 584x467, bvgjCseGkTPN.png)
All muslims are pedophiles
Based post OP, the rise in the average age of marriage and the demonization of father-vetted marriages serves one main purpose: the destruction of the family unit. The most powerful families worldwide still have tight control over who their daughters marry, and as you said, they don't let them be idle at a sexual age for too long.
>Gene Simmons wife told on tv that she used to scape to parties until she lost her virginity at 12
Most things on TV are fake and placed there for propaganda purposes, specially if they involve someone famous. But this shows in which direction t¡authorities want to lead young women: to ruin their lives.
>Gene Simmons wife told on tv that she used to scape to parties until she lost her virginity at 12
Most things on TV are fake and placed there for propaganda purposes, specially if they involve someone famous. But this shows in which direction t¡authorities want to lead young women: to ruin their lives.
Sage
Does nobody remember the last pedo thread that exclusively existed for screenshot bait?
Does nobody remember the last pedo thread that exclusively existed for screenshot bait?
>>355632
But it's a retarded inherently flawed argument!
Women are stupid at 40, 30, 20, and 10.
Let women marry at 12 and they will make awful decisions.
They will marry 12 year old boys and divorce them and force his parents to pay alimony.
They will marry pajeet shitstreets or niggers aged 12 to 18 or 18 to 30.
They will not marry OP.
Why is OP convinced that kids are fucking so much anyway?
Marriage is a worthless thing because you cannot beat your wife or kill her for cheating on you.
Even if OP found a 12 year old willing to marry him she would still cheat on him... if she was what he really thinks women are at that age: horny sluts.
OP is wrong. OP is retarded.
OP is a deranged disabled coomer leftist faggot in disguise.
Lowering the age of consent will not fix white women. Marriage is fucking worthless unless it is her tool to extract wealth from men so letting women access it earlier will not help.
White women are blank slates. Ban jew media and ban dildos and kill jews and send niggers to africa or work camps or death camps and white women of breedable age wont be able to satisfy or contain their lust for white men.
White women will do as the dominant power in society tells them. They are raised on jew lies so they serve the jews. Kill jews and they will serve the white man again.
Any talk of fucking with marriage is useless talk because marriage does nothing to give him power over her.
Now sage this thread. If it does get archived, i will show it to newfags like you next time OP comes back to post this jewish bait thread again, so you will understand this tiresome game.
But it's a retarded inherently flawed argument!
Women are stupid at 40, 30, 20, and 10.
Let women marry at 12 and they will make awful decisions.
They will marry 12 year old boys and divorce them and force his parents to pay alimony.
They will marry pajeet shitstreets or niggers aged 12 to 18 or 18 to 30.
They will not marry OP.
Why is OP convinced that kids are fucking so much anyway?
Marriage is a worthless thing because you cannot beat your wife or kill her for cheating on you.
Even if OP found a 12 year old willing to marry him she would still cheat on him... if she was what he really thinks women are at that age: horny sluts.
OP is wrong. OP is retarded.
OP is a deranged disabled coomer leftist faggot in disguise.
Lowering the age of consent will not fix white women. Marriage is fucking worthless unless it is her tool to extract wealth from men so letting women access it earlier will not help.
White women are blank slates. Ban jew media and ban dildos and kill jews and send niggers to africa or work camps or death camps and white women of breedable age wont be able to satisfy or contain their lust for white men.
White women will do as the dominant power in society tells them. They are raised on jew lies so they serve the jews. Kill jews and they will serve the white man again.
Any talk of fucking with marriage is useless talk because marriage does nothing to give him power over her.
Now sage this thread. If it does get archived, i will show it to newfags like you next time OP comes back to post this jewish bait thread again, so you will understand this tiresome game.
>>355642
No one is talking about letting young women choose how to marry here. Their fathers should decide. Also stop comparing virgin or low n-count women to whores, they are notthe same.
>
No one is talking about letting young women choose how to marry here. Their fathers should decide. Also stop comparing virgin or low n-count women to whores, they are notthe same.
>
>>355686
And what guarantee do you have that fathers would make good decisions regarding who their daughters should marry, anyway? Don't forget how many women and men were brainwashed into white guilt and a racemixing fetish.
And if the age for marriage was lowered, women would still be able to call the cops on any man trying to force them into marriage or get in the way of their marriage.
And what guarantee do you have that fathers would make good decisions regarding who their daughters should marry, anyway? Don't forget how many women and men were brainwashed into white guilt and a racemixing fetish.
And if the age for marriage was lowered, women would still be able to call the cops on any man trying to force them into marriage or get in the way of their marriage.
If I remember correctly, it is at the age of 18 that the plasticity of the brain slows down a lot and therefor less influenceable and more independent. Although the age in which the brain fully mature is debatable, the medium I think is between 16 to 23 depending of the person metabolism. Source : my ass and memories of diverse trivia, unconfirmed.
File (): 01348BB7CF42434D8B8F17208D083BBD-71959.jpg (70.3 KB, 435x502, TQiDvNK.jpg)
>>355693
Why do you bother lifting your fingers here when the only thing you type is neurotic racebait fetish spam? You sound American in how you can never shut up about nigger cock, it's almost every message. Go back to 4pol and use those hands to fap to the racebait threads instead, or at least do some introspection, little man
>>355777
Kinda makes you think. Girls spend that entire time in school and then the only thing they want is a career. Lucky trips
Why do you bother lifting your fingers here when the only thing you type is neurotic racebait fetish spam? You sound American in how you can never shut up about nigger cock, it's almost every message. Go back to 4pol and use those hands to fap to the racebait threads instead, or at least do some introspection, little man
>>355777
Kinda makes you think. Girls spend that entire time in school and then the only thing they want is a career. Lucky trips
File (): BAEED09A895711347D7398C56B18ACEC-3622830.gif (3.5 MB, 848x1180, 6198585.gif)
>>355816
>pony posters are glowniggers
Elaborate and explain why ponies make your ass ache so badly.
>pony posters are glowniggers
Elaborate and explain why ponies make your ass ache so badly.
Or are you just upset that pone posts are being used to slide your pedo apogist thread?
>>355821
>you're a glownigger for not buying into my pedo psyop!
Nigger, you're openly advocating for pedophilia. Kill yourself.
>you're a glownigger for not buying into my pedo psyop!
Nigger, you're openly advocating for pedophilia. Kill yourself.
File (): 961804275343897E12F8E3880FEC2B68-470706.png (459.7 KB, 2348x2102, 6443118.png)
>>355827
Your limp trolling attempts are pretty sad. Here, have an uncommon mare.
Your limp trolling attempts are pretty sad. Here, have an uncommon mare.
File (): 6A2BBF73BFB3EF4211A1DE8CDD9EA948-86134.png (84.1 KB, 613x850, 1668792267528541 (tnyX1).png)
Buttmad faggot mods couldnt even handle some Free Speech. They removed the memes!
THAT'S THE TYPE OF PLACE YOURE DEALING WITH HERE
THAT'S THE TYPE OF PLACE YOURE DEALING WITH HERE
File (): D8547250368A8F8F6F002D18E6EB74CD-112002.png (109.4 KB, 675x765, 45d9b34427b8d271.png)
Pedoposting is still a jewish ploy to make free speech sites look unappealing to outsiders. Why else would pedoposters read from the same script and sound so unappealing and delusional when they claim "little girls are horny sluts who will screw anyone and get used up by the time they are marriageable, therefore the age of consent or marriage must be lowered"? That's a disgusting and absurd thing to say. Marriage isn't his tool for exerting influence over her. It is her tool for exerting influence on him.
Exile jews and niggers. That's what matters. Protect our kids.
Exile jews and niggers. That's what matters. Protect our kids.
>355962
Yeah, it's pretty blatant, too. Would anyone care if mods just jannied this obvious gay op?
Yeah, it's pretty blatant, too. Would anyone care if mods just jannied this obvious gay op?
>>355966
There should be a disclaimer on the thread starter post to ruin any screenshot the faggot leftist plans on making out of this thread once enough replies seem to be supportive of OP's pedophilia.
There should be a disclaimer on the thread starter post to ruin any screenshot the faggot leftist plans on making out of this thread once enough replies seem to be supportive of OP's pedophilia.
>>355969
The sooner it hits bump limit, the sooner it will slide.
These jew feds wait for it to leave the front page and then they bump it.
The sooner it hits bump limit, the sooner it will slide.
These jew feds wait for it to leave the front page and then they bump it.
>>355971
>The sooner it hits bump limit, the sooner it will slide.
>79 replies
>Bump limit is around 700
>Entire site gets maybe 10 posts per day
lmao this thread ain't going nowhere for a long, long time. Seethe you british nigger.
>The sooner it hits bump limit, the sooner it will slide.
>79 replies
>Bump limit is around 700
>Entire site gets maybe 10 posts per day
lmao this thread ain't going nowhere for a long, long time. Seethe you british nigger.
File (): 8BB5C1C981242907AA77C8A7C72825FF-990854.png (967.6 KB, 1334x750, 496c2c16cf37bd0fb07db6f080ec6072.png)
File (): AE0289B3D14E93578D1F13CD7CEFBB88-1248254.png (1.2 MB, 1472x1408, 26559d7d7dd5a1eb.png)
>>355962
>That's a disgusting and absurd thing to say
Ye, so why did you say it?
>Exile jews and niggers. That's what matters. Protect our kids.
That's simpler said than done. We don't have legal authority to kick anyone out, you're skipping a few steps, or rather you're jumping over the entire board. Stewarding our girls into stable relationships at an earlier age is viable (within current laws) right now
>>355966
>>355971
The fact you need it to be censored helps prove it's truth. Why call us jewish while you act like facebook employees? Strength is in truth, bro
>>355973
82 replies and counting, and still not a single reply that isn't "ur jewish" or in agreement
If a single person can give an actual counter to how it was universally accepted historically but actually modernity is right this time, I'll concede and shut up forever
It is just a fact they can't cope with
>That's a disgusting and absurd thing to say
Ye, so why did you say it?
>Exile jews and niggers. That's what matters. Protect our kids.
That's simpler said than done. We don't have legal authority to kick anyone out, you're skipping a few steps, or rather you're jumping over the entire board. Stewarding our girls into stable relationships at an earlier age is viable (within current laws) right now
>>355966
>>355971
The fact you need it to be censored helps prove it's truth. Why call us jewish while you act like facebook employees? Strength is in truth, bro
>>355973
82 replies and counting, and still not a single reply that isn't "ur jewish" or in agreement
If a single person can give an actual counter to how it was universally accepted historically but actually modernity is right this time, I'll concede and shut up forever
It is just a fact they can't cope with
File (): 4849FCB93EEFC382CE92E59FD9FA83BC-8614.png (8.4 KB, 500x250, Oekaki.png)
Just waiting for the next alt-chan closing down, cause the fucking pedos couldn't shut up.
File (): 6907B25EDB0F3044D57DA832D6040A0E-547698.png (534.9 KB, 1024x1360, 1643435467203.png)
File (): A078B31BA34B6224D294A4A909DFC930-1325689.png (1.3 MB, 1146x1709, 1668809741907878.png)
File (): 562BE3C937CAD60AB73C4F187BE9FA96-136752.jpg (133.5 KB, 830x1500, 1668809599345904.jpg)
File (): 4E5FC3D202A6CF19E450B7315B9F8443-781782.png (763.5 KB, 848x1200, 1668809455706140.png)
File (): C3F1BBB21E08DE7FB835CB75891FD079-712550.png (695.8 KB, 1142x1184, 1668808151355795.png)
File (): 2191960F6CF8C9D0DE1F830747821002-111613.jpg (109.0 KB, 807x1000, 1668807950373589.jpg)
>>355984
You're not making arguments for your case or arguing against my arguments for my case.
You're just dismissing what I have to say.
We live in a pozzed society.
I still don't understand why anyone would want women to have earlier access to marriage.
It's not as if marriage is still something sacred or legally protected.
You can't beat or behead your wife for cheating on you no matter how old she is. She won't get six months or life in jail for cheating on you.
Marriage is her tool for extracting wealth from him and the taxpayer while exerting influence over him. It's not his tool for exerting influence over her any more.
The pedoposter jew bullshit seems like it's all read from the same script by glowies because it's such an unconvincing argument and the glowies bringing it up are so eager to descend into name-calling bait posts
You're not making arguments for your case or arguing against my arguments for my case.
You're just dismissing what I have to say.
We live in a pozzed society.
I still don't understand why anyone would want women to have earlier access to marriage.
It's not as if marriage is still something sacred or legally protected.
You can't beat or behead your wife for cheating on you no matter how old she is. She won't get six months or life in jail for cheating on you.
Marriage is her tool for extracting wealth from him and the taxpayer while exerting influence over him. It's not his tool for exerting influence over her any more.
The pedoposter jew bullshit seems like it's all read from the same script by glowies because it's such an unconvincing argument and the glowies bringing it up are so eager to descend into name-calling bait posts
File (): 8F23D2883C9981B0F0CCA29A0AB0208A-39617.jpg (38.7 KB, 487x396, 527137.jpeg)
File (): 984BCCAF3F1E8218810976C2430B120D-2957598.png (2.8 MB, 2896x4023, 1006820.png)
File (): CD16098B2C3227565A32DCBBD45E85FA-2981189.jpg (2.8 MB, 4800x4000, 2019674.jpeg)
File (): 9DD356A82302AC6FCE561EB9C19914FA-5201414.png (5.0 MB, 3000x2360, 6279454.png)
File (): E26D153B975ED1451F1B0506C6CCACBD-1534906.png (1.5 MB, 2048x2048, 6387327.png)
>>355998
Marriage here is more than just a legal ceremony. The sooner bonding happens the more effective it is. The more girls are allowed to "experiment" the more damaged they become
You basically just sound MGTOWie, which is suicidal in the end. You have kids with girls in a sane environment or you die out. The cleaner their slate the better it will be
Marriage here is more than just a legal ceremony. The sooner bonding happens the more effective it is. The more girls are allowed to "experiment" the more damaged they become
You basically just sound MGTOWie, which is suicidal in the end. You have kids with girls in a sane environment or you die out. The cleaner their slate the better it will be
>>355976
Yes. It's been like this for a couple years. It kept getting extended over and over because the totally-not-generals didn't want to make fresh threads. The result is that now mediocre threads stay up for years so long as dedicated retards bump them every few weeks.
Yes. It's been like this for a couple years. It kept getting extended over and over because the totally-not-generals didn't want to make fresh threads. The result is that now mediocre threads stay up for years so long as dedicated retards bump them every few weeks.
89 replies | 34 files | 45 UUIDs | Archived