The leaps in logic made to act like MAP's are child molesters

Someone smeared me because I looked at transformation art of adults turning into monster girls

Their logic on the situation is quite…stupid:

They say that an attraction to children is inherently predatory? That’s tatatulolgy, not an explanation. It’s simply saying “it just is shut up”

Also I said “looking at fictional depections of women”. Why do you ignore the word fictional in this context? Likewise why do they assume that a) I have an attraction to real life children, and b) that means I automatically think they are capable of adult consent? They are making a lot of leaps in logic here. Basically they are saying.

“You’re asking why its ok (not predatory) to be attracted to adults and not children? It is because adults have fully developed brains (most of them) capable of consent, whereas children do not and thus are not capable of consent.”

It’s predatory because you are taking advantage of a child’s developing mind to satisfy your own fucked up sexual desires.

No, that is why its wrong to have sex with children. I asked how it is predatory to be attracted. Also, they again ignore that these are not images of real children. Likewise I am not interested in the age of the characters.

So how am I taking advantage of children in this case?
They can’t say, but insist I must be a pedophile.


I can never tell the ages of characters .-.
They look like a combo of adults and minors to me. Maybe 1, 5, and 6 are ‘kids’ but that’s only going off of height… none of them are even human so our anatomy and laws shouldn’t even apply!
Do people even assign ages to each and every character they make? My special ocs don’t even have ages lol

1 Like

There’s nothing wrong with being attracted to children, so long as you’re not engaging with or acting on that attraction in a way that actually involves real children, like with art and fiction (lolicon/shota, 3D/CGI) and sex dolls.
Simulated/virtual child pornography does not actually involve children, only representations of the idea of children, so it’s fine. There is no actual child implicated or involved with fiction. It’s important to understand the difference between the abstract idea and the reality of children, as is the case with anything.

Looking at CSAM, however, is a problematic behavior because it fuels a market for material that demands abuse.
If you can keep it relegated to materials that are innately fantastical and fictitious, then you’re fine.

Even then, if you consume loli/shota or some fantastical stuff, it’s likely that you won’t even be a pedophile if you’re looking at it for a different reason than to get off to the thought of children. Many people look at loli because they enjoy the character in question, or they like petite/cute anime content, while others may get off to “straight shota” because they project themselves onto the young boy character depicted in sexual situations with older, mature, or more developed female characters.

The psychology is always more complex than what antis or dissenters make it seem.

That’s me allright. It sickens me how people try and cherry-pick, like what this guy does to the FAQ

It’s no use talking to people who made up their mind years before the discussion is taking place.

Some people want to see pedophiles as nothing but immoral and dangerous monsters. They won’t accept any argument or even scientific evidence to the contrary, because they don’t want to rethink their position and attitude. Thus they will twist anything they find so that it supports their pre-conceived notion of the pedophile monster.

If all else fails, they will just claim that all pedophiles secretly watch CSAM and thus deserve damnation.

I disagree with this, because I used to have that mindset, that pedophiles, regardless of upbringing, were “ticking time bombs” who would, at some point in their lives, commit a hands-on sexual offense against a child.
You should always try to have a civil dialog because that’s how results happen. Witch burnings, irrationality, etc. are not long-term solutions, nor are they even short term, and people know this. But they willfully defy that and justify it, and catching them in that is a good way to make them restrain those feelings and behave civilly. You can’t force it, but it works.

It wasn’t until after I spent some time with alleged “pedo hunters” (modern-day equivalent of antis who would harass, report, hack, do anything to cause harm to or expose alleged pedophiles online) that I began to see how closed-minded this mindset was, and then I broke off from them and began to ask questions.

Don’t get me wrong, there are some pretty evil people who are pedophilic. Heartless, senseless bastards with not an ounce of regard for the children they abuse or seek to abuse, and there were a good bit of abusers/exploiters who did some nasty stuff, like grooming children in game communities and extorting them with sensitive/explicit information or photographs of them, that I’m thankful were exposed, banned, and later on, reported and arrested.

But a lot of others were just… harmless people, really, who may have admitted their interests to the wrong person, or were caught watching loli/shota hentai, or flat-out were misrepresented. But the group would still target these people because it wasn’t about protecting children, it was about attacking an easy target whose suffering society would turn a blind eye to, or celebrate.
It wasn’t about sending a message about grooming, or sexualized extortion, molestation, CP/CSAM, or even child abuse. And I began to see the postmortem effects of a lot of it, and quite frankly, many people simply didn’t deserve this, and that justice was more than just the intention or the effect.


Good for you. One guy I argue with online is upset because I used his sources against him when he used them to say “child molestation is pedophilia”:

It sucks because even when I am using his sources he says:

Dude, child molestation IS pedophilia, what are you talking about? I shouldn’t have to find like twenty you-approved links to prove to you that anything sexual done to children is pedophilia. Whether it be “for da power!!!” Like you claim or some other weird thing I know for an absolute fact you’re gonna bring up because I couldn’t search up at least seven articles that you agree with.

He conflates a pedophilic interest with child molestation because in his mind:

This isn’t even a peer-reviewed thing, you should have been taught in school that doing anything sexual to a child is pedophilia. Molestation is sexually assaulting someone whether it involves you sticking your dick in someone or not, and yes this can be done to someone to assert power this does not mitigate the fact that this is sexual

It’s the idea that only people who have any attraction to children at all are the ones who molest them, even when I point out it’s more of a matter of opportunity than attraction or desire for children.

Pedo-hunters like this don’t realize that they are engaging in persecution of thought crimes

1 Like

He does it again

Homosexuality isn’t a crime. Pedophilia is a crime. @ryu289, you yourself have engaged in one of the fallacies you’re so obsessed with (and one you called out Coffey on like a complete retard)- a strawman fallacy. You’re misrepresenting their argument by making it easier to attack. This would have stood if we were still in the ages where homosexuals were stoned to death in the streets, or if we all lived in some middle eastern shithole. Yet, we don’t. You are comparing apples and oranges. A much better argument would have been:

“Replace ‘pedophile’ with ‘rapist’ we can see how absurd your logic is.”

This would be more effective if his source didn’t say this:

While pedophilia itself does not give rise to criminal liability, acting on it does.

Pedophiles act upon those who cannot consent, making them the exact same as (if not worse than) rapists. Notice how your argument therein holds zero water still, considering the fact that both of them are disgusting criminals. This is because you are a dumb retard who fucks little girls and hides behind gay people. You are not a “MAP ally,” nor are you a gay ally given you called me a faggot in a derogatory fashion earlier, so don’t use gays to support your arguments.

Also, since pedophilia is a crime, if you are a “MAP ally,” then you are a criminal accomplice and can go to prison.

(Also, yes. Pedophilia applies to non-offenders as well. You can be a pedophile without sexually assaulting children. The idea that you can’t is just fucking stupid, especially when pedophilia is literally a mental disorder that can be diagnosed and can get people referred to therapy.)

And then he goes on to mention non-offenders…so Pedophiles act on those who can’t consent…unless they don’t but are still criminals because of their thoughts…does that right?