• If you're here for vtubers, I highly recommend you go to The Virtual Asylum instead.
    They'll love you there

Megathread Stupid Shit You Find On Twitter

immahnoob

varishangout.com
Regular
Patron of the Forums
Close but somewhat missing the point.
Yes, they don't believe in standards. That's not the issue. The issue is they believe all human relationships come down to power - who can push who around.
Accepting any of their premises is interpreted by them as a tacit admission that you recognise they have power over you.
If you recognise it, you're giving them permission to exercise it.
The issue is, their premises are all over the place, you can't really not admit to some of them.
Those that'll be assertive will be seen as the worst of the worst, those that don't have "muh optics" written on their foreheads basically.
 

AK-12

varishangout.com
Regular
Locked account was making fun of an artist (rape + pedo survivor) for making loli drawings. Supports real pedophile actions instead. Got called out. Ratio'd and then locked his account.


View attachment 3740
Did this fucking retard literally say in the last post "I would rather be a pedomedo, than like loli drawings"??? Please, correct me if I am wrong/did misunderstood.
It sure sound that way when I read it.
Damn, that such a big self own that I doubt anyone can recover.
 

Beginner

varishangout.com
Regular
The issue is, their premises are all over the place, you can't really not admit to some of them.
Those that'll be assertive will be seen as the worst of the worst, those that don't have "muh optics" written on their foreheads basically.
Yes.
Because it's not about having a consistent philosophical position.
It's about ideological 'might makes right'.
As an example of one common position from them: "Science is no more or less true than any (indigenous) religion's explanation for natural phenomena. Science is just the opinion the west holds in order to maintain supremacy and hegemony over minority belief structures."
Anything you claim as truth or fact, they interpret as a power play. It's not 'true' to them, it's 'the version of reality you're trying to push because it benefits you to do so'.
 

immahnoob

varishangout.com
Regular
Patron of the Forums
Yes.
Because it's not about having a consistent philosophical position.
It's about ideological 'might makes right'.
As an example of one common position from them: "Science is no more or less true than any (indigenous) religion's explanation for natural phenomena. Science is just the opinion the west holds in order to maintain supremacy and hegemony over minority belief structures."
Anything you claim as truth or fact, they interpret as a power play. It's not 'true' to them, it's 'the version of reality you're trying to push because it benefits you to do so'.
But then what is the correct way to handle them?
I honestly believe that "passive defense" hasn't worked until now, and even this idea of "let's just make everyone else believe these people are crazy" hasn't done much either.
I don't think sperging is the right choice necessarily, but it can certainly create a gatekeeping situation.
 

Beginner

varishangout.com
Regular
But then what is the correct way to handle them?
I honestly believe that "passive defense" hasn't worked until now, and even this idea of "let's just make everyone else believe these people are crazy" hasn't done much either.
I don't think sperging is the right choice necessarily, but it can certainly create a gatekeeping situation.
A few things.

1) Gatekeep.
I know this is super unpopular because it's actively excluding people from places.
Here's the thing though, if they get into a space, they deem it a moral-ethical mandate to take the helm by any means necessary.
Gatekeeping is only bad if it prevents people willing to engage in good faith from coming in.
They aren't operating in good faith.

2) Cede zero ground.
"If you disagree with me, you're a Nazi."
In the face of this, the correct answer is a Chad "Yes".
We've seen it time and time again, people stand their ground and the response?
Nothing.
They view all the world as power.
The mere act of standing against the mob implies you have the power to stand. That you've got teeth.
They have to make a calculation at that point whether they're going to roll those dice against you.

3) Disregard their positions as valid at every step.
All moral claims are power plays to them.
So deny the mere concept they have power.
I've watched the nutters clear out of places when it's become clear the owners are neither American, nor invested in American politics. They self-remove out of disinterest mostly.
To give a nod to Halo a little: "Can you even find Estonia on a map?"

If, and only if, you want to play by their rules.
Assert power over them with everything you have.
Remind them they're not the centre of the universe.
Punish them for making the assumption that everything revolves around the USA.
Remember, if everything is about power, then guilt trip them for their attempt to assert their power over you.
The Estonian example: "President? Yeah, I've got opinions on President Kaljulaid."
Or a racial example if you happen to not be white: "Why is a white person lecturing me?"
 

immahnoob

varishangout.com
Regular
Patron of the Forums
A few things.

1) Gatekeep.
I know this is super unpopular because it's actively excluding people from places.
Here's the thing though, if they get into a space, they deem it a moral-ethical mandate to take the helm by any means necessary.
Gatekeeping is only bad if it prevents people willing to engage in good faith from coming in.
They aren't operating in good faith.

2) Cede zero ground.
"If you disagree with me, you're a Nazi."
In the face of this, the correct answer is a Chad "Yes".
We've seen it time and time again, people stand their ground and the response?
Nothing.
They view all the world as power.
The mere act of standing against the mob implies you have the power to stand. That you've got teeth.
They have to make a calculation at that point whether they're going to roll those dice against you.

3) Disregard their positions as valid at every step.
All moral claims are power plays to them.
So deny the mere concept they have power.
I've watched the nutters clear out of places when it's become clear the owners are neither American, nor invested in American politics. They self-remove out of disinterest mostly.
To give a nod to Halo a little: "Can you even find Estonia on a map?"

If, and only if, you want to play by their rules.
Assert power over them with everything you have.
Remind them they're not the centre of the universe.
Punish them for making the assumption that everything revolves around the USA.
Remember, if everything is about power, then guilt trip them for their attempt to assert their power over you.
The Estonian example: "President? Yeah, I've got opinions on President Kaljulaid."
Or a racial example if you happen to not be white: "Why is a white person lecturing me?"
I'm all in agreement with gatekeeping if that wasn't clear, I think all of these are valid except playing by their rules, unless you're doing it ironically or mocking it as well.
As for 2, it's also why you get blocked a lot of times when you argue back (on Twatter), hence why a lot of people see that as a "win".
 

Mandrake

varishangout.com
Regular
Did this fucking retard literally say in the last post "I would rather be a pedomedo, than like loli drawings"??? Please, correct me if I am wrong/did misunderstood.
It sure sound that way when I read it.
Damn, that such a big self own that I doubt anyone can recover.
You aren't wrong.
It shows well that what their problem was never about protecting any IRL person from rape, but the moral disturbance THEY HAVE when they see loli content.
It's basically the potemkin view of the world, as being shown a rosy view of it matters more than the reality of hurt people.
That's also the reason why so many of them outright reject studies that show over and over again than pedo criminals are usually family (step family especially), or neighbours, or/and mentally disturbed people. It has nothing to do with fiction.
 

Beginner

varishangout.com
Regular
I'm all in agreement with gatekeeping if that wasn't clear, I think all of these are valid except playing by their rules, unless you're doing it ironically or mocking it as well.
As for 2, it's also why you get blocked a lot of times when you argue back (on Twatter), hence why a lot of people see that as a "win".
Well yeah, because playing by their rules is tacitly implying their worldview has some merit. I wouldn't personally advocate for it.
But as they literally do not understand other worldviews - they assume you're playing the same game even if you beat them over the head that you reject theirs (they'd argue you're waging a form of self-delusion that lets you take the moral highground without actually putting in any effort) - sometimes you have to go 'fuck it' and speak a language they do understand.
 

AK-12

varishangout.com
Regular
That's also the reason why so many of them outright reject studies that show over and over again than pedo criminals are usually family (step family especially), or neighbours, or/and mentally disturbed people. It has nothing to do with fiction.
Uuuu, interesting. Got any sources/links? I am not forcing you to prove your claims, but I really wanna have some sources and proof saved/bookmarked so that the next time I will run into a drama with an anti-lolifag I will push their shit in with proof and studies without any hesitation.
 

LegallyLoli

varishangout.com
I remember someone telling me this: "Treat the fictional characters as if they are real people".

And it confused me. How and why?
 

Narbray

varishangout.com
Regular
Uuuu, interesting. Got any sources/links? I am not forcing you to prove your claims, but I really wanna have some sources and proof saved/bookmarked so that the next time I will run into a drama with an anti-lolifag I will push their shit in with proof and studies without any hesitation.
simple, it can be found in wikipedia, if this is not enough, any of the links wikipedia sources will say the same

Causes

Although what causes pedophilia is not yet known, researchers began reporting a series of findings linking pedophilia with brain structure and function, beginning in 2002. Testing individuals from a variety of referral sources inside and outside the criminal justice system as well as controls, these studies found associations between pedophilia and lower IQs, poorer scores on memory tests, greater rates of non-right-handedness, greater rates of school grade failure over and above the IQ differences, lesser physical height, greater probability of having suffered childhood head injuries resulting in unconsciousness, and several differences in MRI-detected brain structures.

Such studies suggest that there are one or more neurological characteristics present at birth that cause or increase the likelihood of being pedophilic. Some studies have found that pedophiles are less cognitively impaired than non-pedophilic child molesters. A 2011 study reported that pedophilic child molesters had deficits in response inhibition, but no deficits in memory or cognitive flexibility. Evidence of familial transmittability "suggests, but does not prove that genetic factors are responsible" for the development of pedophilia. A 2015 study indicated that pedophilic offenders have a normal IQ.

Another study, using structural MRI, indicated that male pedophiles have a lower volume of white matter than a control group. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has indicated that child molesters diagnosed with pedophilia have reduced activation of the hypothalamus as compared with non-pedophilic persons when viewing sexually arousing pictures of adults. A 2008 functional neuroimaging study notes that central processing of sexual stimuli in heterosexual "paedophile forensic inpatients" may be altered by a disturbance in the prefrontal networks, which "may be associated with stimulus-controlled behaviours, such as sexual compulsive behaviours". The findings may also suggest "a dysfunction at the cognitive stage of sexual arousal processing".

Blanchard, Cantor, and Robichaud (2006) reviewed the research that attempted to identify hormonal aspects of pedophiles. They concluded that there is some evidence that pedophilic men have less testosterone than controls, but that the research is of poor quality and that it is difficult to draw any firm conclusion from it.

While not causes of pedophilia themselves, childhood abuse by adults or comorbid psychiatric illnesses—such as personality disorders and substance abuse—are risk factors for acting on pedophilic urges.
Blanchard, Cantor, and Robichaud addressed comorbid psychiatric illnesses that, "The theoretical implications are not so clear. Do particular genes or noxious factors in the prenatal environment predispose a male to develop both affective disorders and pedophilia, or do the frustration, danger, and isolation engendered by unacceptable sexual desires—or their occasional furtive satisfaction—lead to anxiety and despair?" They indicated that, because they previously found mothers of pedophiles to be more likely to have undergone psychiatric treatment, the genetic possibility is more likely.

A study analyzing the sexual fantasies of 200 heterosexual men by using the Wilson Sex Fantasy Questionnaire exam determined that males with a pronounced degree of paraphilic interest (including pedophilia) had a greater number of older brothers, a high 2D:4D digit ratio (which would indicate low prenatal androgen exposure), and an elevated probability of being left-handed, suggesting that disturbed hemispheric brain lateralization may play a role in deviant attractions.[/ISPOILER]

Here there is absolutely nothing related to fiction, in fact it can be concluded that the disorder is caused by an accumulation of several factors and that none of them involves fictional material, in fact there is not even evidence that viewing any type of material [fictional or not] provoke this type of behavior and much less make you commit a crime [such as abuse of a minor]

Also in the same wikipedia you can use the article for paraphilias

Causes

The causes of paraphilias in people are unclear, but some research points to a possible prenatal neurodevelopmental correlation. A 2008 study analyzing the sexual fantasies of 200 heterosexual men by using the Wilson Sex Fantasy Questionnaire exam determined that males with a pronounced degree of fetish interest had a greater number of older brothers, a high 2D:4D digit ratio (which would indicate excessive prenatal estrogen exposure), and an elevated probability of being left-handed, suggesting that disturbed hemispheric brain lateralization may play a role in deviant attractions.

Behavioral explanations propose that paraphilias are conditioned early in life, during an experience that pairs the paraphilic stimulus with intense sexual arousal.
Susan Nolen-Hoeksema suggests that, once established, masturbatory fantasies about the stimulus reinforce and broaden the paraphilic arousal.


Sources:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-006-9018-6
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16708284/
Last link:
Results:
Results for the six major categories showed that SOC were not different from SOA (all d between -.02 and .14) other than showing lower externalizing behaviors (d=-.25). Sex offenders against children were somewhat different from non-sex offenders, especially with regard to sexual problems and attitudes (d=.83 and .51). Sex offenders against children showed substantial differences from non-offenders with medium sized effects in all six major categories (d's range from .39 to .58).

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-006-9018-6#citeas
https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...uban/95ebbf5dc5f2faa23890bf2b8cdfc373c3f530e2

https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/download/1718/1836?inline=1
This article may not be a good example but I appreciated it curiously and that's why I published it, there are some things in doubt in this since they take many 'suppositions' and this is almost always based on someone who is confirmed that He is a pedophile, at a certain point in the text it says that if someone is discovered by looking at literary material or graphics generated by a computer, then it is a strong indicator that that person may be a pedophile, but I think it is more relative than that, since it does not specify What kind of images or video, or text, are you consuming specifically, and I don't think this applies to anime. Anyway I don't think it's a good source but it looked interesting that's why I published it

´´Even if we were to grant that pedophilia really is a disease, however, we would still not have a complete argument against the enjoyment of texts and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content, for it would also need to be true that it is wrong to satisfy preferences that result from a disease. This is a doubtful premise, however, for even if we grant that it is bad to have a disease, once we have it and cannot get rid of it, it seems to be an open question whether or not we should give in to the disease in ways that do not cause harm. Admittedly, doing so might be wrong if it intensifies the disease, but we lack evidence that pedophiles become more pedophilic by virtue of enjoying texts or computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. No research indicates this, and when it comes to other sexual preferences, such as homo- and heterosexuality, we seem to be accustomed to the idea that they are largely stable and that exposure to homo- or heterosexual pornography cannot be expected to change anyone’s orientation. As such, we lack good reasons for why it is bad that pedophiles satisfy their preferences by means of texts and computer-generated graphics.

In the absence of convincing arguments to the contrary, we should conclude that it can be morally permissible for pedophiles to enjoy fictional stories and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. It is important to note, however, that even if we accept this conclusion, it does not follow that we must be comfortable with such practices. Given that pedophilia predisposes people to seek adult-child sex, and that adult-child sex exposes children to significant risks of serious harm, it is understandable that most of us strongly dislike it. Moreover, it does not follow from the above that it is irrational to be worried if one discovers that someone enjoys fictional stories or computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. One might have very good reason to worry since this is a strong indication that the person is a pedophile, and pedophilia predisposes people to seek adult-child sex. Observe, however, that what is troubling here is the discovery of the person’s sexual preferences via his enjoyment of virtual pedophilia, not his enjoyment of virtual pedophilia as such. Once he has those preferences and cannot change them, he might do nothing wrong in enjoying such fictional stories and computer-generated graphics. Indeed, doing so might be one of the best things he can do granted the unfortunate circumstances in which he finds himself.

Conclusion

If my arguments in this article are sound, then being a pedophile—in the sense of having a sexual preference for children—is neither moral nor immoral. Engagement in adult-child sex is immoral, but perhaps not always blameworthy to the extent that we intuitively assume. Finally, the enjoyment of fictional stories and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content is, in and of itself, morally acceptable. If these conclusions are correct, what practical implications follow?``

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4478390/ [very interesting this one, quite complete]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/pedophilia

Causes

The causes of pedophilia (and other paraphilias) are not known. There is some evidence that pedophilia may run in families, though it is unclear whether this stems from genetics or learned behavior.
A history of childhood sexual abuse is another potential factor in the development of pedophilias, although this has not been proven. Behavioral learning models suggest that a child who is the victim or observer of inappropriate sexual behaviors may become conditioned to imitate these same behaviors. These individuals, deprived of normal social and sexual contacts, may seek gratification through less socially acceptable means.
Physiological models are investigating the potential relationship between hormones and behavior, particularly the role of aggression and male sexual hormones. Pedophiles have been shown to be shorter on average and are more likely to be left-handed, as well as to have lower IQs than the general population. Brain scans indicate that they have less white matter—the connective circuitry in the brain—and at least one study has shown they are more likely to have suffered childhood head injuries than non-pedophiles.
Individuals may become aware of their sexual interest in children around the time of puberty. Pedophilia may be a lifelong condition, but pedophilic disorder includes elements that can change over time, including distress, psychosocial impairment, and an individual's tendency to act on urges.

References

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.
Levey, R. & Curfman, W.C. (2010). Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders.
Tenbergen, G., Wittfoth, M., Frieling, H., Ponseti, J., Walter, M., Walter, H., ... & Kruger, T. H. (2015). The neurobiology and psychology of pedophilia: recent advances and challenges. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 9.
Bleyer, Jennifer. "Sympathy for the Deviant." Psychology Today, November 2015.
Last updated: 02/22/2019

https://psychcentral.com/pro/causes-of-pedophilia#1 [I include the references below]

References:
American Psychiatric Association (2014). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition: DSM-5. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.

Berlin, F. S., & Krout, E. (1994). Pedophilia: Diagnostic Concepts Treatment and Ethical Considerations. Retrieved from http://www.bishop-accountability.org.

Comer, R. J. (2010). Abnormal Psychology (Seventh ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Hall, R. C., & Hall, R. C. (2007). A Profile of Pedophilia: Definitions, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4), 457-471.

Hucker, S., Langevin, R., Wortzman, G., Bain, J., Handy, L., Chambers, J., & Wright, S. (1986).

Neuropsychological Impairment of Pedophiles. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18(4), 440-448. Lanyon, R. I. (1986). Theory and Treatment in Child Molestation. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 54(2), 176-182.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00344/full [interesting]
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00940/full

https://aboutpedophilia.com/2018/08/30/dolls-manga-and-fictional-outlets-for-pedophiles/
*I left this for the end, it does not contain sources but it deals with exactly what interests us, and it is interesting.

uffff well so far I recommend checking the sources before using them as I haven't read them all completely.

But no matter how you search, you will not find evidence that consuming this type of material leads to pedophile behavior or aggression on minors.

I also recommend obtaining some information about psychology before discussing with these people since it is important to know that psychology does not use the scientific method as it is and many studies are far from being scientific, psychology depends a lot on the personal opinion of the professional. [what makes you have a subjective opinion] and diagnostic methods, behavior patterns and causes can vary greatly from person to person, psychology is not considered science by many people as it ignores the scientific method of reproducibility, methods that work for some. stop working for many others, making their study and verification difficult, so that any opinion of an ´´expert` in psychology can be easily ignored [even the opinions of psychologists can be easily ignored in a jury] and all that of the psychologist Many profiles are lies or incomplete truths. It is very difficult to determine a person's behavior just from the things they consume and nothing should be taken for granted.

I have seen cases of "psychologists" who give "supposed psychological profiles of people in social networks" and this could not be more false. These people are an offense to people who take the study of psychology and human behavior seriously.
 
Last edited:

AK-12

varishangout.com
Regular
I remember someone telling me this: "Treat the fictional characters as if they are real people".

And it confused me. How and why?
This shows exactly how they are flip flopping from one side to another when it's convenient. An extremely funny case I witnessed was a furfag bitching about loli and shota and how its literally muh cp and doesn't care if the characters are fictional/made up. And then when you opened up his Twatter page, all you could see was cub and some disgusting cross species r34 furfag shit. And people called out the furfag for his stinking shit, and no joke at all he had the audacity to respond with "it's all fictional". And people were pushing his shit back in with that.
SFW loli = mUh cHeEsE PiZzA, & NSFW cub furfag shit = jUsT fICtIoN. Intelligence of a Twatter normalfag 101 I fucking swear.

simple, it can be found in wikipedia, if this is not enough, any of the links wikipedia sources will say the same

Causes

Although what causes pedophilia is not yet known, researchers began reporting a series of findings linking pedophilia with brain structure and function, beginning in 2002. Testing individuals from a variety of referral sources inside and outside the criminal justice system as well as controls, these studies found associations between pedophilia and lower IQs, poorer scores on memory tests, greater rates of non-right-handedness, greater rates of school grade failure over and above the IQ differences, lesser physical height, greater probability of having suffered childhood head injuries resulting in unconsciousness, and several differences in MRI-detected brain structures.

Such studies suggest that there are one or more neurological characteristics present at birth that cause or increase the likelihood of being pedophilic. Some studies have found that pedophiles are less cognitively impaired than non-pedophilic child molesters. A 2011 study reported that pedophilic child molesters had deficits in response inhibition, but no deficits in memory or cognitive flexibility. Evidence of familial transmittability "suggests, but does not prove that genetic factors are responsible" for the development of pedophilia. A 2015 study indicated that pedophilic offenders have a normal IQ.

Another study, using structural MRI, indicated that male pedophiles have a lower volume of white matter than a control group. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has indicated that child molesters diagnosed with pedophilia have reduced activation of the hypothalamus as compared with non-pedophilic persons when viewing sexually arousing pictures of adults. A 2008 functional neuroimaging study notes that central processing of sexual stimuli in heterosexual "paedophile forensic inpatients" may be altered by a disturbance in the prefrontal networks, which "may be associated with stimulus-controlled behaviours, such as sexual compulsive behaviours". The findings may also suggest "a dysfunction at the cognitive stage of sexual arousal processing".

Blanchard, Cantor, and Robichaud (2006) reviewed the research that attempted to identify hormonal aspects of pedophiles. They concluded that there is some evidence that pedophilic men have less testosterone than controls, but that the research is of poor quality and that it is difficult to draw any firm conclusion from it.

While not causes of pedophilia themselves, childhood abuse by adults or comorbid psychiatric illnesses—such as personality disorders and substance abuse—are risk factors for acting on pedophilic urges.
Blanchard, Cantor, and Robichaud addressed comorbid psychiatric illnesses that, "The theoretical implications are not so clear. Do particular genes or noxious factors in the prenatal environment predispose a male to develop both affective disorders and pedophilia, or do the frustration, danger, and isolation engendered by unacceptable sexual desires—or their occasional furtive satisfaction—lead to anxiety and despair?" They indicated that, because they previously found mothers of pedophiles to be more likely to have undergone psychiatric treatment, the genetic possibility is more likely.

A study analyzing the sexual fantasies of 200 heterosexual men by using the Wilson Sex Fantasy Questionnaire exam determined that males with a pronounced degree of paraphilic interest (including pedophilia) had a greater number of older brothers, a high 2D:4D digit ratio (which would indicate low prenatal androgen exposure), and an elevated probability of being left-handed, suggesting that disturbed hemispheric brain lateralization may play a role in deviant attractions.[/ISPOILER]

Here there is absolutely nothing related to fiction, in fact it can be concluded that the disorder is caused by an accumulation of several factors and that none of them involves fictional material, in fact there is not even evidence that viewing any type of material [fictional or not] provoke this type of behavior and much less make you commit a crime [such as abuse of a minor]

Also in the same wikipedia you can use the article for paraphilias

Causes

The causes of paraphilias in people are unclear, but some research points to a possible prenatal neurodevelopmental correlation. A 2008 study analyzing the sexual fantasies of 200 heterosexual men by using the Wilson Sex Fantasy Questionnaire exam determined that males with a pronounced degree of fetish interest had a greater number of older brothers, a high 2D:4D digit ratio (which would indicate excessive prenatal estrogen exposure), and an elevated probability of being left-handed, suggesting that disturbed hemispheric brain lateralization may play a role in deviant attractions.

Behavioral explanations propose that paraphilias are conditioned early in life, during an experience that pairs the paraphilic stimulus with intense sexual arousal.
Susan Nolen-Hoeksema suggests that, once established, masturbatory fantasies about the stimulus reinforce and broaden the paraphilic arousal.


Sources:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-006-9018-6
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16708284/
Last link:
Results:
Results for the six major categories showed that SOC were not different from SOA (all d between -.02 and .14) other than showing lower externalizing behaviors (d=-.25). Sex offenders against children were somewhat different from non-sex offenders, especially with regard to sexual problems and attitudes (d=.83 and .51). Sex offenders against children showed substantial differences from non-offenders with medium sized effects in all six major categories (d's range from .39 to .58).

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-006-9018-6#citeas
https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...uban/95ebbf5dc5f2faa23890bf2b8cdfc373c3f530e2

https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/download/1718/1836?inline=1
This article may not be a good example but I appreciated it curiously and that's why I published it, there are some things in doubt in this since they take many 'suppositions' and this is almost always based on someone who is confirmed that He is a pedophile, at a certain point in the text it says that if someone is discovered by looking at literary material or graphics generated by a computer, then it is a strong indicator that that person may be a pedophile, but I think it is more relative than that, since it does not specify What kind of images or video, or text, are you consuming specifically, and I don't think this applies to anime. Anyway I don't think it's a good source but it looked interesting that's why I published it

´´Even if we were to grant that pedophilia really is a disease, however, we would still not have a complete argument against the enjoyment of texts and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content, for it would also need to be true that it is wrong to satisfy preferences that result from a disease. This is a doubtful premise, however, for even if we grant that it is bad to have a disease, once we have it and cannot get rid of it, it seems to be an open question whether or not we should give in to the disease in ways that do not cause harm. Admittedly, doing so might be wrong if it intensifies the disease, but we lack evidence that pedophiles become more pedophilic by virtue of enjoying texts or computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. No research indicates this, and when it comes to other sexual preferences, such as homo- and heterosexuality, we seem to be accustomed to the idea that they are largely stable and that exposure to homo- or heterosexual pornography cannot be expected to change anyone’s orientation. As such, we lack good reasons for why it is bad that pedophiles satisfy their preferences by means of texts and computer-generated graphics.

In the absence of convincing arguments to the contrary, we should conclude that it can be morally permissible for pedophiles to enjoy fictional stories and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. It is important to note, however, that even if we accept this conclusion, it does not follow that we must be comfortable with such practices. Given that pedophilia predisposes people to seek adult-child sex, and that adult-child sex exposes children to significant risks of serious harm, it is understandable that most of us strongly dislike it. Moreover, it does not follow from the above that it is irrational to be worried if one discovers that someone enjoys fictional stories or computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content. One might have very good reason to worry since this is a strong indication that the person is a pedophile, and pedophilia predisposes people to seek adult-child sex. Observe, however, that what is troubling here is the discovery of the person’s sexual preferences via his enjoyment of virtual pedophilia, not his enjoyment of virtual pedophilia as such. Once he has those preferences and cannot change them, he might do nothing wrong in enjoying such fictional stories and computer-generated graphics. Indeed, doing so might be one of the best things he can do granted the unfortunate circumstances in which he finds himself.

Conclusion

If my arguments in this article are sound, then being a pedophile—in the sense of having a sexual preference for children—is neither moral nor immoral. Engagement in adult-child sex is immoral, but perhaps not always blameworthy to the extent that we intuitively assume. Finally, the enjoyment of fictional stories and computer-generated graphics with pedophilic content is, in and of itself, morally acceptable. If these conclusions are correct, what practical implications follow?``

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4478390/ [very interesting this one, quite complete]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/pedophilia

Causes

The causes of pedophilia (and other paraphilias) are not known. There is some evidence that pedophilia may run in families, though it is unclear whether this stems from genetics or learned behavior.
A history of childhood sexual abuse is another potential factor in the development of pedophilias, although this has not been proven. Behavioral learning models suggest that a child who is the victim or observer of inappropriate sexual behaviors may become conditioned to imitate these same behaviors. These individuals, deprived of normal social and sexual contacts, may seek gratification through less socially acceptable means.
Physiological models are investigating the potential relationship between hormones and behavior, particularly the role of aggression and male sexual hormones. Pedophiles have been shown to be shorter on average and are more likely to be left-handed, as well as to have lower IQs than the general population. Brain scans indicate that they have less white matter—the connective circuitry in the brain—and at least one study has shown they are more likely to have suffered childhood head injuries than non-pedophiles.
Individuals may become aware of their sexual interest in children around the time of puberty. Pedophilia may be a lifelong condition, but pedophilic disorder includes elements that can change over time, including distress, psychosocial impairment, and an individual's tendency to act on urges.

References

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.
Levey, R. & Curfman, W.C. (2010). Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders.
Tenbergen, G., Wittfoth, M., Frieling, H., Ponseti, J., Walter, M., Walter, H., ... & Kruger, T. H. (2015). The neurobiology and psychology of pedophilia: recent advances and challenges. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 9.
Bleyer, Jennifer. "Sympathy for the Deviant." Psychology Today, November 2015.
Last updated: 02/22/2019

https://psychcentral.com/pro/causes-of-pedophilia#1 [I include the references below]

References:
American Psychiatric Association (2014). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition: DSM-5. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.

Berlin, F. S., & Krout, E. (1994). Pedophilia: Diagnostic Concepts Treatment and Ethical Considerations. Retrieved from http://www.bishop-accountability.org.

Comer, R. J. (2010). Abnormal Psychology (Seventh ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

Hall, R. C., & Hall, R. C. (2007). A Profile of Pedophilia: Definitions, Characteristics of Offenders, Recidivism, Treatment Outcomes and Forensic Issues. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 82(4), 457-471.

Hucker, S., Langevin, R., Wortzman, G., Bain, J., Handy, L., Chambers, J., & Wright, S. (1986).

Neuropsychological Impairment of Pedophiles. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 18(4), 440-448. Lanyon, R. I. (1986). Theory and Treatment in Child Molestation. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 54(2), 176-182.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00344/full [interesting]
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00940/full

https://aboutpedophilia.com/2018/08/30/dolls-manga-and-fictional-outlets-for-pedophiles/
*I left this for the end, it does not contain sources but it deals with exactly what interests us, and it is interesting.

uffff well so far I recommend checking the sources before using them as I haven't read them all completely.

But no matter how you search, you will not find evidence that consuming this type of material leads to pedophile behavior or aggression on minors.

I also recommend obtaining some information about psychology before discussing with these people since it is important to know that psychology does not use the scientific method as it is and many studies are far from being scientific, psychology depends a lot on the personal opinion of the professional. [what makes you have a subjective opinion] and diagnostic methods, behavior patterns and causes can vary greatly from person to person, psychology is not considered science by many people as it ignores the scientific method of reproducibility, methods that work for some. stop working for many others, making their study and verification difficult, so that any opinion of an ´´expert` in psychology can be easily ignored [even the opinions of psychologists can be easily ignored in a jury] and all that of the psychologist Many profiles are lies or incomplete truths. It is very difficult to determine a person's behavior just from the things they consume and nothing should be taken for granted.

I have seen cases of "psychologists" who give "supposed psychological profiles of people in social networks" and this could not be more false. These people are an offense to people who take the study of psychology and human behavior seriously.
Huuuuu, thanks man. Now I have some shit ready to throw at the future censorshipfags.
 

Mandrake

varishangout.com
Regular
Uuuu, interesting. Got any sources/links? I am not forcing you to prove your claims, but I really wanna have some sources and proof saved/bookmarked so that the next time I will run into a drama with an anti-lolifag I will push their shit in with proof and studies without any hesitation.
As @Narbray said, otherwise there is also this useful small fascicule you can easily find :


FACT: Those who molest children look and act just like everyone else
There are people who have or will sexually abuse children in churches, schools, and youth sports leagues. Abusers can be neighbors, friends, and family members. People who sexually abuse children can be found in families, schools, churches, recreation centers, youth sports leagues, and any other place children gather. Significantly, abusers can be and often are other children. About 90% of children who are victims of abuse know their abuser. 12,13 Only 10% of sexually abused children are abused by a stranger.12 Approximately 30% of children who are sexually abused are abused by family members. 12, 13 The younger the victim, the more likely it is that the abuser is a family member. Of those molesting a child under six, 50% were family members. Family members also accounted for 23% of those abusing children ages 12 to 17.9 About 60% of children who are sexually abused are abused by the people the family trusts.12,13

I had better material before when I got interested in the subject, especially related to the step father/mother thing, but I can't find the link rn.
Again, the main take there, is that fiction has NOTHING to do with this shit. It existed before that, and thinking that someone fapping to some loli in a hentai will suddenly rape some kid is as stupid as someone killing random people because he had fun in GTA. Or you know, women having rape fantasies (very common) suddenly would go out to be raped in the street just because of that. Humans are slightly more complicated than this...
This war on loli was always for the eyes of the people being bothered by it anyway.
 

immahnoob

varishangout.com
Regular
Patron of the Forums
It's not only molestation and rape that happens with people that you know.
It's also pretty much every other crime, especially murder.

EDIT:
Also, some funny threads.
@DiceySpikes posted these on Twitter sometime ago, and yes, you can actually sift through the DSM and see that they make a difference between people that enjoy fictional material and that enjoy real material.


EDIT2: @Halo SAVE US, THE PLEROMA ISN'T WORKING.
 

Fennec_fox

varishangout.com
Regular
SFW loli = mUh cHeEsE PiZzA, & NSFW cub furfag shit = jUsT fICtIoN. Intelligence of a Twatter normalfag 101 I fucking swear.
Not just twitter, but also discord. ESPECIALLY discord. I still remember how they were banning left and right the servers with lolis but were completely fine with cub furry porn for some reason lol. I think they had to walk back on that decision.
I also remember how one japanese furry artist was destroyed by western furries cuz he was making cub furry characters but as "kawaii shota". You can guess the rest.
 

PhantomXero1x

varishangout.com
Regular
Now they're after violent video games. They also apparently never heard of the First Amendment.

View attachment 1606
Tweet Archive

I get a feeling that this is projection, one video game developer trying to sabotage another rival video game companies own businesses.

Especially given that the company he works for WB is way bigger than the other company making that game so he's just using woke culture as a guise to sabotage the other companies business.

That certainly sounds something a capitalist would do and its strange that someone who's woke taking part in such a capitalistic act.
 

AK-12

varishangout.com
Regular
Not just twitter, but also discord. ESPECIALLY discord. I still remember how they were banning left and right the servers with lolis but were completely fine with cub furry porn for some reason lol. I think they had to walk back on that decision.
I also remember how one japanese furry artist was destroyed by western furries cuz he was making cub furry characters but as "kawaii shota". You can guess the rest.
That Discord drama was pure fucking irony. A perfect textbook example of rules for thee but not for me. Furfags are the very definition of hypocrisy when it comes to this topic. Just yesterday one of the very few YTers that I still watch had a stream and when this topic suddently came he went full beserk about the Discord case. Also fuck the cub r34. There was and probably still is the epidemy of actual pedo furfags in the higher rank of the Discord staff pyramid.
 

Attachments

  • DiscordFurfagsLikeCub.png
    DiscordFurfagsLikeCub.png
    225.3 KB · Views: 263
  • Screenshot_17.png
    Screenshot_17.png
    988.8 KB · Views: 218

Narbray

varishangout.com
Regular
It's not only molestation and rape that happens with people that you know.
It's also pretty much every other crime, especially murder.

EDIT:
Also, some funny threads.
@DiceySpikes posted these on Twitter sometime ago, and yes, you can actually sift through the DSM and see that they make a difference between people that enjoy fictional material and that enjoy real material.


EDIT2: @Halo SAVE US, THE PLEROMA ISN'T WORKING.
Exactly, that is something that is important for everyone to know and understand, as it says in those tweets, pedophilia is not a crime as everyone thinks and everything that these people [antis] do if it can be considered a crime, even saying that pedophiles are criminals or mentally ill they can be calumny and become illegal.

I think that even I will make a small compilation of sources to have at hand XD
 

Beginner

varishangout.com
Regular

I am honestly not sure what to make of this I personally would just let sleeping dogs lie but what is your opinion on it?
>Shizu is in like, all the screencaps
Well you got one person's opinion on it.
Personally, I get it, the Japanese people in there don't want their favourite franchise to be pulled because some jockey got their knickers in a twist.
Having said that, every franchise is being pulled lately for absolutely asinine reasons and getting precious over it just means you haven't been paying attention to what's been happening to media in general.
 
Top