Welcome to Inkbunny...

To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )

YOU'RE A PEDO!!

by Crassus

There's a phrase I keep hearing people say a lot these days. It goes like this:

"	Just because I like cub porn, they call me a pedo!

Alright? Fine. Let me ask you: If you like homosexual porn, are you a homo?

(*pauses*) ... Think about it!!

So, I mean, just hear me out, roight? (I'm going to rant about this like GradeAUnderA because he's fucking hilarious.)

Labelling anyone for being a 100%-grade bonified preference just for liking a type of art is stupid, to begin with. I need to preface with that, but let's take a look at what these people are saying, from their mindset, using their rules.

Clinically... like, really really technically, here... they are technically right that people who are attracted to art involving young prepubescent characters (don't CARE what species) are pedophiles, because the character is prepubescent! DUH! (Well, hebephile in my case, but anyways.)

But people don't like being called pedophiles for obvious reasons, roight? Because what do they do next? They and go the extra fucking mile and say, "Well then, if you find cubs attractive, you must fuck little kids!" WHAT DA FU—

Seriously, how do they get away with this? Easy. Because the word "pedophile" has been twisted around to no longer mean "someone who is attracted to." It now means "someone who fucks." Seriously, you hear it everywhere. "X person has been found guilty of pedophilia." So not only are they assuming that if you're attracted to cubs you're attracted to RL kids, they are ALSO taking a flying leap by accusing you of fucking real children. Fucking hell. Not even the books say this. It's just made up!

(*cue scene transition with funky music*)

And this is problem getting worse with time. I remember 20 years ago, being on FurryMUCK, in the WIXXX (remember what those are, greymuzzles?) among the list of sexual attributes you could set, the word "pedophilia" was in there. I am absolutely telling you the truth. In 1996, if you were on FurryMUCK, you could literally set "pedophilia" as something you were into. (Talk about liberal!) In 1997, someone changed that to "ageplay" because "pedophilia" was I guess just too close to reality for them. Ageplay. Nice little euphemism, there, but everyone knew it basically meant the same thing. And it's stayed that way ever since. But now you can hardly say ageplay. Ageplay—a word taken from traditional BDSM, meaning "pretending to be young" (because these people would be fucking iRL, not behind keyboards) can't even be used without a little wincing and grimacing now. You can't even PRETEND anymore without being accused of raping children! Now we're getting into multiple levels of stupid.

But we're getting off-topic now. We're talking about art. Is someone who's attracted to art going to fuck a RL kid? Well, we can't, because it's impossible to fuck something imaginary. So what they're really saying is "If you're into cubs, you must find real kids attractive too, and if you are attracted to kids, it is obvious you are fucking them!!"

.... *rubs his temples*

Alright, so I guess we're forced to talk about RL anyways. I'm going to have to break things down to the argument made against people attracted to RL kids. I'm sorry for doing this, but remember, they're taking us here, not me, alright? Right. So, let's take a trip, shall we?

The argument goes something like this: "YOU'RE A PEDOPHILE SO YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE FUCKING KIDS."

Alright. Let's be fair. If I applied that logic to some straight guy and said, "YOU'RE STRAIGHT SO YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE FUCKING WOMEN." Does THAT make sense?

.... Yes and no. Yes, it does in a way because if the straight guy WAS fucking, he'd want to fuck a woman, obviously, right? Well, IS HE? No! Not necessarily! Just because you find women attractive doesn't mean you're actually having sex!! Hell, I find women attractive and I don't get laid that often! Believe me, if I had a solid sex life you think I would be sitting around typing out shit like this? Fuck no! I'd be screwing my brains out! So no, just because someone is attracted to something doesn't mean they're going to go out and fuck it!

Alright, so, what comes next is: "But pedophiles are different! They fuck kids against their will! They groom! They manipulate! They trick them into thinking it's alright! And if they don't get their way they literally force them!"

I got news for ya... ANY RAPIST GROOMS, TRICKS AND MANIPULATES AND FORCES. But just because someone's a pedophile DOESN'T MAKE THEM A RAPIST. It's fucking retarded! Just because someone's attracted to someone doesn't mean they're a mean shit-headed, devious person. That's called being prejudiced. Apply it back to a straight person: Just because someone is straight doesn't mean they're going to go out, be coercive, lie, manipulate, or force a woman into sex! (Unless they're a fuckheaded jock at spring break hitting up bars, but that's beside the point!)

Listen to me: It does not matter the age of the victim! If someone is forced, coerced, manipulated, or basically treated like a sexual object that has no rights of their own, it's called RAPE! So why do they need all of these age laws and just stick with rape laws? I know why! Next up! The consent argument!

(*cue scene transition with funky music*)

The argument goes something like this: "Children don't have the capability to consent! They are still developing and they're not able to defend themselves against unwanted contact and you'll harm them!" .... ALL THE MORE REASON WHY I WOULDN'T GO AROUND FUCKING THEM!!

Now I know, you haters have heard me take a different opinion about this way way in the past. I used to argue that kids hypothetically can consent. This is because I have seen kids who's parents treated them like actual human beings. They raised them in such a smart, intelligent and rational way that these people were so mature at a young age, no one could ever manipulate or take advantage of them. They exist.

But I've gotten older, and I've become a little wiser, (and honestly more cynical) and I've changed my stance. I do not think it's good to have sex with a kid even if that individual child is personally willing, smart, informed and capable of consenting. Here's why:

Minors are probably the most repressed group of people in the western world. As a whole, they are the most under-rated, dis-empowered, helpless, suppressed, confused, conflicted, talked down to, in the dark, powerless, and overall unfree group of people I can think of. They are prevented from thinking for themselves even when they can, kept from doing things for themselves even if they can (usually because it's socially unacceptable), and who basically aren't allowed to be full fucking human beings until some they hit some arbitrary age that some stranger in a suit wrote in a lawbook (backed by people with jails and guns). The moment they hit that age, however, they are immediately fuckable! But not before then!

So let me ask you, how could I, or anyone of conscience, try to have sex with someone who has the entire system stacked up against them? It would just make their lives worse.

Moreover, the tension and stress regarding pedophobia have become so supercharged.. so volatile.. that even kids having sex with each other or talking/sexting each other are being labelled as child molesters and pornographers themselves. It's insanity.

You want to empower a child so the world can be a better place? Teach them to code. Make them dreamweavers of reality. And I'm not talking some dinky top-level code for an app controlled by Apple. No, I mean that hard-lined shit. Trust me, if the whole young generation could add to the sourcecode of the V8 engine or create a new decentralized furry social network, that'll change the world pretty fucking quick.

*ahems* But getting back to the whole point I was talking about.

The point is, I think the vast majority of cublovers, shota and loli lovers, and yes, even actual real kid-fuckers—errr, people into RL kids agree with me on this! It's not good to sex it up with children.

So if I know I don't have sex with kids iRL, and I get called a name that is synonymous with having sex with kids, then obviously I'm going to defend myself against it and deny it! I'm going to say, "FUCK YOU! I AM NOT A FUCKING PEDOPHILE! FUCK OFF YA WANKER," even though I would actually qualify as one for finding cub porn attractive. No, I'm going to immediately want to disassociate myself from that, all because they've managed to equate ATTRACTION with ACTION. I've been accused of some really nasty things before, and none of it is true. Doesn't matter to these people though. They just go on and on and on no matter what I do or say. What can ya do? No wonder Tartii pulled her art! On one hand I don't blame her! None of her cub art was sexual, but even if she secretly held an attraction for it, she probably feared being associated with others so horribly that she pulled all her art! It gets fucking stressful!

But... for me to deny saying that I'm attracted to young cubs/shota/loli/whatever when I have all these favorites listed on my IB is just fucking being in denial!

"Pedo" in the name-calling sense is a meaningless fucking word. All it's used for is to make people afraid and hate and stick you in an imaginary group. In reality, everyone's sexuality is as unique as a fingerprint. We all have something weird and different about us that sets us apart because that's what sexuality is for: Creating Diversity.

(PS: Hah! All this and I haven't even TOUCHED on all the people who tell me "I had sex as a kid, I loved it so that's why I'm into cub art. I like imagining that I'm the cub in the picture!" That is an entirely different can of worms to be opened at a later time.)

Viewed:	231 times
Added:	7 years, 10 months ago 02 Jun 2016 07:07 CEST

20 Comments on this Journal

Leave a Comment...

KichigaiKitsune

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Interesting journal, and amusing that it was timed just after my own rant went up. Will definitely be commenting on this when I get the chance to read it all.

Crassus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ KichigaiKitsune

Just make sure to read it again before commenting because I'm a serial reviser.

KichigaiKitsune

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Crassus

Can't be any worse than me.

daedalus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Nice - I don't see the word hebephile used correctly very often. But I digress.. It is unsettling how much lack of cognitive dissonance there is on this subject for exactly the reasons you point out (i.e. viewing of 'rape' or other 'vile' subjects somehow is not connected to the person being of that persuasion, but cub art is). I have to wonder how much energy it takes to force that kind of disconnect in someone's mind.

CeilYurei

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Interesting point...but tartii went so far as tio atttack those liking cub.

Crassus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ CeilYurei

How did she do that?

CeilYurei

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Crassus

By suggesting the ban in the first place, for one. A classic case of "I don't like it so must punish you for liking it."

Crassus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ CeilYurei

Pff. We wouldn't have been mad at her if Bad Dragon didn't use that as an excuse to ban it.

CeilYurei

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Crassus

Either way she's partly to blame.

Roketsune

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Crassus

I have documented well (especially in my first of three current journals inspired by this) that she had a malicious intention. She pretends to be in the pragmatic/rationalist camp, but outbursts I have documented from her in the same journal prove she was motivated by acrimony and moral affrontry.

CeilYurei

7 years, 10 months ago

link

One could actually argue that banning art of "underage" characters could convince a pedophile to 'just go for it'. hell during the time that loli/shota/cub was banned in the US during the early 2000s, a drawn image was treated the same as a picture of an actual child which was seen as the same as raping a kid. If they were already tempted to try to molest a child there was literally no safe outlet for them.

Worse, if you try talking to a psychiatric professional about any attraction to kids and ahve a niece or nephew or a child yourself you might get arrested and sent to prison without even harming a kid. so the only support a pedophile has is reaching out to cub art and loli and shota art lovers who might ahve the same feelings. Or simply jack off to the art. Jacking off to may from pokemon getting fucked hard by a Machoke is a lot preferable than a pedophile harming a kid. You can't prevent those who would rape a child anyway from raping a kid, but a safe outlet for any fetish/attraction is preferable to the urges and desire s building until their resolve snaps or they kill themselves for having said urges but no intent to harm a child

GreenReaper

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Edited 7 years, 10 months ago by Owner

"	If you like homosexual porn, are you a homo?

If you're aroused by homosexual porn, you clearly have an interest there. You may not be predominately homosexual, but what does that matter? It's still homo. [Not that there's anything wrong with that.]

I feel the argument about straight people is flawed in that it implies "I would if I could".
That isn't all that encouraging to those who don't want you to fuck their kids. :-)

The "can of worms" topic has most promise, because it focuses on the fact that this is fantasy, and a big part of that fantasy (becoming a cub) is clearly unrealistic and infeasible in real life.

GronV3

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Well said and I agree.
I think just because you look at it does not mean you will go out and touch every boy and girl inappropriately.

People need to realize that it might sound sick but some get off on the drawings so that they do not do stuff to kids irl.
Especially if you got molested as a kid and have those feeling now as an adult.
I would never hurt a kid irl.
Or any one for that matter I am just to soft hearted to hurt any one.

BlueberryBaby

7 years, 10 months ago

link

you can be whatever you want and watch whatever porn you want, its natural to have secret curiosities.

some people are weird when it comes to porn though, they'll be all asexual and jazz and be watching gay/lesbian/robot/tentacle/alien porn with some odd kinks and fetishes. I'm just speaking from my mine adding my own personal opinion all from experience from friends and others telling me what they're into. but... Porn is porn, you watch it to fap to it and thats that.

in japan porn is made to keep some sexually active people off the street and hands off people so they can be occupied by visual candy, of course toys are also a plus for them as well.

moyomongoose

7 years, 10 months ago

link

FA has 63 pages of bestiality art. Does that mean FA viewers go around screwing goats?

Paper2

7 years, 10 months ago

link

I'll just leave these articles here:
http://adjectivespecies.com/2014/01/20/the-legality-of-cub-porn/
http://www.adjectivespecies.com/2015/07/27/in-defence-of-cub-porn/

Roketsune

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Clinically... like, really really clinically, here... they are technically right that people who are attracted to art involving young prepubescent characters (don't CARE what species) are pedophiles, because the character is prepubescent! DUH! (Well, hebephile in my case, but anyways.)

I am very sure that when they wrote the DSM and deliberated on the pathological and non-pathological meaning of 'pedophile', they never used any basis other than existing humans. To declare all who like cub are clinically/technically pedophiles and hebephiles is fallacious generalizing. While it would be nice to have more people like us, let's not drag random furries into our demographics when it's not warranted.

Crassus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Roketsune

"	Roketsune wrote:
	I am very sure that when they wrote the DSM and deliberated on the pathological and non-pathological meaning of 'pedophile', they never used any basis other than existing humans.

You're right, they probably didn't. Modern mainstream psychiatry doesn't stem from an artistic, alternative, divergent way of thinking. In fact, they probably have a total clinical diagnosis in store just to give all the furries their own classification of illness if they wanted to.

But that doesn't exclude my argument's logical validity.

Pedo = child. Imaginary child fur character? Imaginary pedophilic attraction.

I never said that people into anthropomorphic young are into human young.

I also never said that the nature of every person into cubs is pedo/hebe/ephebophilic.

Nor did I say that there's a disease at play here, (which is what pathology indicates), so I don't agree of your use in the word there.

What I said is that if an old fur is into a young fur, that attraction is (or at least can be) pedophilic in nature.That fictional character child is still a child (assuming you instil the societal roles of a minor into that fictional character) so therefore it would logically fall under "pedo" (i.e.: "child").

Roketsune

7 years, 10 months ago

link

Edited 7 years, 10 months ago by Owner

@ Crassus

In fact, they probably have a total clinical diagnosis in store just to give all the furries their own classification of illness if they wanted to.

As much as I despise the general psychological industry- especially with regards to pedo/hebephiles and childhood sexuality- that is nonsense. They don't pathologize everything that is weird. They don't even pathologize pedophilia per se (meaning, only the orientation).

But that doesn't exclude my argument's logical validity.

Pedo = child. Imaginary child fur character? Imaginary pedophilic attraction.

The following quote invalidates your argument, even if what you attempted to convey was not what you actually did.

"	Clinically... like, really really clinically, here... they are technically right that people who are attracted to art involving young prepubescent characters (don't CARE what species) are pedophiles, because the character is prepubescent! DUH! (Well, hebephile in my case, but anyways.)

Either you grievously misspoke or you have an extraordinarily erroneous idea of what the psychological industry considers pedophilia. Even if you meant to use the word 'technically', that is not the typical definition of 'pedophilia' by most people who use the term with any semblance of correctness. While I do often describe artwork and stories as 'pedo/hehe/ephebophilic' in nature merely because there are few other valid and concise manners of describing them, that is not at all the same thing as calling those who masturbate to them pedo/hebe/ephebophiles. To call someone that with no qualifier is to assert they are sexually attracted to humans of the same ages, because everyone else who uses the terms by themselves uses that meaning. You are dragging furries into our sexual orientation who do not rightfully belong by using such terms.

I also never said that the nature of every person into cubs is pedo/hebe/ephebophilic.

Refer to your quote above.

Nor did I say that there's a disease at play here, (which is what pathology indicates), so I don't agree of your use in the word there.

I never conveyed that our orientation is a disease or that you did. You are an inferior utilizer of the written medium and thus you believe that is the case, but it is not. Note that I said "deliberated on the pathological and non-pathological meaning of 'pedophile'"

You are bad at this whole debating thing, and I suggest you stop doing it and leave these matters to those who are more capable. I sincerely hope you are not one of those who are on the forefront today of defending us, or I would honestly be embarrassed. Seeing you speak so inarticulately now, I shudder to think how crazy and misinformed you came across during your heyday. No doubt, a substantial amount of abuse you suffered was from that and your inability to recognize when you were nearing the precipice. Now you've generally overcompensated, but still manage to embarrass yourself from time to time.

Crassus

7 years, 10 months ago

link

@ Roketsune

Sorry, I meant "technically." I'll edit my post.

New Comment:

Move reply box to top ↑

Log in or create an account to comment.