Welcome to Inkbunny...
Allowed ratings
To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )
PedoCoon

Username change

From the user previously known as catlover1019:

I always thought the whole having numbers in usernames thing was a bit tacky, so I decided to finally change mine. Plus, this new username is a lot more relevant to who I am now, than the old one which I started using in some places when I was like 10.

Chances are I'll never completely get away from the catlover1019 name. There are some sites where you can't change your username, and I'm not one to abandon accounts. From now on, though, this is the preferred name.

Yes, this was a very spur of the moment change, and I may regret it when I get up tomorrow. Only time will tell.

-PedoCoon
Viewed: 303 times
Added: 2 months, 3 weeks ago
 
Meowzor
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Word of advice: This is not a good idea. You're drawing very bad attention to yourself by putting "Pedo" in your name. Best thing to do right now IMO: turn off name-change visibility, think of a less provocative name, and wipe the identity of PedoCoon from anything attached to you.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
While I appreciate your concern. I'm gonna decline your advice.

This is not a secret here, or anywhere where I use this identity. The information was always just a click away, now they only have to read my name.

The fact is I'm not breaking any laws. The worst someone can do is dox me, which may make my life more difficult, but wouldn't ruin it. I'm used to people hating me, harassing me, and "exposing" me. I actually find it quite amusing. I'd prefer to get doxed, but it is the only actual bad thing that can happen.
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Prefer not to get doxed you meant.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Yes, of course. I need to proof-read better.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 1 week ago
Of course you're not going to change your name. Changing your name to "Pedocoon" is only furthing the proof that you're a sick pedophile. Don't procreate
PedoCoon
2 months, 1 week ago
Not sure why you think there needs to be "proof" of something I never denied. I don't think it makes me "sick," but I'll say it loud and clear: "I *am* a pedophile."
tribondkuba111
2 months, 1 week ago
Stay away from children and DON'T procreate. It's also funny that you're a babyfur as well. What a degenerate combination
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
You mean very good attention?  The more who stand up for pedophilia, zoophilia, and other forms of love and attraction, the better.

It's the human societies and media in many places which have created the silly narrative that pedophile = rapist.  Thus, calling yourself a pedophile helps to destroy that narrative.  Hell, I still hear the phrase "convicted pedophile" being thrown around, lol.  That's like calling someone a convicted homosexual.  What did they actually do that was bad?  What is this, Nazi Germany?  Do you believe in thought crimes or something?  (Not directed at you, but at those I hear using that term.)

If you were just bringing up how there are those out there who don't understand all that and equate pedophile with rapist so would be hurtful towards PedoCoon, definitely, but that's to be expected and is part of standing up for what's right.  Someone does something illegal, then they'll be gone after.  I don't know how "illegal" making death threats is but I'm pretty sure you can get the police involved about that although they're swamped with online death threat stuff so good luck.
youngfoxlover
2 months, 3 weeks ago
I like your new username :3
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
So "map" is a pedophile who also believes that cubs should actually be able to yiff, while anti-map is someone who is a pedophile who doesn't believe that cubs should be able to yiff?
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Also, what about someone who isn't a pedophile but still believes in the right of young animals to yiff?
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
MAP means "minor attracted person" which is an umbrella term for pedophiles and hebephiles. It doesn't specify whether they think cubs should be able to yiff or not. Usually the terms used for that are pro-contact and anti-contact. Anti-MAP could mean either anyone who's against MAPs, or I think I've also seen it used form anti-contact MAPs. Someone who isn't a pedo but believes cubs should be able to yiff would be a pro-contact ally by the new jargon.
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
So MAP = pedophile, got it, thanks.

So why not just say "pedo"?  Let me guess, it was meant to be a "secret" term to avoid the heat of using the terms "pedo" or "pedophile".  Well at least where and when you can do so safely, I think using the term "pedo", "pedophile", and "pedophilia" is good to try to "take back the word" as it were.  MAP on the other paw, well, maybe good for IRL due to the danger of coming out as a pedophile and standing up for cub yiff rights and pedophile rights, but even then would be good to stand up for of course.  One step at a time though I guess.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
"So why not just say "pedo"?  Let me guess, it was meant to be a "secret" term to avoid the heat of using the terms "pedo" or "pedophile"."

pretty much...

"MAP on the other paw, well, maybe good for IRL due to the danger of coming out as a pedophile and standing up for cub yiff rights and pedophile rights, but even then would be good to stand up for of course."

also good for creating confusion since a map is...a map, not a pedo. but pedos have co-opted the word so...yeah. hello, confusion for people who don't know much about pedos.
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Yep, and maybe it has been helpful in order to bring down someone's "ZOMG PEDO IS RAPE" blanket statements / tribalism / brainwashing guard so that you can have a better chance of getting through to them and explaining that cubs should have the right to be the yiffy beings they often/usually are when given the chance, and that there's nothing wrong with animals sharing the joy of yiff with them, and everyone, as long as everyone involved is happy and safe.  Even so, the word needs to be colloquially defined to mean what it actually means by definition, just as zoophilia does (mostly at least, I think).

Sex is so demonized that there seriously needs to be a movement pushing back against that bullshit and recognizing sex as the normally good fun loving wonderful thing to share that it is.  Rape would decrease, violence and other actual crimes would decrease, and sex trafficking would be pretty much non-existent.  Why rape and traffick when you can easily yiff most anyone right next to you because everyone who was all uptight and stupid about it has for the most part stopped being that way except for a few crazy religious nutcases here and there, asexuals, or those who just  aren't interested or in the mood?  Licking, cuddling, sucking, and fucking are friendly gestures and compliments and often can brighten up someone's day.  The world would be a much more loving and less warmongering and hateful place if everyone yiffed and stopped being uptight prudes about yiff and love.

There are way too many countries outlawing zoophilia and/or pedophilia, it's really scary.  The trend needs to be reversed, and that won't happen if everyone hides it and shuts up about it.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
let me be perfectly clear here: i am NOT pro-pedophilia and i oppose both your (you and pedocoon here) claims and agenda.

it's one thing to have fantasies and look at cub porn featuring 100% fictional character and another thing entirely to want to go out and fuck irl children.

if you even consider doing the latter, just go ahead and turn yourself in to the police so you can be added to the sex offender registry before you harm anyone.

"There are way too many countries outlawing zoophilia and/or pedophilia, it's really scary.  The trend needs to be reversed, and that won't happen if everyone hides it and shuts up about it."

mmm...no. in regards to people who partake in such activities irl and not porn with fictional characters...that trend is a good thing and protects people.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Don't bother with
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
he's too much of a degenerate furfag. Also "it's one thing to have fantasies and look at cub porn featuring 100% fictional character and another thing entirely to want to go out and fuck irl children." Jerking it cub porn is just as bad as IRL child porn. Go look up the Amber Alert Law/Act and you'll see what I'm talking about
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
It's called the PROTECT Act, it's horribly vague, and those parts of it seems to have been ruled to be unconstitutional anyway. The fact that you don't know any of this proves that you're just parroting other antis without bothering to do the research yourself, which is hardly a surprise.

Also, calling people furfags on a furry porn site is laughable. Gotta admit I've never seen that one before.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Bitch, I do my research, unlike you. How is it laughable calling you a furfag? You are one.
Swiftpaw
2 months, 3 weeks ago
They banned me so I couldn't reply, so I've banned them too.  Yet another close-minded brainwashed anti-sex unthinking tool.  They also are anti-climate change so seem to be anti-thinking and anti-science in general.

ERROR ERROR, INFORMATION CANNOT PENETRATE HEAD THICKNESS.  lol
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Wow, nice that you're showing your true colors, you sick pedo fucker
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
No, I'm the pedo, the kids would be the "pedo fuckers." :P
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Stop trying to be funny, it's not working. Don't procreate
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
wow, can you be even more of a pedophile/zoophila sick fuck apologist? "There are way too many countries outlawing zoophilia and/or pedophilia, it's really scary.  The trend needs to be reversed, and that won't happen if everyone hides it and shuts up about it." Oh boo fucking hoo, too bad, there's a reason why many countries outlaw it, you sick fuck.
"So why not just say "pedo"?  Let me guess, it was meant to be a "secret" term to avoid the heat of using the terms "pedo" or "pedophile" " No fucking shit, sherlock. "They banned me so I couldn't reply, so I've banned them too.  Yet another close-minded brainwashed anti-sex unthinking tool.  They also are anti-climate change so seem to be anti-thinking and anti-science in general." He blocked you #1. #2 There you go again with the whole "close-minded brainwashed anti-sex" insult. Bro, he's anti-pedophilia and anti-zoophilia, you fucking idiot. Funny how this is coming from the same close minded asshole who's a pedo and zoophilia apologist who's fucking butthurt that many countries outlaw pedophilia and Zoophilia. You just admitted that you're a sick fuck who's SEXUALLY attracted to children and animals. Guess what bitch? No country is going to bend over backwards for you to legalize pedophilia and zoophilia. Both are morally fucking wrong but assholes like you and Catcoon1019 don't see that because y'all heads are too far up your own asses. Do humanity a favor, same goes for you
PedoCoon
PedoCoon
(why did you change your name?) don't fucking procreate, there is enough degenerates in the world. P.S. way to block me like a pussy
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
now go back to being a degenerate
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
"Jerking it cub porn is just as bad as IRL child porn."

and who exactly is harmed by drawn and/or animated content featuring 100% fictional characters? hm? i may be anti-pedo and anti-zoophilia but i do draw the line at punishing thought crimes. please go to the UK and join the police monitoring twitter if you want to take part in punishing thought crimes.

i'm also not a diehard anti-pedo who believes everything even remotely related to the topic should be banned. i can be reasonable when i want to be and the whole cub porn thing is actually pretty analogous to violent video games in that it can serve as a harmless outlet for otherwise harmful thoughts and urges.

"wow, can you be even more of a pedophile/zoophila sick fuck apologist?"

that's pretty much why i blocked him.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Well, I'd love to actually debate these things, instead of you just loudly disagreeing with me for my specified reason.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
i'd consider it but that would require YOU to accept the burden of proof on providing information to backup your claims and not try to get me to prove your points for you.

if you can't manage that much then there's really no point in trying.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
I'm not the one claiming that something is harmful without evidence. Everything is legal by default it is up to the people that think something should be illegal to demonstrate why.

You can't prove a negative. There's either evidence that consesual zoophilic and pedophilic sex are harmful, or their isn't. If need be for pedophilia at least, I do know of some studies that fail to demonstrate that it's harmful if consensual. That's the best that's possible, because you're the one making a positive claim of harm.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
like i said before, provide info that backs up your claims yourself and do not try to get me to prove your claims for you. that is not how things work and i am not doing that for you.

"I'm not the one claiming that something is harmful without evidence."

no, you're the one claiming something isn't harmful without evidence.

"You can't prove a negative. There's either evidence that consesual zoophilic and pedophilic sex are harmful, or their isn't."

and here you go again. i am not going to prove your point for you.

"I do know of some studies that fail to demonstrate that it's harmful if consensual."

and the link to those studies are where? oh, right...nowhere. because you won't provide info to backup the claims your making.

you're the one trying to avoid and/or shift the burden of proof onto other people.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Well, here's the study I was talking about: https://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/sandfort_84.htm Yes. the author admits it cannot be taken as represetitive, but the same is also true of the studies showing harm. They can only study cases known to the psychiatric community, and that involved one of two things. Either the pedophile must have been prosecuted, or the person who was a child at the time of the encounter/relationship must have sought help. I think it's more likely for the abusive cases to be the ones where the law got involved, and obviously someone is far more likely to tell a shrink if they're actually having problems because of it.

Also, most research seems to make no distinctions between obvious rape, and encounters that would otherwise be considered consensual if it weren't for the age of the younger participant. This obviously makes it next to useless when discussing only the latter set of cases.

I would like to be very clear, though, that by taking the position that pedophilic and zoophilic sex are harmful you are absolutely making a claim, and are not excerpt from the burden of proof. Just because the majority of people agree with you doesn't mean you're not the one making the claim. As an analogy, the majority of people believe in god, but they're still the ones with the burden of proof, who have to show that there's evidence for such beliefs.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
You can't reason with him either, there is a reason why he got banned from Deviantart
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
No, I don't take part in punishing though crimes, I'm not an SJW. With
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
you can't reason with him. He'll keep doubling down on his beliefs. Also, why does he keep saying we're close minded anti-sex brainwashed?
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
ummm... you know, i was actually going to mention that before but with how he also mentioned climate change it seemed a bit too political at the time but looking back on it... i am a tad curious myself.

"Yet another close-minded brainwashed anti-sex unthinking tool.  They also are anti-climate change so seem to be anti-thinking and anti-science in general."

hmmm...

"Yet another close-minded brainwashed anti-sex unthinking tool."

fair point with the close-minded point. at least, at the time.

a more accurate claim would be "kink shaming" but "anti-sex" and "unthinking tool"... why would i be against people having sex? as for "unthinking tool"...gonna just ignore that insult aimed at my intelligence.

"They also are anti-climate change so seem to be anti-thinking and anti-science in general."

i honestly don't know where this came from (is it bait?). unless i know swiftpaw from somewhere else under a different name. if that's the case, that's a...problem to be dealt with but for now i'll just leave it as a maybe.

i agree climate change is a valid concern but thus far (for decades now) little has been done about it and typically those that keep trying to fearmonger about it tend to be massive hypocrites (rich people flying/riding to/from remote locations to discuss the topic in smog machines) or activists who are more concerned with dancing in streets, doing what seems to be a form of performance art in some cases (interpretive dance?), and generally just making a nuisance of themselves in public.

add to it, none of the short term doomsayer type of claims concerning it have ever come true and are typically politically motivated fearmongering to drive support towards a given politician.

so...i acknowledge it's a valid long term concern but that's all you'll get from me. the earth isn't on fire currently and it'll still be spinning with humans living on it decades from now despite the current short term doomsayer claims.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Yeah, that's what I want to know: how are we're both "anti-sex?" I think he's saying that because we're against his agenda and claims. Man, you should see
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
journals discussing this topic
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
While I can't really speak for SwiftPaw, the reason why the term "anti-sex" kinda makes sense to me is because a lot of the anti-pedophilia and anti-zoophilia rhetoric seems to be at least somewhat based on the idea that sex is somehow "bad" and that vulnerable individuals need to be shielded from it. It really does seem like many people see sex almost as a "necessary evil" which would absolutely make them anti-sex.

The fact that climate change isn't an immediate existential concern for humans is no excuse for inaction. There are many other species on this planet that are far less adaptable, among many other reasons why we should act.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
"because a lot of the anti-pedophilia and anti-zoophilia rhetoric seems to be at least somewhat based on the idea that sex is somehow "bad" and that vulnerable individuals need to be shielded from it."

that's not the issue and you know it isn't.

"The fact that climate change isn't an immediate existential concern for humans is no excuse for inaction."

then get people to stop using the topic to fearmonger, to stop exploiting the topic for political power, and get the modern day hippies off the streets so they stop blocking traffic and get people who can to actually do something about it.

also, tell the dancing hippies doing their interpretive dance auditions in the streets to stop blocking things like ambulances before they start getting people killed with their stupidity.

because thus far no one has done ANYTHING about it except use it as a means of causing unrelated problems. it's a tool at this point.

me? i'm one person who is so poor they can only just scrape by each month. what could you possibly expect me to do about something like climate change? to expect me to be able to do anything about such a problem is absurd. i can't do anything about climate change.

take those complaints to the people who can but won't do anything about it. and watch as they sip on a cup filled with your tears.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Don't tell me what I know. I replied to the other thread with the study I was talking about before, so reply there if you want to have an actual proper conversation about this topic. As it is, I honestly do get the impression that an anti-sex attitude is at the root of a lot of the objections to pedophilia and zoophilia. Because of the lack of actual evidence that consensual sex is harmful to children and non-humans, the objections need to come from somewhere else.

Most people that I see talking about climate change absolutely are taking their complaints to " the people who can but won't do anything about it." However, to be honest this isn't a topic I have much interest in debating. I'd much rather stick to sexual morality.
treos
2 months, 3 weeks ago
"I replied to the other thread with the study I was talking about before, so reply there if you want to have an actual proper conversation about this topic."

a study with a sample size of only 25 participants who were part of a male/male relationship. was it really not possible to find any female children/adults to take part in the study? i highly doubt it.

not only is that a really small sample size but it also helps contribute to the assumption that gays are pedos. a claim i really hate to see people make.

if anything, such a small scale study likely does more harm than good.

"As it is, I honestly do get the impression that an anti-sex attitude is at the root of a lot of the objections to pedophilia and zoophilia."

calling someone anti-sex implies they are against sexual activities in general. i'm opposed to pedophilia and zoophilia, not sex.

"I have much interest in debating. I'd much rather stick to sexual morality."

nope...NO! i am NOT arguing morality with a pedo because morality is purely subjective term that seldom ever adds anything helpful or useful to a conversation that isn't directly related to it.
PedoCoon
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Studying homosexual pedophila does nothing to contribute to the assumption that "gays are pedos." If anything properly read the study might contribute to the asumption that "pedos are gay." An incorrect generalization, but something that it true in my case.

As for the sample size; I agree that it's pretty low, but for the record other studies on the topic also suffer from that limitation, in addition to the other ones I already forwarded.

When I say "morality" I only mean whether or not something is harmful.

You still have yet to defend your position in any way. I could just start debunking the common talking points that I know of, but that'd be approaching a strawman fallacy when I'm talking to someone fully capable of making their own arguments. I can hardly convince you that pedophilia and zoophilia aren't wrong when I don't know the reasons you think they are.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Bro, you have no fucking morals. You're a pedophile and a zoophila.
cincizra
2 months, 2 weeks ago
Lol, all you've gotta do is show why their attraction is intrinsically harmful and it'll destroy their fantasies.
PedoCoon
2 months, 2 weeks ago
How can *attraction* be intrinsically harmful? It's important to debate of course whether the *actions* of bestiality of pedophilic sex are inherently harmful, and I really don't think the evidence at all shows that they are, but the attractions themselves are harmless. The sheer number of militant anti-contact MAPs, who hate me just as much as the antis do should be proof enough for them, that people can have the attraction, and still agree with you, and thus be "harmless" in your eyes.

I'm sorry if I've misinterpreted something you said. It wasn't my intention if I did.
cincizra
2 months, 2 weeks ago
" PedoCoon wrote:
How can *attraction* be intrinsically harmful?

I didn't mean to make that claim. I only meant to say that a proof of that claim would destroy your fantasies.

As far as I can tell, most pedophiles and zoophiles don't like having those attractions in a society that hates them for it. So there's plenty motivation to find and believe a proof that it's intrinsically harmful. The result in the communities seems to be a tense mixture of closeting, vocal anti-contact activism, and the rare vocal pro-contact message. It's not a happy or healthy situation for anyone, and the only thing keeping most people in that situation is a refusal to lie to themselves about their attractions.
PedoCoon
2 months, 2 weeks ago
I see.

Yeah. I think I'm doing pretty alright. I really don't mind being hated online, as long as it doesn't effect my irl life. Of course, I wish things were different, but things are unlikely to change for the better any time soon. Of course, I still hold up hope and spread my message. At least it makes me feel like I'm doing something about it.

I guess I'm weird in that I've never really struggled with self-hatred. I think it's because I knew and accepted who I was before I fully realized just how badly most people hate people like myself.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 2 weeks ago
Even if I show them, they'll still double down, like Swiftpaw
cincizra
2 months, 2 weeks ago
" tribondkuba111 wrote:
if


I can't argue with that. "If A, then B" is true when both A and B are false.
tribondkuba111
2 months, 2 weeks ago
And you're a Pedocoon whiteknight. Piss off
tribondkuba111
2 months, 3 weeks ago
Swiftpaw
Swiftpaw
"ERROR ERROR, INFORMATION CANNOT PENETRATE HEAD THICKNESS.  lol" nice failed attempt at being funny, furfag
New Comment:
Move reply box to top
Log in or create an account to comment.