Little victim

[x---x]

What do you like to do with her?

Okay, I delete them.

Do you wanna more? ;)

[persiangurl]

thats fucking disgusting, i hope you get hit by a train .... soon

[FieryButterfly]

I second that persiangurl.That's just fucking sick.

[persiangurl]

What do you like to do with her?

Okay, I delete them.

Do you wanna more? ;)

thanks for deleting... now please take a friggin LOOK at what you are doing and what kind of consequence it has for the kids involved!!!!

that is somebodies little KID!!!! who will probably be fucked up inthe head for life and god knows how she got into such photography (kidnap? trickery?)

i mean REALLY, if you must fantasize about younger ones, just find OF AGE females that LOOK younger and dress them up as such,

what you are doing is damaging to those kids and their families and just perpetuates the evil methods these photographers use to abuse these kids
, not to mention its ILLEGAL!

shame on u

[Tanya]

shit, how old were they? thats sick

[Grm]

Sorry folks,I was off line, thank you persiangurl for sending me an alert.

Ok Mr whoever you are we don't tolerate any kiddy porn on this site, so I suggest you go back into that filthy hole you came from.
Angry
Grm

[HN1]

Sorry folks,I was off line, thank you persiangurl for sending me an alert.

Ok Mr whoever you are we don't tolerate any kiddy porn on this site, so I suggest you go back into that filthy hole you came from.
Angry
Grm

They posted ACTUAL child porn?!

*bes sick in large bucket*

Can ya not send their IP address to the cops or something? And isn't there an anonymous online way of doing it?

[menace]

You ever hear of that program that allows you to alter a picture so that the person in it appears older or younger? Don't know the name of it, but my point is that even if it is sick, it's probably not illegal. Still, you never know...

[HN1]

You ever hear of that program that allows you to alter a picture so that the person in it appears older or younger? Don't know the name of it, but my point is that even if it is sick, it's probably not illegal. Still, you never know...

If it wasn't real then I don't see the problem or how anyone on here can call it sick - it's someone's fantasy, just like the rape fantasies.

[persiangurl]

it was several unaltered pictures of a pre pubecsent girl in VERY provacative poses

highly illegal

extremely disgusting

[stevoj]

He should have his gentials cut off with a rusty knife and made to eat them :mad:

[Rogue]

If it wasn't real then I don't see the problem or how anyone on here can call it sick - it's someone's fantasy, just like the rape fantasies.

You are a baffling person. Most of your posts so far have been sensitive and acting as the board's conscience, then possible kiddy porn comes along, and you're cool with it.

[HN1]

You are a baffling person. Most of your posts so far have been sensitive and acting as the board's conscience, then possible kiddy porn comes along, and you're cool with it.

I never said I was fine with it. I was, and am, and always will be, outraged by kiddy porn. But people on here have rape fantasies - fantasies which, if acted on, harm people. But as long as they stay as fantasies then I don't care about them. The same goes for any other fantasy, and for you to say I'm fine with kiddy porn just because I said I have no problem with people fantasising over it as long as it stays as fantasy, is extremely hypocritical and I'm inclined to think that your attacks on other people's fantasies like that means you are a kiddy fiddler. The evidence would suggest that you are.

[Rogue]

I never said I was fine with it. I was, and am, and always will be, outraged by kiddy porn. But people on here have rape fantasies - fantasies which, if acted on, harm people. But as long as they stay as fantasies then I don't care about them. The same goes for any other fantasy, and for you to say I'm fine with kiddy porn just because I said I have no problem with people fantasising over it as long as it stays as fantasy, is extremely hypocritical and I'm inclined to think that your attacks on other people's fantasies like that means you are a kiddy fiddler. The evidence would suggest that you are.

Now you're being hypocritical. You've no problem with fantasies, yet you are the one who attacked my fantasy, which was clear to any person with a sense of humour, was intentionally hypothetical and farcical. Someone posts pictures, of what appear to be children no less, and you defend him. I said it was POSSIBLE kiddy porn you were fine with. Someone got 2 years in jail for fake child porn in my country the other day. As for this "evidence", that envelope looks pretty empty to me. I'd check again for you, but I'd just return with my middle finger.

[menace]

Here's a paradox for you: kiddy porn is illegal everywhere in the world, yet daiper/baby oil commercials that are full of naked kids can be seen on TV in prime time. Something here smells of hypocracy to me...

[Lupo]

It is iligal and it should stay that way. Kids are undeveloped adults until they reach their teens and how someone can react to a small kid is beyond me. Must be a flaw in the brain of some sort.

I see you point menace but then we would have to bann nudity and that would be going too far i think. Nudity is still a natural thing ( at least it should be ) and ones we all walked the earth in the nude and no one reacted to that. Let's not go too far in restrictions because of a minority who got things backwards.

[HN1]

Now you're being hypocritical. You've no problem with fantasies, yet you are the one who attacked my fantasy, which was clear to any person with a sense of humour, was intentionally hypothetical and farcical. Someone posts pictures, of what appear to be children no less, and you defend him. I said it was POSSIBLE kiddy porn you were fine with. Someone got 2 years in jail for fake child porn in my country the other day. As for this "evidence", that envelope looks pretty empty to me. I'd check again for you, but I'd just return with my middle finger.

If you're the same person I "attacked" in a post that had something to do with a bank robbery, then I "attacked" you because you appeared to be suggesting people should do it for real.

I never saw any picture of the child. I have no idea how realistic the picture was, or what exactly the child was doing - for all I know it could have been a picture pulled off a naturist website. I also have no idea whether, whatever the child was doing, the child was real or whether someone had "morphed" it.

You look at pictures of so-called fake rape. You fantasise about raping women.

Some pedos look at pictures of fake kiddy porn. Some fantasise over doing sexual things with children.

You are both enjoying something that hurts someone, in fantasy form. For you to say one is worse than the other makes YOU a hypocrit.

I have no problem with any fantasy, as long as, if it involves harm, it is never carried out in reality. I do however get really pissed off when people genuinely take part in sexual things with kids (in other words, when they harm them) or when some ill-informed complete hypocrit who thinks that everyone has or should have the same sense of so-called "humour" suggests that the opposite is true.

[persiangurl]

If you're the same person I "attacked" in a post that had something to do with a bank robbery, then I "attacked" you because you appeared to be suggesting people should do it for real.

I never saw any picture of the child. I have no idea how realistic the picture was, or what exactly the child was doing - for all I know it could have been a picture pulled off a naturist website. I also have no idea whether, whatever the child was doing, the child was real or whether someone had "morphed" it.

You look at pictures of so-called fake rape. You fantasise about raping women.

Some pedos look at pictures of fake kiddy porn. Some fantasise over doing sexual things with children.

You are both enjoying something that hurts someone, in fantasy form. For you to say one is worse than the other makes YOU a hypocrit.

I have no problem with any fantasy, as long as, if it involves harm, it is never carried out in reality. I do however get really pissed off when people genuinely take part in sexual things with kids (in other words, when they harm them) or when some ill-informed complete hypocrit who thinks that everyone has or should have the same sense of so-called "humour" suggests that the opposite is true.



obviously u didnt bother readng my previous posts...


it was a REAL child, who was REALLY prepubescent, and was REALLY showing her vagina
and that is REALLY wrong and harmful in numerous ways


end of thread

[Dancingspirit]

Kindly PM me that vidoe downloading link, i will appreciate.

Thanks

[Lupo]

WTF??... Are you for real?? :mad:

[stevoj]

WTF??... Are you for real?? :mad:

Lets hope not

[Brek]

While child pornography and rape are uniquely noxious, what the fuck gave us, people fantasizing about a felony almost universally viewed as a horrific assault, the right to attack those with predilections for children or young teens? Yes, I would argue that pedophilia is probably on average more likely to devolve to actual action than rape fantasy (especially considering rape fantasy is really on a quite natural path only a little bit away from "rough sex" and a good number of people find it alluring in the right context), but then criticize the fantasy when it devolves. If we wish to say that there is a diametrical or qualitative difference between fantasizing about a horrendously immoral act and actually doing it, why does that break down when the crime is marginally more immoral? ESPECIALLY since there have been cultures that have incorporated child sex into their lifestyle (i.e. Sparta: yes, horrifically immoral, but rape as such is almost never justified, though forced marriage and rape against adversaries may be) and the definition of "adult" as "18" is a uniquely European construction. The fact that we are willing to replicate the same behavior almost down to the words chosen that occurs from judgmental and Puritanical people about our fantasy reeks not only of hypocrisy but of a real failure to actually BELIEVE what we preach (yes, the two are distinct).

However, the deletion of the image was apropos as in this context it is basically child porn, and the forum's interests trump the individual's rights...

[HN1]

obviously u didnt bother readng my previous posts...


it was a REAL child, who was REALLY prepubescent, and was REALLY showing her vagina
and that is REALLY wrong and harmful in numerous ways


end of thread

I did, but no offence, I don't know you, so I have no reason to believe what you said was accurate.

[HN1]

While child pornography and rape are uniquely noxious, what the fuck gave us, people fantasizing about a felony almost universally viewed as a horrific assault, the right to attack those with predilections for children or young teens? Yes, I would argue that pedophilia is probably on average more likely to devolve to actual action than rape fantasy (especially considering rape fantasy is really on a quite natural path only a little bit away from "rough sex" and a good number of people find it alluring in the right context), but then criticize the fantasy when it devolves. If we wish to say that there is a diametrical or qualitative difference between fantasizing about a horrendously immoral act and actually doing it, why does that break down when the crime is marginally more immoral? ESPECIALLY since there have been cultures that have incorporated child sex into their lifestyle (i.e. Sparta: yes, horrifically immoral, but rape as such is almost never justified, though forced marriage and rape against adversaries may be) and the definition of "adult" as "18" is a uniquely European construction. The fact that we are willing to replicate the same behavior almost down to the words chosen that occurs from judgmental and Puritanical people about our fantasy reeks not only of hypocrisy but of a real failure to actually BELIEVE what we preach (yes, the two are distinct).

However, the deletion of the image was apropos as in this context it is basically child porn, and the forum's interests trump the individual's rights...

It's not the people who are attracted to kids I was attacking, It's the people who actually go out and do stuff to them. I don't attack epople with rape fantasies. But I would attack anyone who carried out such a fantasy without the agreement of the other party.

[Brek]

Well, see, removing a child picture from a website is NOT stopping pedophilia (the exploitation has occured) and keeping one is NOT congruent to child rape. I oppose any child pornography with real actors, of course, but my point is that there seems to be an anti-pedophilia-fantasy tendency among rape fantasy community members that is the exact parallel of the anti-rape fantasy tendency of the "average Joe".

If all everyone here was saying was "Rape is wrong, pedophilia is worse", then yes, they are stating the position of anyone remotely ethical or sane.

[HN1]

Well, see, removing a child picture from a website is NOT stopping pedophilia (the exploitation has occured) and keeping one is NOT congruent to child rape. I oppose any child pornography with real actors, of course, but my point is that there seems to be an anti-pedophilia-fantasy tendency among rape fantasy community members that is the exact parallel of the anti-rape fantasy tendency of the "average Joe".

If all everyone here was saying was "Rape is wrong, pedophilia is worse", then yes, they are stating the position of anyone remotely ethical or sane.

Whilst keeping one may not be helping children be harmed, the process of obtaining that photo could be. For example, whilst a person may not be directly harming any child by stealing such a picture off a "preview" section of a child porn site, they are indirectly abusing children by using taht site in the first place - encouraging the website to make more pictures - which of course is done by harming more children.

And yeh removing it isn't stopping it. If this site is oh-so-kosher and only fantasy, why has the picture (and the person who posted it, plus their IP address) not been reported to the authorities?

And this:
"If all everyone here was saying was "Rape is wrong, pedophilia is worse", then yes, they are stating the position of anyone remotely ethical or sane."
depends on their definition of pedophilia. If it's pedophilia to engage in fantasies about children, which are not harming them, then how can you say that's worse than rape, or a rape fantasy? Both involve serious harm.

And whilst I've never done any studies myself, there are people who calim that so-called "consensual" pedophilia is alright, as long as society's reactions are not negative, as at least it's consensual and doesn't involve force. I personally think a) that's a load of BS or b) that's only the case in countries where it is commonplace and accepted and nobody sees it (pedophilia where the children are not forced) as being anything wrong, even when they reach adulthood

[Brek]

Whilst keeping one may not be helping children be harmed, the process of obtaining that photo could be. For example, whilst a person may not be directly harming any child by stealing such a picture off a "preview" section of a child porn site, they are indirectly abusing children by using taht site in the first place - encouraging the website to make more pictures - which of course is done by harming more children.

I agree, and was discussing exactly that problem in an earlier post, and feel such organizations should be shut down and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I also believe the statute of limitations on child rape should be extended. Nonetheless, that is the parallel of the real rape video, which one should similarly not supported. Of course, here we are not the person who stole the preview, but a proxy thereof, and thus do not directly benefit the business: further, the pedophile who does so may HURT the business. Anyways, that's not really my point. I never denied and even openly stated that in some contexts at some time the pedophilic tendency and its accoutrements could be immoral, dangerous, etc. But it is no more so invariably than the rape fantasy one, though it is somewhat more noxious and more connected to serious mental illness. Maybe it is not a parallel situation, but that is not an obvious fact. Just as in some instances the rape fantasy and acquiring the means to satisfy it may be dangerous and destructive, so too can that be the case with the pedophilic fantasy.

depends on their definition of pedophilia. If it's pedophilia to engage in fantasies about children, which are not harming them, then how can you say that's worse than rape, or a rape fantasy? Both involve serious harm.

I did not mean fantasy: I was not adequately distinguishing between pedophilia, the tendency, and child rape, the act. Child rape is immoral. Pedophilia, not necessarily so, for precisely the reason you discuss.

Some people do claim that some sex with children is based on honest consent. I do think that a 13 year old, while not being fully matured, is mature enough to have at least some degree of sexual consent right. But there can be no seriously supportable argument, irrespective of cultural deviation, that justifies pre-pubescent sex: the body is not designed to do it, the child cannot be said to give proper consent, the parents' rights are clear, etc.

[gal4]

Well, I suppose, it comes down to what age, a person can consent to being into sexual intercourse. Oh, well, sex is one thing but necrophilia, and cannibalism, tsk, tsk.

Flesh Eating Cannibals (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/15/ok.missinggirl/index.html)

[Rogue]

If you're the same person I "attacked" in a post that had something to do with a bank robbery, then I "attacked" you because you appeared to be suggesting people should do it for real.

I never saw any picture of the child. I have no idea how realistic the picture was, or what exactly the child was doing - for all I know it could have been a picture pulled off a naturist website. I also have no idea whether, whatever the child was doing, the child was real or whether someone had "morphed" it.

You look at pictures of so-called fake rape. You fantasise about raping women.

Some pedos look at pictures of fake kiddy porn. Some fantasise over doing sexual things with children.

You are both enjoying something that hurts someone, in fantasy form. For you to say one is worse than the other makes YOU a hypocrit.

I have no problem with any fantasy, as long as, if it involves harm, it is never carried out in reality. I do however get really pissed off when people genuinely take part in sexual things with kids (in other words, when they harm them) or when some ill-informed complete hypocrit who thinks that everyone has or should have the same sense of so-called "humour" suggests that the opposite is true.

Where did I say something is worse than something else? I'm only referring to this thread. You're so fast to throw out the word hypocrite (at least spell it right) yet in theory, I in fact agree with you, they're both fantasy about hurting someone. There are fantasies of victims as young as 13 in the stories section. But pictures are generally unwanted here. I'm not sure if fake pictures are allowed, but personally I don't want to see them, it's too dodgy, they could be real, and we don't want to be shut down. You say you can't take PG's word for it cos you don't know her, well most of us don't know each other for sure, so I don't just believe one person and not the next. What I do know and love is how the regular members are describing their brutal fantasies one minute and are quick to say real rape is unacceptable in a serious thread the next. While it's an important aspect, some people like yourself are spending all your time on the latter. Basically, step into the dark side for once by saying what's on your mind without disclaimers (eg. my dumbass bank robbin' thread) and jump back over to the serious stuff again, it's fun :)

[persiangurl]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


evidence of male inferiority

[Brek]

Since clearly genetic testing or some other essentialist account has gone the way of the dodo; no, in Persian land a whole gender is cast aspersions upon by a thoughtful and responsive post. And what's your working definition of inferiority, Persian? Surely it's as illuminating and crassly subjective as your "Man, Jews are ugly" comments!

The notion that not everyone wants to see such a picture is, while undoubtedly accurate, a pretty bad argument since this is supposed to be a forum open to a wide variety of fantasies. But it does make sense from a forum self-defense standpoint to not even risk it. Also, there is a sort of cognitive dissonance involved in distinguishing between play and reality, but it's worth the sacrifice... though we are all here to have fun, ultimately. Nonetheless, knowing where we are and how we stand vis-a-vis things like child porn is relatively important speaking from the viewpoint of a community, hmm?

[gal4]

Since clearly genetic testing or some other essentialist account has gone the way of the dodo; no, in Persian land a whole gender is cast aspersions upon by a thoughtful and responsive post. And what's your working definition of inferiority, Persian? Surely it's as illuminating and crassly subjective as your "Man, Jews are ugly" comments!

The notion that not everyone wants to see such a picture is, while undoubtedly accurate, a pretty bad argument since this is supposed to be a forum open to a wide variety of fantasies. But it does make sense from a forum self-defense standpoint to not even risk it. Also, there is a sort of cognitive dissonance involved in distinguishing between play and reality, but it's worth the sacrifice... though we are all here to have fun, ultimately. Nonetheless, knowing where we are and how we stand vis-a-vis things like child porn is relatively important speaking from the viewpoint of a community, hmm?

So, when did you move to South Carolina?

Thought you liked girls (http://www.fox21.com/Global/story.asp?s=3456745)

[Brek]

Actually, I was in South Carolina a few years back. The place is a hellhole: My balls were sweating up a storm. It felt like the sweat would just attack you.

That story is noxious, of course, but noxious because it includes the assault upon an animal and two girls. Just as finding an article about the trauma of rape wouldn't mean anything to us at this site.

[gal4]

The loveliness of Charleston seems somehow sadly gay
The glory that was Rome is of another day
I've been terribly alone and forgotten in Manhattan
I'm going home to my city by the swampy

I left my balls in South Carolina
High on a hill, it calls to me
To be where little cable cars climb halfway to the stars
The morning fog may chill the air, I don't care

My love waits there in South Carolina
Above the blue and windy sea
When I come home to you, South Carolina
Your golden sun will shine for me


Woof, Woof.

[HN1]

I did not mean fantasy: I was not adequately distinguishing between pedophilia, the tendency, and child rape, the act. Child rape is immoral. Pedophilia, not necessarily so, for precisely the reason you discuss.

I think I'm wrong about what I thought you meant, but just in case... do you think fantasy child rape is any worse than fantasy adult rape? Because I don't see how it is. But I don't think you meant that anyway. Not sure.

[HN1]

...Just as finding an article about the trauma of rape wouldn't mean anything to us at this site.

It would to some. Some people realise how bad it is, therefore feel sorry for the victims, whoever the attacker was. Some people are inhuman - for example those who don't care how traumatic rape is.

[HN1]

Here's a paradox for you: kiddy porn is illegal everywhere in the world, yet daiper/baby oil commercials that are full of naked kids can be seen on TV in prime time. Something here smells of hypocracy to me...

Ah I never caught this post before... thing is, pictures of naked kids, as long as they aren't in sexual poses, are perfectly legal in a lot of countries. And I see no reason why they shouldn't be - it doesn't harm a kid for them to be nude, and there are nudists and naturists all over the world. It's when it becomes sexual that it takes away their innocence. I've seen one person write that the girl was in a provocative pose, and one that she was showing her vagina. If she was showing her pussy, but she was not in a sexual pose, so what? It's perfectly legal in a lot of countries.

[stevoj]

Sexual Poses or not,I don't believe such pictures belong in a place like this and I'm glad I didn't see them.Anyone who thinks they should have stayed needs their head examined!

[HN1]

Sexual Poses or not,I don't believe such pictures belong in a place like this and I'm glad I didn't see them.Anyone who thinks they should have stayed needs their head examined!

why? maybe they don't belong here, but if they are perfectly innocent and freely available on the internet, legally, then there's no harm in wanting them to stay. anyone who didn't have a rape fantasy could say anyone who wants the rape pics to stay here needs their head examined. stop being a hypocrit

[stevoj]

I can be whatever I want :p