Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If every adult man ever attracted to a post pubescent female under the age of 18 is now a pedophile, what are we going to call actual pedophiles?
So you’re going with the “it’s natural” argument.
I am suggesting there may be a distinction between actual pedophilia (attraction to biological pre-pubescent children) and attraction to females who have completed puberty and are physically women, whether they have reached 18 or not.
I’m not at all saying it’s a good thing. It’s gross, disgusting, and wrong due to power imbalance and exploitation, but it’s not pedophilia.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If every adult man ever attracted to a post pubescent female under the age of 18 is now a pedophile, what are we going to call actual pedophiles?
So you’re going with the “it’s natural” argument.
Anonymous wrote:Dems are getting desperate.
Anonymous wrote:If a Dem wins the upcoming special election in Arizona, there will be enough votes to force the disclosure of the Epstein files.
Anonymous wrote:They could honor Charlie Kirk by demanding the release of the Epstein files.
Anonymous wrote:If every adult man ever attracted to a post pubescent female under the age of 18 is now a pedophile, what are we going to call actual pedophiles?
Anonymous wrote:Dems are getting desperate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If every adult man ever attracted to a post pubescent female under the age of 18 is now a pedophile, what are we going to call actual pedophiles?
![]()
That doesn't look post-pubescent to me
Dont you see the bush?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If every adult man ever attracted to a post pubescent female under the age of 18 is now a pedophile, what are we going to call actual pedophiles?
![]()
That doesn't look post-pubescent to me
Anonymous wrote:
They could shake the name of being pro-pedophilia if they, you know, gave up on being blatantly pro-pedophiles.