• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

What are Babyfurs?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Astus

Well Known Foxxo
You read one comment you disagree with and you're done with people? :V



Again, they haven't actually done anything wrong until they act on it.

Also, paedophiles have asked for castration and were actually refused in many cases.

I think *that* is rather silly, but the point I'm trying to make is you can't punish people for thoughts or feelings and they don't necessarily translate to action.



I would hope someone from *any* community would feel the same way >.>
All of the comments since I last posted


Every time they whack off to child porn they act on it, they're sexually stimulating themselves to that idea or thought. I can imagine that they've been rejected as there are more civilized manners to change sexual deviance if they do work. And sure you can punish people for thoughts or feelings they haven't manifested into action, if I post online that I'm going to go into times square and bomb a bunch of people the FBI is going to be at my door to arrest me, and probably put me in jail for making a bomb threat even if they don't find any bomb making materials.



That I can agree with
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
Prepubescent children are not equipped with sufficient mental faculty to make informed decisions about consent to sexual activities.

Hence any adult performing sexual activities with a child is taking advantage of them and abusing their position of trust as an adult.

of course children can't consent so parents have to consent on their behalf
 

BRN

WTB Forum Mod Powers
If a parent consents to allowing their prepubescent child to be fucked, then that parent is being negligent in their care

The child lacks the faculties to make a decision about sex, and the adult lacks the right to make a choice for the child. There's so many things deeply wrong with the idea of consent-by-proxy that I don't think you thought that through @Somnium
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
i hate the government for telling parents how they should raise their children. The parent naturally loves their child and only wishes good for them.
 
Last edited:

Astus

Well Known Foxxo
i hate the government for telling parents how they should raise their children. The parents naturally loves his child and only wishes good for him.
The only thing is a parent who is wiling to let their child be scarred by someone physically and mentally isn't doing something in the best interest of their child. The government gives guidelines for how to raise children off of a few decades of psychological studies and experiments.

I find it slightly odd that you said "him" at the end there; I thought you were being general, not talking about just males
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
The only thing is a parent who is wiling to let their child be scarred by someone physically and mentally isn't doing something in the best interest of their child.

How can you be sure if the child will be scarred? Maybe they will be more than happy to please their uncle.
I find it slightly odd that you said "him" at the end there; I thought you were being general, not talking about just males

fixed. I ought to start using they instead of he, though it sound and looks weird to me. Also no one thought that in school.

And I should stop playing the devil's advocate
 

Astus

Well Known Foxxo

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
i hate the government for telling parents how they should raise their children. The parent naturally loves their child and only wishes good for them.

Many parents raise their children poorly in spite of having good intentions, which is why advice from childcare experts is useful. A good example is that many parents over feed their children.

Some parents do not have their children's best interests in mind; instances of violent or sexual abuse of children by their parents are routine.

No well meaning and upstanding parent would ever give anybody permission to sodomise their child. I cannot believe that this is even up for discussion; you are literally recommending the system they have in Yemen, where parents sell their young girls off as brides ._.
 

Ricky

Well-Known Member
@Ricky No really, if you aren't familiar with basic terms in the literature then this probably explains why you got the wrong end of the stick when you read that citation.

I see this a lot (for example, people routinely confusing 'genetic' as in 'was generated' with 'related to the genes'); perhaps papers should use more accessible language or have glossaries of terms in them.

@Fallowfox No, really, if you can't think of anything intelligent to say then this probably explains why you would resort to asinine ad hominem tactics like the above.

I see this a lot (for example, people routinely attack the members character over some trivial bullshit semantics when they can't think of a way to address the actual topic); maybe these people should just give up instead of routinely bending over to grab their ankles :V

I'm going to address the other (more intelligent) comments, but I'm only on my second cup of coffee and I want to dig up the research I'm thinking of which came from a class at UC Berkeley.
 

scet

Member
.... wait what

*stars on sleepily*

Childern are human people, no one belongs to anyone. Thats slavery and wrong

*looks at me text from my slaves*

Ok well it's definitely not that bad but M/s dynamics is an consenting adult activities that kids can't understand . . .

Ok well just don't make your children your slaves, and um not normal people too, slavery is bad but ok if the slave wants it but it's not ok to push people into things like that
 

BRN

WTB Forum Mod Powers
okay okay i get it, your child does not belong to you
Christ, no, of course it bloody doesn't. x3

Your child belongs to itself. Because it can't take care of itself, it's the parents' responsibility to look after it and take care of it.

That doesn't given you, or anyone, total ownership of another person's body, no matter how old they are.
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
I'm going to address the other (more intelligent) comments, but I'm only on my second cup of coffee and I want to dig up the research I'm thinking of which came from a class at UC Berkeley.

Are you going to find a paper which attempts to answer whether consumption of abusive pornography causes an increase in the likelihood of committing abuses?
I would be interested if you found one. I haven't been able to find any myself.
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
Christ, no, of course it bloody doesn't. x3

Your child belongs to itself. Because it can't take care of itself, it's the parents' responsibility to look after it and take care of it.

That doesn't given you, or anyone, total ownership of another person's body, no matter how old they are.

then why I can't kill myself, but a sergeant can decide when my life ends?
 

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Don't you get it @Fallowfox if we are too stupid to own ourselves how can we own someone else?

I think you need to clarify your argument.

Nobody owns you, it's not illegal to commit suicide and soldiers enter into a contract to perform dangerous service; their sergeants do not 'own' them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BRN

Ricky

Well-Known Member
Every time they whack off to child porn they act on it, they're sexually stimulating themselves to that idea or thought.

Yeah, and just to recall from your last post:

The issue with the pornography is that it's never enough, there comes a point where the body adjusts to the stimulation recieved and it requires more for them to receive the same feeling they had before, the feelings they want.

So, to back up a bit, I guess it's possible pornography could be used as an outlet to help mitigate these deviant feelings, if they become desensitized to them and have to turn to something else. In all honesty, as can be seen from the research, there isn't much compelling evidence one way or the other, so the only logical conclusion one can draw is it neither helps nor exacerbates the situation to any great extent. That's why I think any argument trying to claim pornography either encourages or discourages sexual predation will degenerate into what we saw yesterday.

I can imagine that they've been rejected as there are more civilized manners to change sexual deviance if they do work.

Like what? I mean, there is chemical castration, but one would hope will power would be enough. Obviously the people in question don't have the ability to overcome these desires through will power alone or they wouldn't be asking to take such drastic measures.

And sure you can punish people for thoughts or feelings they haven't manifested into action, if I post online that I'm going to go into times square and bomb a bunch of people the FBI is going to be at my door to arrest me, and probably put me in jail for making a bomb threat even if they don't find any bomb making materials.

That's not a thought, though. The action you took by posting it online is enough to make it a threat.

The child lacks the faculties to make a decision about sex, and the adult lacks the right to make a choice for the child. There's so many things deeply wrong with the idea of consent-by-proxy that I don't think you thought that through

The parent can, and must, consent on certain things like medical decisions. They can be tried as negligent when making bad decisions for the child. For example, if your child is dying of meningitis and you take him to an "alternative medical practitioner" as opposed to a real doctor you are held liable for the child's death. When it comes to sex, the parent has no way to know how the child will react, but I don't see why this is even a topic of discussion in the first place. The only reason I see a parent making this decision is when some adult wants to take advantage of the child which is both sick and wrong.

The parent naturally loves their child and only wishes good for them.

Not literally :V

Children at a very young age, as far as I'm aware, are not usually interested in sex. As you say later on, the child might want to please a family member like a parent or an uncle and this is the very definition of being taken advantage of.


I'd be wary of sites that get their information from other sites that all have a financial bias. I'm not going to argue that children are not traumatized by such acts, but I've read plenty of information from both sides to know it's somewhere along the lines of the pornography debate. It probably causes some degree of trauma and this is probably much less than people make it out to be. In fact, things like this (quoted from the site you linked to) might be even more detrimental than the original trauma, itself:

Sexual abuse is a particularly sinister type of trauma because of the shame it instills in the victim. With childhood sexual abuse, victims are often too young to know how to express what is happening and seek out help. When not properly treated, this can result in a lifetime of PTSD, depression and anxiety.... Often, victims of sexual abuse will try to downplay their experience by saying that it “wasn’t that bad.” It’s vital to recognize that abuse comes in many shapes, colors and sizes and that all abuse is bad.

You can easily see, by things like Munchausen By Proxy Syndrome, what severe psychological impact parental behavior can have on children. If the parent is so convinced the child will be traumatized then it's just as likely in this case the child would end up believing it (and therefore manifesting it) as well.

Geez, there's a lot of perverts in this forum...

Can we please go back to ogling hot foxes? pls thnk u.

Perverts? In a furry forum? NO WAY

Haha, honestly I'd prefer intellectual discussion over a circle-jerk of fox porn any day :V

Are you going to find a paper which attempts to answer whether consumption of abusive pornography causes an increase in the likelihood of committing abuses?
I would be interested if you found one. I haven't been able to find any myself.

Aww, how cute. He wants some more :3

I was just having some fun with you. Put your pants back on and we'll continue this in another thread.
 

Somnium

The Sparklewolf
Banned
I think you need to clarify your argument.

Nobody owns you, it's not illegal to commit suicide and soldiers enter into a contract to perform dangerous service; their sergeants do not 'own' them.

suicide is legal!? well yea in some places you don't go to jail after attempted suicide, but in others, aren't you stopped by force against your will before committing it and then locked up in a psych ward until you become "stable" enough? I'm talking about conscription especially during war time. And what about seat belts or illegal drugs? My point was, owning a life, even your own, is too big of a responsibility, so the government has to intervene and tell us what we can do and what we can't.
Okay this is going off topic too much.

Children at a very young age, as far as I'm aware, are not usually interested in sex. As you say later on, the child might want to please a family member like a parent or an uncle and this is the very definition of being taken advantage of.

so what, the lady might want to please her boss by giving him head, so that she could get a promotion. Taking advantage of someone is just a part of life.
 
Last edited:

Fallowfox

Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
suicide is legal!? well yea in some places you don't go to jail after attempted suicide, but in others, aren't you stopped by force against your will before committing it and then locked up in a psych ward until you become "stable" enough? I'm talking about conscription especially during war time. And what about seat belts or illegal drugs? My point was, owning a life, even your own, is too big of a responsibility, so the government has to intervene and tell us what we can do and what we can't.
Okay this is going off topic too much.

So you can't be charged with a crime for attempting suicide, and few nations have mandatory conscription, but I digress; parents are responsible for the wellbeing of their children. They do not own their children and if they are assessed to have failed to provide for their children's wellbeing, then childcare services are entitled to rehome the children.
 

Ricky

Well-Known Member
Okay this is going off topic too much.

Why do people always freak out about this?

Conversations evolve.

so what, the lady might want to please her boss by giving him a head, so that she could get a promotion. Taking advantage of someone is just a part of life.

Lol. Getting a head by giving it :V

Yes, but this is why it's considered sexual harassment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top