Message from @Æthelflæd اللّٰهُ أَكْبَر

Discord ID: 518757008867065867


2018-12-02 11:47:12 UTC  

you are assuming intent, intent that you have no way to prove you are right on (and that I would say, you are wrong most of the times for assuming it)

2018-12-02 11:47:27 UTC  

no I'm not, I'm explicitly not assuming intent

2018-12-02 11:47:41 UTC  

someone playing Hitler in a movie is also acting racist

2018-12-02 11:48:48 UTC  

>in which case you get off on paint
A paint arouser 😂

2018-12-02 11:49:27 UTC  

fap to a drying paint wall once, forever known as attracted to walls

2018-12-02 11:49:34 UTC  

yeah, if your pee-pee get hard watching paint dry, the painter can notice, there's no need to make any assumptions there

2018-12-02 11:49:54 UTC  

ever watched porn then to find out the girl was 17 and that you are now a pedo?

2018-12-02 11:50:02 UTC  

no?

2018-12-02 11:50:50 UTC  

sure 😏

2018-12-02 11:51:30 UTC  

and even if I did, that'd make me a hebephile, or if I did it while I myself was close to that age, "normal"

2018-12-02 11:51:47 UTC  

I can go lower on the example if you need me to

2018-12-02 11:51:48 UTC  

there's a pretty wide gap between child and late teen

2018-12-02 11:52:37 UTC  

sure

2018-12-02 11:52:49 UTC  

you are basically admiting to it anyway

2018-12-02 11:53:13 UTC  

yeah. it's how we define these things.

2018-12-02 11:53:18 UTC  

you apply labels too easily and are blind to any nuance

2018-12-02 11:53:58 UTC  

you also apply intent to any action without any thought put into it

2018-12-02 11:54:45 UTC  

you keep saying that, but memeing lies doesn't make it true

2018-12-02 11:55:04 UTC  

when lies did I meme?

2018-12-02 11:55:17 UTC  

I'll be waiting

2018-12-02 11:55:21 UTC  

that I apply intent to any action without any thought put into it

2018-12-02 11:55:44 UTC  

getting an erection isn't an assumption of intent, it's a physical consequence of stimuli

2018-12-02 11:56:07 UTC  

as for me applying labels too easily, that's your opinion and that's fine

2018-12-02 11:56:31 UTC  

let's go by parts. First, our first examples were just about watching, not fapping, erection, or stiffy

2018-12-02 11:56:43 UTC  

I think the wider labels are the better, we don't really need 10000000 genders, two or at most three should suffice

2018-12-02 11:56:59 UTC  

you can never judge someone merely because they _watched_ something

2018-12-02 11:57:29 UTC  

>our first examples were just about watching, not fapping, erection, or stiffy
Your example was, and I quote
>if I fap to paint dry on a wall, that doesn't mean I'm aroused by walls

2018-12-02 11:57:41 UTC  

don't conflate two different examples

2018-12-02 11:57:42 UTC  

that wasn't even the first mate

2018-12-02 11:57:47 UTC  

that was the middle of it

2018-12-02 11:58:37 UTC  

>First, our first examples were just about watching, not fapping, erection, or stiffy
Right then. and as I said, there are many reasons you could watch something. By accident. As part of your legal investigation. Out of morbid curiosity.

2018-12-02 11:58:49 UTC  

>cp is banned everywhere, but I wouldn't claim that anyone that watches it is a pedo

2018-12-02 11:59:13 UTC  

I have never contested that

2018-12-02 11:59:44 UTC  

but anyone who is aroused by the prepubescent children in the CP is a pedo

2018-12-02 12:00:26 UTC  

depends how vague you are with definitions

2018-12-02 12:00:40 UTC  

a pedo is someone that is into kids

2018-12-02 12:00:58 UTC  

not someone that faps into cp content once 🤔

2018-12-02 12:01:27 UTC  

getting aroused by something, doesn't determine your tastes

2018-12-02 12:01:44 UTC  

let's change the example though, because cp is unconfortable to debate