Switch to full style
Societal problems, economics, etc.
Post a reply

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by PillowHumper » July 2016

The real question is what % of people are even capable of changing their minds. The anti-JB crew are just stuck in their ways. Arguing with them is like arguing with a liberal..just a waste of time :uzi:

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

PillowHumper wrote:The real question is what % of people are even capable of changing their minds. The anti-JB crew are just stuck in their ways. Arguing with them is like arguing with a liberal..just a waste of time :uzi:


It's essentially identical to arguing with any other group of religious people, no matter how much evidence you show a creationist, or an anti-vaxxer, or a scientologist, no matter how outlandish their beliefs are, it is very rare to convince them that they are delusional.

Image

They are mostly incapable of realizing how delusional they are, or even that they are delusional at all. They mindlessly accept the mythology of their society, and then they tenaciously cling to it. I mean, just look at their belief that their society got the age of consent just right, in some states in the USA people will argue until they are blue in the face that fucking 17 year olds is a horrible rape, whereas in adjacent states people will say fucking 16 year olds is fine but fucking 15 year olds is an awful crime, all the while fucking 14 year olds is legal in Germany. They all just mindlessly accumulate doxa, and then are virtually incapable of ever changing their beliefs.

Everyone thinks they were born under the one true religion. Everyone thinks they were born under the one true age of consent. They are all fucking retarded, delusional, and religious.
Last edited by mrz on Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:27 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

MRZ - fuck children or STFU

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

Rotting Penis wrote:MRZ - fuck children or STFU


Furthermore they take pride and have dopamine release by saying the things they are programmed to say. I just read a comment on a news article where a person gleefully proclaimed that fucking 15 year olds should get you locked up for decades. In saying this, which is the line that he is supposed to say, he undoubtedly felt really good about himself. Has he ever actually critically thought about the matter? Has the thought ever crossed his mind that maybe people shouldn't be locked up for as long as murderers (or even at all in reality) for doing things that are completely legal in Germany and Portugal?

Of course not! He just pulled out the book of programming that society, or more so the Prison Industrial Complex, Fundamentalist Christians, and Radical Feminists, shoved into his mind, and said his lines, like a person in a play. He is not even a real person in reality, he has no agency what-so-ever, he is just the programmed drone of the status quo. The people represented in plays are not real, but they are played by actors who are real people. These drones are never real people, they are always actors in the play written by the status quo, like they have no real identity to fall back on after the play is over, they are entirely pretend, actors who say their lines, but they never stop acting, they are nothing other than their act.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

mrz wrote:
Rotting Penis wrote:MRZ - fuck children or STFU


Furthermore they take pride and have dopamine release by saying the things they are programmed to say. I just read a comment on a news article where a person gleefully proclaimed that fucking 15 year olds should get you locked up for decades. In saying this, which is the line that he is supposed to say, he undoubtedly felt really good about himself. Has he ever actually critically thought about the matter? Has the thought ever crossed his mind that maybe people shouldn't be locked up for as long as murderers (or even at all in reality) for doing things that are completely legal in Germany and Portugal?

Of course not! He just pulled out the book of programming that society, or more so the Prison Industrial Complex, Fundamentalist Christians, and Radical Feminists, shoved into his mind, and said his lines, like a person in a play. He is not even a real person in reality, he has no agency what-so-ever, he is just the programmed drone of the status quo. The people represented in plays are not real, but they are played by actors who are real people. These drones are never real people, they are always actors in the play written by the status quo, like they have no real identity to fall back on after the play is over, they are entirely pretend.

In the time it took to write that, 27000 jailbaits masturbated thinking about Chad's cock, 0 jailbaits masturbated thinking about MRZ's cock

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

Rotting Penis wrote:
mrz wrote:
Furthermore they take pride and have dopamine release by saying the things they are programmed to say. I just read a comment on a news article where a person gleefully proclaimed that fucking 15 year olds should get you locked up for decades. In saying this, which is the line that he is supposed to say, he undoubtedly felt really good about himself. Has he ever actually critically thought about the matter? Has the thought ever crossed his mind that maybe people shouldn't be locked up for as long as murderers (or even at all in reality) for doing things that are completely legal in Germany and Portugal?

Of course not! He just pulled out the book of programming that society, or more so the Prison Industrial Complex, Fundamentalist Christians, and Radical Feminists, shoved into his mind, and said his lines, like a person in a play. He is not even a real person in reality, he has no agency what-so-ever, he is just the programmed drone of the status quo. The people represented in plays are not real, but they are played by actors who are real people. These drones are never real people, they are always actors in the play written by the status quo, like they have no real identity to fall back on after the play is over, they are entirely pretend.

In the time it took to write that, 27000 jailbaits masturbated thinking about Chad's cock, 0 jailbaits masturbated thinking about MRZ's cock


I don't even give a fuck man, what you fail to realize is that entirely separately from my desire to fuck JBs, I desire for humans to actually live in fucking reality, but the vast majority of humans are schizophrenic mindless zombies, they believe in an assortment of mythologies, like it's just so frustrating and actually scary, particularly because this glaring vulnerability in the masses (their state of complete disconnection from actual reality), is manipulated by sociopaths (who are actually in reality) to control them like fucking robots.

Seriously, I have far more concern about living in a population that overwhelmingly consists of psychotic zombie drones that are on the botnets of slave trafficking sociopaths, than I do about fucking JBs.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:51 am.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

It is not feminist propaganda that is from self admitted cases of males committing sexual assault. There is extremely high prevalence of sexual assault and rape committed by males, it's rarely reported and rarely results in charges or convictions when it is. In some countries over a quarter of males have raped a female, in USA I think it is 10%.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:51 am.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:51 am.

Re:

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

Ona (Thailand) wrote:
mrz wrote:
Discovered by an aspie (Le Mrz);

1. Photographs are magical voodoo dolls that cause what happened in them to happen again when viewed

8. The majority of males are secret pedophiles


For the first point, I think that is meant in a figurative sense where each time a paedophile or child porn consumer sees a photo-image or a video-clip, an injustice is done to the alleged victim. It is akin to the idea when a wife has a sexual affair, an injustice is done to her husband whether or not he is aware of it.

For the latter point, I think that the majority of heterosexual teenage boys and men of reproductive age (say between age 12 to 60) are attracted to JB. I reckon that perhaps 90% of them are so attracted to girls between age 12 and 17 whilst 5% are not by virtue of their being asexuals (with the remaining 5% of men being homosexuals). The truth is that most will not admit it due to their fear of being rejected by family and society.
.

It's not like that entirely.

1. The majority of males COULD fuck pubescent girls if they were pretty

2. The majority of males don't obsess about it, because they PREFER post-pubescent girls

3. Only pedophiles obsess about it, because they are not attracted to post-pubescents

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by Springfield » July 2016

Mrz when the fbi kicks down your door will your pants be around your ankles or are you an open zipper only kind of guy?

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

Springfield wrote:Mrz when the fbi kicks down your door will your pants be around your ankles or are you an open zipper only kind of guy?

LOL, what a question :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:50 am.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

Get it,

I meant "could" as in less willing than "would" not as being or not being allowed to.

I don't think you will succeed at persuading MRZ, because it's just his innate preference. The same way as it would be futile to try and persuade a homosexual that women are hotter than men.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:49 am.

Re: Re:

by mrz » July 2016

Rotting Penis wrote:
Ona (Thailand) wrote:
For the first point, I think that is meant in a figurative sense where each time a paedophile or child porn consumer sees a photo-image or a video-clip, an injustice is done to the alleged victim. It is akin to the idea when a wife has a sexual affair, an injustice is done to her husband whether or not he is aware of it.

For the latter point, I think that the majority of heterosexual teenage boys and men of reproductive age (say between age 12 to 60) are attracted to JB. I reckon that perhaps 90% of them are so attracted to girls between age 12 and 17 whilst 5% are not by virtue of their being asexuals (with the remaining 5% of men being homosexuals). The truth is that most will not admit it due to their fear of being rejected by family and society.
.

It's not like that entirely.

1. The majority of males COULD fuck pubescent girls if they were pretty

2. The majority of males don't obsess about it, because they PREFER post-pubescent girls

3. Only pedophiles obsess about it, because they are not attracted to post-pubescents


How do they even know what they prefer they are banned from even looking at pictures of naked JBs, because it magically abuses them and funds the multi billion dollar CP industry that doesn't actually exist.

For the first point, I think that is meant in a figurative sense where each time a paedophile or child porn consumer sees a photo-image or a video-clip, an injustice is done to the alleged victim. It is akin to the idea when a wife has a sexual affair, an injustice is done to her husband whether or not he is aware of it.


You are like a Christian trying to argue there is a non-literal interpretation of the Bible, in a form of apologism for the outlandishness of the beliefs of the religiously delusional. There is a reason why people get locked up for sentences equivalent to actually doing what is in pictures they look at, and it is not because these people are using this logic figuratively, the people who preach these things literally in their insanity believe them to be true, that is why they say them, that is why their actions reflect them, they are followers of a religion that was fashioned out of a collection of prison industry propaganda.

They even squabble amongst themselves about these things, in the last FBI operation they hosted CP for like a week or something to try to hack the people looking at it (which they had extremely little success with), and even in doing this the FBI angered many people who claimed they caused the children in the pictures to be raped all over again. Of course the LE agencies conveniently don't think that magical voodoo revictimization applies to them when they distribute CP, essentially many people think what the FBI did was equivalent to pimping out little children to be raped in order to catch people raping children, but I don't even at all agree with those people (though I'm glad the extremists of the faith are starting to turn on their preachers, anything that causes people to dislike the FBI makes me happy even if their reason is based on religious insanity), it's just I don't think looking at CP should be illegal either for exactly the same reason, magical voodoo revictimization doesn't exist, the multi billion dollar CP industry doesn't exist, it wasn't the billion dollar CP industry distributing that CP it was the FBI and prior to them some random person with a forum for complete no profit at all, like none of the reasons they actually use to justify such operations are actually based on anything real it's just a bunch of religious scriptures.
Last edited by mrz on Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Re:

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

mrz wrote:How do they even know what they prefer they are banned from even looking at pictures of naked JBs,

shitty attempt at argument

you obviously feel sexual attraction to girls in clothes, they don't need to be naked for that

Re: Re:

by mrz » July 2016

Rotting Penis wrote:
mrz wrote:How do they even know what they prefer they are banned from even looking at pictures of naked JBs,

shitty attempt at argument

you obviously feel sexual attraction to girls in clothes, they don't need to be naked for that


Yes but it is proven that people are more attracted to naked females, how do you know that your attraction to JBs will not increase more once their clothes are off than your attraction to old bitches when their clothes are off? I think most males are probably preferentially attracted to 14-17 year olds tbh, they are just isolated from them, banned from seeing them naked, it is so stigmatized that they dissociate away from it and deny it.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:49 am.

Re: Re:

by Rotting Penis » July 2016

mrz wrote:
Rotting Penis wrote:shitty attempt at argument

you obviously feel sexual attraction to girls in clothes, they don't need to be naked for that


Yes but it is proven that people are more attracted to naked females, how do you know that your attraction to JBs will not increase more once their clothes are off than your attraction to old bitches when their clothes are off? I think most males are probably preferentially attracted to 14-17 year olds tbh, they are just isolated from them, banned from seeing them naked, it is so stigmatized that they dissociate away from it and deny it.

Why are you so autistically painting it in black and white. It's either "Prime JB" or "old bitches" for you.

Let me explain to you how it works for normal non-pedophilic males:

A hot girl is a hot girl, regardless of her age, obviously until menopause. A hot "old bitch" is hotter than an ugly JB, and a hot JB, even if she's barely pubescent is hotter than an ugly "old bitch".

For most males age is not the primary factor, unlike for you.

Obviously most males like young girls, you can argue what is the most desired age group and whatever, but ultimately it's about the individual girl in question, not about her age.

For you it's primarily about age, and if she fits your preferred age group, only then you can start to evaluate her as an individual.

You got it all backwards.

Re:

by mrz » July 2016

Ona (Thailand) wrote:
mrz wrote:


You are like a Christian trying to argue there is a non-literal interpretation of the Bible, in a form of apologism for the outlandishness of the beliefs of the religiously delusional. There is a reason why people get locked up for sentences equivalent to actually doing what is in pictures they look at, and it is not because these people are using this logic figuratively, the people who preach these things literally in their insanity believe them to be true, that is why they say them, that is why their actions reflect them, they are followers of a religion that was fashioned out of a collection of prison industry propaganda.


1. How the Christian Bible can be interpreted non-literally does not seem to make sense -- since it is said by believers to be the Word of God.

2. For the second point, I really believe that people mean this in a metaphoric sense. It would surprise me if people were to believe that magical voodoo were at work. Common sense tells us that if a man were to look at a naked image of a 10 year old girl and she would feel a sharp pin prick on her arm -- then 10,000 men viewing this from the deep web using Tor would give her a fatal heart attack. People who ostensibly claim a voodoo effect must be either using the term figuratively or they are being disingenuous in a similar way to how insensitive Westerners throw the phrase "Karma is a b*tch" around to describe people who were punished for their bad behavior. As you know, this is not how Karma works in Hinduism and Buddhism.

If you could provide us a sample of a case where it is claimed that every time a paedophile looks at a photo of a child then a child is being hurt, we could examine this in depth. Keep in mind that people who are bound by identity politics or who are social activists feel that they must use dramatic gestures to become noticed by society. If you were to ask such a person who claims to believe in such a thing and ask about the physical mechanism of how the child is come to be hurt, the person likely could not give you an answer -- perhaps because the person does not really believe it and was just throwing the phrase around (similar to the phrase which mis-describes Karma) in order to shock and overcome any resistance to the ideologic position. This is similar to an "either-or" kind of thinking where the U.S. former president George Bush Jr once claimed that if we don't stand behind the fight against Evil, then we are One with the Terrorists. Subsequently a former Canadian Government Minister once claimed that if we are not with them in the fight against child pornography, then we are one with the pornographers. These are all simple and common tactics used by minority-view rights activists to get their views adopted by mainstream society. Sadly we are all falling for it.


There are many such cases, here is one that was analyzed on human-stupidity.com

“However, what he didn’t turn his mind to at the time is that merely having possession and viewing images such as this does victimize and hurt the individual portrayed in the image. He appreciates that now.” Senior gets jail time, probation for having single image of child pornography


another

http://fox8.com/2012/05/21/former-pasto ... n-charges/

"we hear that in court that they feel like they are victimized every single time someone downloads their videos or looks at their videos they feel like they are being raped all over again,” said Canonico.


We don't even need to analyze their fundamentalist beliefs to show their insanity though, do you think they were also being figurative when they claimed that the CP industry is a 20 billion dollar industry, despite having absolutely no evidence for this, and it actually being contradicted by reality? Did they say 20 billion figuratively? The risk I run of showing you how insane these people are, is that you will rationalize their insanity to not be dumbfounded at how it could be that these people are actually in power, so if you want to argue about if people actually believe in voodoo theory literally or if it is just a figure of speech, what about their false claims of the billion dollar CP industry, or any of their other claims for that matter?

You need to keep in mind that almost half of people in the USA strongly believe that the Universe came in to existence 10,000 years ago and the first humans were Adam and Eve, their entire history is disconnected from reality, like they have a completely separate time line from reality, even as recently as the formation and early foundation of the USA is almost complete fabricated by them, many of them believe the USA was founded as a religious nation after the founders fled from Christian oppression in the UK, like their entire history is false, their entire theory of how man came into existence is false, they think language existed prior to humans and from the beginning of time, that a magical Jew lives in sky and is waging a war against a demon that they need to participate in, and they commonly converse with themselves as if they are actually communicating with a being that doesn't exist, like the list really goes on and on of their beliefs that are completely disconnected from reality, and that is only focusing on one thing, many people also anti-vaxx, like there is just an abundance of completely insane beliefs in the minds of people in USA, so why do you think that they are not serious when they explicitly claim that looking at CP causes the people depicted to be hurt and to be like they are raped all over again, they obviously really believe this they literally treat the issue as if the people looking at such images are raping children and they say looking at such images causes them to be raped all over again, so yeah they honestly actually do believe in this but we don't even need to focus on their most fundamentalist mystical beliefs we can look at ones that are less rabidly insane.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:49 am.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by ihateallwomen » July 2016

Normies just stick to the majority opinion to feel better about themselves. If the media told them the sky is not blue they will start harassing anyone who says otherwise. They are just useful idiots for the government.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

In the above I would interpret the same. Note the use of the phrase "feel like" twice in the same sentence which implies that this "voodoo effect" is figurative in meaning. In English "like" or "as" is even weaker than metaphor. Also the alleged victim does not know when a man downloads a naked image of her as a child; she is simply imagining being "hurt" whenever she imagines a man doing it. It is all in her mind.


If it is all in her mind then why do they care if people look at it or not it has no effect on her and it is still something she will imagine regardless of any instantiation of it. They are using this not as a figure of speech, but as the justification for their laws, but their figure of speech has nothing in support of their argument. They need to stop people from looking at CP....because the person in it doesn't like imagining people looking at it.....even though she will still imagine that if people look at it or not, and people looking at it has no effect on her whatsoever. Their utterance is only coherently related to the argument they support with it if it is actually literally true, if it is a figure of speech for what it is actual reality it is incoherently used for that, a non-sequitur.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by PillowHumper » July 2016

The United States is more anti religion than ever before and things are as worse as ever

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by mrz » July 2016

This line of thought actually reminds me of another belief I've seen from the believers,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_por ... _and_abuse

Several professors of psychology state that memories of child abuse are maintained as long as visual records exist, are accessed, and are "exploited perversely."[6][10]


This is another absurd claim that is reminiscent of your argument that they are figuratively making such a statement, like here they are not arguing that voodoo is taking place when the images are viewed, but rather that viewing them somehow maintains the memory of child abuse.

Taken literally this implies that the people depicted cannot forget it unless people stop viewing the images, but obviously this is not true. Taken figuratively to mean that new people will have a memory of the picture form, it is incoherent as an argument, if we replace the figurative speech with its literal definition, this would be to say that looking at some pictures should be illegal because the people who look at them will remember having seen them otherwise, which is pretty much circular reasoning, like it should be illegal to look at them because it should be illegal to remember having looked at them.

Besides I've seen underage porn legally in foreign countries, and I can to some extent visually recall it, like that is a visual record encoded into my brain, and sometimes I even fantasize thinking about them, like their argument is essentially that my memory of that will be maintained so long as my memory of that is maintained, which is pretty inherently obvious and not seemingly related.

So if we assume they mean what they say then they are saying coherent things but they are mystical and have no actual connection to reality, and if we assume they are speaking figuratively, then the actual intended meanings of their figures of speech are incoherent to their argument.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:49 am.

Re: You won't believe these 8 OUTRAGEOUS beliefs of the PIC!

by phaggit » July 2016

what do you hope to accomplish with these threads? you've convinced no one other than low sentience mentally ill schizoids like yourself. you're just fishing for pedophiles for the fbi now.

[Deleted]

by Ona (Thailand) » July 2016

This post by Ona (Thailand) was deleted by Ona (Thailand) on Sat Aug 06, 2016 2:49 am.
Post a reply

Topic Tags