Pro Pedophilia

>>2719199
Of course. They were satanic too.

>>2719199
Like anything, there were factions. Kinda like asking, "do all Christians really do whatever the pope says?" When not all Christians give 2 shits about the Pope, and even a lot of catholics don't care. There was NAMBLA though and I think they are still extant

>>2719199
there wasn't something called pedophile before 60s or 70s

>>2719199
Probably since they realized that they have nothing in common with each other

File: 1410287920607.jpg (10KB, 232x236px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 232x236px

>>2719227

>>2719199
Pederasty is the traditional form of homosexuality seen throughout history and in other cultures and species. In a historical and sociological context, gays share a lot more in common with boy lovers than with lesbians, and certainly more than with transgender/genderqueer people, which are labels that describe an internal identity rather than an external attraction like gay/lesbian/child lover.

Politically, though, "between consenting adults" is a very strong line with broad appeal, and applies equally to gays and lesbians, but dubiously to child lovers. Because of this and hysteria about commercialized child abuse (which is completely fabricated propaganda; there never was a meaningful market for child pornography before or after it was banned in the early 70s, and certainly not for the sadistic shit most people think of when the topic is brought up), the gay pride movement cut its ties to the sinking pedophile ship.

File: 1-2.jpg (31KB, 640x254px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 640x254px

>>2719618
>there never was a meaningful market for child pornography before or after it was banned in the early 70s, and certainly not for the sadistic shit most people think of when the topic is brought up

wrong.

https://www.wearethorn.org/child-pornography-and-abuse-statistics/

>>2719199
yes, google Nambla

>>2719639
I'm not saying sadistic shit doesn't exist, I'm saying that the vast majority of those 22M images are going to be of willing child models by professional photographers with parental consent. None of the other statistics on that page are particularly relevant to anything. Certain P2P networks have a relatively high concentration of pedophiles compared to the general population. That's nice, I suppose.

>>2719199
Yeah, the abolition of age of consent laws was loudly demanded by gay acceptance movements.
>>2719227
Yeah sure, the first confermed death because of aids in america got hiv when he was 13 but that's just a coincidence.

>>2719734
cp generates $3 billion yearly so to say that there's no meaningful market for it is just wrong and furthermore just because a photographer has training and the parents consent does not mean abuse isn't taking place.

parents of child actors are notorious for looking the other way when their children get molested because they know it will help their career which means fame and $$$ so who cares what goes on during those private "contract negotiations."

>>2719778
>cp generates $3 billion yearly so to say that there's no meaningful market for it is just wrong
That's actually the specific made-up propaganda number I was referring to. The vast majority of actual child porn, including hardcore (involving penetration) and softcore (no penetration), but not nude or non-nude modeling (which wouldn't considered porn at all if the subjects were adults) or candid nudist/naturist content (which is actually legal and protected by the First Amendment, but often gets counted in "images of abuse" statistics anyway), is created at home by "hobbyists" and traded to other "hobbyists" in exchange for OC. Feel free to substitute a better word there, but the fact of the matter is that very little money actually changes hands in this "market."

There's an actual history to that "$3 billion" number that involves a lot of politicians and reporters multiplying questionable figures by arbitrary numbers, and corroborated by LEAs confiscating old (legal) copies of magazines like Lolita and Paidika, and estimating their value at many thousands of dollars apiece (prices that they have never and will never fetch on the open market) to claim that they "destroyed X millions worth of child porn last year."

I'll also point out that the adult porn industry is claimed to be worth $10 billion annually. Claiming that pedophiles (who account for roughly 2% of the population) are spending a third of that implies that each is spending over 15 times as much as the average person on porn.
>furthermore just because a photographer has training and the parents consent does not mean abuse isn't taking place.
No, but the fact that the photographer has a business reputation to uphold and parents don't typically send their children off to be raped implies that the models aren't necessarily unwilling victims of exploitation. In fact, most child models seek out new studios whenever one is shut down because an LEA decided it published one too many nip slips.