I am likely going to be banned for this thread, and I am fine with that. It took me a while to realize what ADOL was talking about in his arguments.
Go ahead and apply his arguments to anything related to pedophilia, and you'll see that they actually apply better to a pro pedophilia argument. The bestiality argument is used as a wedge to get your mind to slowly wrap around the ideal that pedophilia should be legal.
He knows that if he comes on the site and does post pro pedophile arguments, that he will be immediately banned. Most are not as blatantly free speech as I am. I think his pedophile arguments, should be engaged with and defeated. If he is outright banned, he will just go find some echo chamber to blindly agree with his views and encourage him.
I want those debating ADOL, to stop using the term bestiality and explaining to ADOL, why fucking animals is wrong. I want you to directly change his words in quotations. I will use an example below to show what I mean.
original quote
BDSM isn't rape when it was consented to. Bestiality isn't rape when it is consented to. Animals have body language and vocalizations which can be used to communicate, and failing those action. A safe word only needs to be agreed upon when roleplaying non-consent because when said roleplay is not involved the safe word is "no". If the humans don't share a common language: body language such as frowning, angry yelling, pushing away, slapping, or running away cannot be misinterpreted.Just as I believe there is no way to accidentally rape a human even if you don't speak the same language I believe there is no way to accidentally rape a domesticated animal. There is an exception in both cases: if the animal/person has been viciously conditioned to never object to anything. That is very atypical. People don't call animals "stubborn" because they are unfailingly cooperative.
To unmask ADOL we need to rephrase it, even when arguing with him
BDSM isn't rape when it was consented to. sex with children isn't rape when it is consented to. Children have body language and vocalizations which can be used to communicate, and failing those action. A safe word only needs to be agreed upon when roleplaying non-consent because when said roleplay is not involved the safe word is "no". If the humans don't share a common language: body language such as frowning, angry yelling, pushing away, slapping, or running away cannot be misinterpreted.Just as I believe there is no way to accidentally rape a human even if you don't speak the same language I believe there is no way to accidentally rape a Child. There is an exception in both cases: if the child/adult has been viciously conditioned to never object to anything. That is very atypical. People don't call children "stubborn" because they are unfailingly cooperative.
I will give another example to highlight ADOL's actual position.
I didn't say I have sex with non-humans, let us say hypothetically that I have in some jurisdiction where it would be legal to do so. I could in that case know that I had the animal's consent by applying an inductive argument to their behavior (including vocalizations) in the context of my knowledge of their personality and history. That description technically describes the assessment of consent from humans as well, it is never known with 100% certainty; one simply must eliminate the absurd in order to live.Understanding exactly what I am doing to them (or in my case what they are doing to me) is a different matter entirely. We both know that bit is going in that hole. We both know that the other endorses this procedure. The animal may understand fluid is being transferred. The animal definitely doesn't understand that the fluid contains tiny machines called cells. There is no doubt something I don't understand about it as well, I can't tell you what that is but if I had lived 200 years ago I would not know about the cells.
should be changed to
I didn't say I have sex with children, let us say hypothetically that I have in some jurisdiction where it would be legal to do so. I could in that case know that I had the child's consent by applying an inductive argument to their behavior (including vocalizations) in the context of my knowledge of their personality and history. That description technically describes the assessment of consent from adults as well, it is never known with 100% certainty; one simply must eliminate the absurd in order to live.Understanding exactly what I am doing to them (or in my case what they are doing to me) is a different matter entirely. We both know that bit is going in that hole. We both know that the other endorses this procedure. The child may understand fluid is being transferred. The child definitely doesn't understand that the fluid contains tiny machines called cells. There is no doubt something I don't understand about it as well, I can't tell you what that is but if I had lived 200 years ago I would not know about the cells.
Everybody on this board who cares about children should be defending them to ADOL and engaging his arguments. I would also request anyone who is good at doing so, to work on doxxing him. This includes mods as well. Feel free to email me any information you find to [censored]. I will get ahold of police departments in his area to make sure he is being watched and does not have contact with children.
ANy PM messages to minors on the site should be reported to the mods, so they can figure out if any form of grooming is occurring and take actions. I ask children on the site, to please forward their PMs to whiteflame in order for him to decide if their is a pattern of grooming and not to judge something as innocent impulsively.
Honestly though, anyone on this site who said this shit about children would be instantly permabanned. I am not asking for that to occur, but to show you guys how people who are pedophiles and particularly unrepentent pedophiles like ADOL operate to weasel their way into online spaces.
Anyone who doubts me, needs to take a second look at his arguments, and ask if those same arguments apply to children. With children and animals we would be having the same arguments about ability to consent, but in fact his arguments would apply even better to children. By him using beasts as an example though, it makes his arguments even better because everyone ignores the long term psychological impact on ADOL's victims.
Mods, I will keep you confidential. Email me IP information and other information you have on ADOL. He may have a child near him, that is in danger at this very moment/AC
