/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Where lolis are free speech and Hitler did nothing wrong

Index Catalog Archive Bottom Refresh
Name
Options
Subject
Message

Max message length: 12000

files

Max file size: 32.00 MB

Total max file size: 50.00 MB

Max files: 5

Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more

E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and posts)

Misc

Remember to follow the Rules

The backup domains are located at 8chan.se and 8chan.cc. TOR access can be found here, or you can access the TOR portal from the clearnet at Redchannit 3.0.

US Election Thread

8chan.moe is a hobby project with no affiliation whatsoever to the administration of any other "8chan" site, past or present.

Be sure to visit /polarchive/ for file libraries and our companions at /hispol/ Remember to archive all links, and videos should be attached to posts or using a front end

(475.92 KB 1366x2092 pmq2.jpg)

Explain this Anonymous 07/29/2020 (Wed) 23:07:17 No. 1238
>12 year old woman cannot consent >male infant can consent to circumcision Explain this.
>>7106 This. Jews are evil.
(39.08 KB 291x219 putjew4.jpg)

>>10918 Shalom. We are not evil. Our leaders rule the world. Because we have a soul. What about you?
hola
>>10926 The statements 'we are not evil' and 'our leaders rule the world' are mutually exclusive. The group that rules the world is therefore responsible for every bad thing that happens in the world. They would also be responsible for any good things that happen, but that's immaterial because good things don't fucking happen.
>>10926 kike retard
>>1459 This is terrifying stuff. Has the game been rigged from the start just because I was circumsized??
The best society works like this: >White (Christo-Gentile, West-European, Indo-Aryan, and Caucasoid-Europoid) Males (Genetically possessed of at least one Male Chromosome) are citizens and East-Asian Males are civilians. >Only these two categories of humans beings are legally considered people, living beings, or even as sentient, sapient, conscious or animate entities in the government's official capacity, this means that only they have any freedoms, rights, or protections in the eyes of the state and law, however, this also means that they are the only two categories of humans who have any legal accountability. >Citizens are different from civilians in that the citizens are able to serve in law enforcement or national defense, which is a requirement for eligibility to participate in the political processes or be employed by the government. >The status these two categories share, personhood, grants another power, the power to claim ownership of anyone or anything who does not hold the status of "person" if they are the first to possess them (meaning they are not owned by any other "persons"). >This includes all of those who are not White or East-Asian, and all of those who are Female, it also includes anything that is not alive (such as corpses), not human (such as animals), or not biological (such as pretty much anything else, with the sole exception of the entirety of the Earth, celestial objects, satellites, or other such cosmic phenomena). >This means that, among others, all females are slaves or pets, or property that just happens to be alive for a time, they are protected to a degree by the property rights of the person(s) who have ownership of them, in that as the property of another, any physical interaction directed towards them is illegal unless their owner consents to it, and even then only within the limits of what their owner consented to, and the owner can withdraw their consent to the action at any time. Naturally, if their owner consents to anything to be done with (or to) them they have no protections under the law from that, and of course, this also means that they have no protection from their master(s) whatsoever. >While this sounds terrible, it's not actually that bad, as most masters treat their property with respect so long as their property reciprocates, not only because the White and Yellow races are noble enough to do so, but also for more practical reasons. >Mistreatment of one's property is a disadvantage for the owner who does it, and whatever short lived cheap thrills they get from this does not make up for the long lived consequences of doing it, reproductive failure weeds out the genetic traits that produce such a psychology, social stigma ruins the lives of the abusive masters, resources are wasted and destroyed for a gain that doesn't justify the expenses, etc. >Even ignoring that, there is yet another more dire reason not to wantonly abuse one's property, and that is that slaves are not completely powerless against their masters, remember when I said that people are accountable for their actions? this means that slaves are not, but then, if a slave commits a crime, who suffers the punishment for that crime? the answer is that their masters do, and this means that a master assumes responsibility for whatever their slave is convicted of doing, and is punished for their actions in the place of their slave as a consequence. It is this risk that puts a lot of persons off from taking slaves (or pets, as all the rules that apply to slaves also apply to all other forms of animate and/or living varieties of property). >The life of a typical girl is thus quite simple, at birth, she is owned by her father, who raises her with the intent of giving ownership of her away to her husband once he finishes up his compulsory term of service to his country in enforcing the law and defending the nation, who was likely arranged for her when she was born by the fathers of her and her husband, when she has a daughter, that daughter will be the property of her husband, the whole life of the girl and her daughter will be lived under the protection and direction of her father and husband, most of it will be spent in the home, but a good deal of it will be spent out and about on tasks such as shopping, a good bit of influence for her will be in commanding the other slaves of her household, as she has power over them due to her higher status in the house, and in the fact that it is she who is in charge of her children's education and upbringing.It's pretty much going to resemble the arrangement of the middle ages. >Just as there could be fathers with many daughters, there could be husbands with many wives, same rules apply, but with a hierarchy, such as one that places wives of the same race as the husband over those of the other race, or the wives who came before over those who came after. >Under this system, evolution will take place, in both women and men, men will become better husbands and masters, while women became better wives and slaves. >Slaves of unperson races, and their descendants will be marked, such that their ancestry is always apparent, the mark will represent the unperson race to which they belong, jews get a six-point star with one point directed upwards, arabs get the same star, but smaller and over a crescent laying on it's back, and so on, over the generations, when all their racial traits have been mixed out, the mark will remain to tell them apart from purebred peoples, it will be said repeatedly that the jewish women will be the lowest of the human slaves, with only robots/ai, beasts, and the deceased below them, directly above her is the jewish man, and with the arabs above them both in the second place, and establishing a whole hierarchy of races based on how much of a pain in the ass that they were to Whites in the recent years before the new empire was founded. Here are the arguments: - Holy Bible has nothing against pedophilia or polygamy, like it does against all other sorts of activities, and besides it's a Christian tradition to ignore the Bible or to be ignorant of the Bible in the process of deciding what their idea of what is a Christian or Unchristian practice, for example, incest is prohibited but was practiced by Christians for a long time, including during it's most devout periods, wearing or worshiping a cross is both worshipping at the base of an idol and a graven image of the lord and his servants, not to mention all the times the lord's name is spoken in the process. - Both practices were a tradition that spanned the majority of European history, both Christisan and Pre-Christian. - The jews want to keep it illegal and hated, but also want to engage in it themselves as well as leave it as a special privilege for their pets to partake in, as a means of incentivizing them and controlling them, the only time they start advocating acceptance is when they want to take the heat off of someone they need to protect for their own purposes at the time. Like with nationalism, and imperialism, this must mean that it's something they know is good to have, and so wish to maintain exclusive control over this.
>>10343 4 year old teens exist though. Precocious puberty's a bitch. https://www.thecut(Please use archive.today)/2019/01/precocious-puberty-patrick-burleigh.html
>>11677 >Kikes pushing pedo propaganda is real life Fuck off
>>11682 If jews supported pedophilia in general rather than just for themselves and their shabbos goyim, it would be legal right now, there's nothing to stop them from making it legal, or from preventing those who engage in it from suffering consequences. But none of that has happened, why? because it's more useful to them to make it illegal and keep it that way, te culture they create has treated this stuff like the worst crime ever, and the only time they've broke from this was when their shabbos goys got exposed for making use of their jew-given kiddy-fiddling priviledges, also in hastening the indoctrination of children into homosexuality and transgenderism by simulating the traumatizing abuse most homos and trannies have gone through (the goal here is not acceptance of pedophilia as much as it is the promotion of anti-nataist behaviors like homophilia and becoming sterile). For most of human history, there was no such thing as "age of consent", even where rape was a crime, for most of that history age never factored into it, it's an age old European tradition to take a wife, concubine, or lover as young as possible, with age never arising as a question into the legitimacy of the pairing (nationality, religion, breeding, and class would be questioned, but never age). The prohibition of "pedophilia" is a very recent occurrence, and the concept of "pedophilia" as being some sort of defect (instead of natural human sexuality) is only slightly less recent. It's a trait justified by evolution. - by taking a partner as young as possible, a strong bond is formed by the younger to the older, resulting in a more loyal and stable relationship, which is good for ensuring your children are yours and not someone else's, and that the partner is invested in caring for your offspring, - furthermore, you will be the first to mate with them when they reach the age of fertility, and can max out the length of their fertile period for as many offspring as you can bear together, each child is a carrier of the genes of you and your partner, so more children means more chances for you to have grandchildren. - also, being in a relationship at a young age has a benefit before fertility hits, in that the younger has a chance to learn how to be a partner in a relationship before they produce children, and the act of sex is not something new to them by the time it becomes procreative, meaning they will be less put off by it at the time when it starts making babies. - look at the cultures that produce large families, they tend to have very permissive attitudes towards prepubescent children having sex, and little issue with taking multiple sexual partners for yourself. If there is a key component to the revival of a dying race, this would be it. If it were up to me the type of society I'd want would be the type I recently described in this thread, White (and Yellow) Males owning everything and everyone else, including White (and Yellow) Females, being able to do whatever they please with their property. It'd remove laws on the things that I do consider to be degenerate acts of mental sickness as well, such as incest, bestiality, and homophilia, but that's alright, because that's truly going to be just between the masters and their slaves. This would be a world conquered by White Males, meaning no other countries of humans to deal with, and the government will adopt a night-watchman minarchist state, but modified such that the NAP only applies to certain people (White and Yellow Males), and political power is only given to a subset of that population (White Males), the government only exists to enforce the law and defend the nation, just the bare necessities of government to do the bare minimum of government functions. Which means that the rest of the population will be free to live their lives truly unaffected by their actions, as there'd be no government intervention making it their problem, there'd be no government laws forcing them to associate with them or preventing them from disassociating from them (you won't have to bake the cake, and you wont need any justification as to who works for you or who you serve with your own goddamn business, because it's literally your own goddamn business, also you wont have to live around them, and can say whatever you like about them, such as calling the sick fuckers what they are - sick fuckers), no government schools forcing the children to learn about the degenerates and why they should be accepted as if they were just as good (if not better) than the mentally healthy, no taxes being given to pay for the consequences of degeneracy (meaning degenerates have to suffer the full brunt of the consequences themselves, perhaps serving as an incentive to not be such sick fucks), etc. I would make a law that homophilia is prohibited between persons (White Males and Yellow Males), but with one twist, if one of those involved in the activity reports it before it;s discovered by anyone else, they are treated as if they weren't involved and only the other involved parties are punished. Only acts that could transmit sexual diseases between the parties are counted as crimes. Also there'd be an age of consent for White and Yellow Males, the age being 25, and there is a harsher sentence for those who are above this age if they do acts of homophilia with those who are below it (oldfags get BTFO).
>>11692 > For most of human history, there was no such thing as "age of consent" That's because you were considered an adult with responsibilities by the age of 10, and very few people lived beyond their 40's (Unless they were at the highest of heights of society).
>>11724 That's false. The average life expectancy was mostly cut down by infant and child mortality due to starvation and illness, but if you got past the early years where you were fragile to disease and hunger, you could survive easily into old age, especially if you were wealthy enough to afford care in your later years. Also, children were expected to take on adult responsibilities as early as they were able to carry them out. Females are a resource, a resource with unique value to males as a source of pleasure (sexual and otherwise), and with a value to their genes as a means of producing more organisms that carry copies of themselves in them. Females can provide other uses in addition to those, such as labor and companionship, but so could other males. When it comes to the "adult" responsibility of sex, all it takes from the female is just to be present, the male will find a way to use her body to make his genitals feel good so that his semen comes out. She is capable of this from the time she is born. Therefore the limiting factor is to her survivability, which depends on her, but also on what the male does with her, some acts will "break" her (kill her or leave her unable to produce children), and the males who use their females for these acts will be left unable to use her for the purpose of passing on copies of their genes, this would include genes for behaviors, such as the ones that led to the deaths of their females, thus these males are likely to die out over successive generations with high rates of reproductive failure for the males that possess these behavioral traits. However, this is not the only factor to consider, what should also be taken into account is that for the reasons listed above, females who are left some for some period of time are more likely to survive, and this reflects upon the behavioral traits of her close male relatives, particularly their fathers, who, being the first males to encounter them, would be the first to possess, and therefore take ownership of them. This means that males with genes that instill some degree of protectiveness over their daughters would be better at passing their genetics to a third generation than those who do not. So if we make a society where males own females, and females are, in the legal sense, non-sentient objects, the stabilization of this system after the initial chaos will be one were fathers (or other male relatives taking that role), will not molest their daughters even tough there are no laws preventing it, and instead be protective of them, until the day they are passed over to another owner, who will in most cases be their husband, who, despite having no laws preventing mistreatment, will not treat her so poorly as to kill her or leave her unable to reproduce. ultimately the result will not be a vicious world of misogynistic ultraviolence and constant raping of girls and women from cradle to grave, but instead a rather peaceful world where good treatment is encouraged by pragmatic practicality, genetic behavioral traits, and sociocultural standards that originate from the other two factors, plus the preexisting elements of the nature of white males, being empathy, restraint, and decency.
>>11828 You talk about "good treatment," but they don't want that, they want to be treated as goddesses. If they aren't given everything they want with no responsibilities, then they are being oppressed. If you expect to be anything more than a slave to them, then you are just misogynist.
>>1238 >male infant can consent to circumcision I haven't heard anyone make this claim. The explanation is that nobody cares if a male consents. We are disposable utilities/tools.
>>1238 >Explain this. easy, you are a pedophile that is doing what every pedophile does, be a parasite, in this case you are attempting to parasitize anti-penile mutilation advocacy towards your efforts of making is so that you are allowed to fuck children, its merely you nature for in essence you and your fellow pedophiles are the jews of sexuality.(and am im going to assume everyone here know how jews are when it come to female goys of three years and a day old of age, which also means that jews are the jews of sexuality as well)
>>12192 >strawman Child rapist confirmed. Commit suicide.
>>12155 deboonked, straight white christian men hold all the power in society. fucking rapist scum, making poor brown transpeople touch their dirtly little white baby dicks.
but those two things aren't antithetical to one another or even related, you don't have to choose. Both genital mutilation and pedophilia are immoral you fucking tard. why are westerners so retarded.
Oh that;s anti-semetic jew babies love oral sex
>>12444 They are related. They're both having to do with a gang of niggers's ability to consent, and specifically to matters involving genitals and sexuality. Your conclusion that they're both immoral is a fine answer to OP's question, but reading it shouldn't have broken your brain so hard that you had to say the two things weren't related, when that is just ridiculous.
>>7033 the view from his window looks flat and fake
>>8563 i like how the news headline is just barely legible, to the point where if you didnt know the meme, you might not know what it says. excellent work
>>10351 i think they stop being "girls" and start being "women" around 24 or so. that probably has more to do with the modern phenomenon of extended adolescence more than anything else though. boys become men around 28 or so these days
>>12518 And yet puberty actually happens much earlier than at any time throughout history.
>>12542 >whites and asians have small dicks haha this is funny and socially acceptable >blacks have small brains omg wtf you should be killed
>>1519 >I'm ok with more re-negotiating age limitations, but abolishing them altogether is just not going to end well. it will work itself out. the natural age of consent is whichever age the father doesnt kill you for fucking his child. most likely around 16 or 17 in most cases id guess
>>12554 Much earlier than that in most societies throughout time and the globe.
>Thread about jewish blood sacrifice >Suddenly pedoshits decide to shit on the thread and derail it Every time
>>12170 im actually hebechad and 12 is perfect age for baby making nothing degenerate about it need i remind you how old was mother of god
>>1238 id get vanned if i post this on cuckchan wont i
>>15299 Is 12 even considered hebe ? There's a lot of confusion between the term pedo,loli,hebe
>>15319 under 4 - nepi 4-9 = pedo 9-16 = hebe over 16 = ephebe
>>15500 pedoniggers have as many labels as trannies do, lol.
>>12681 Look at the picture OP posted with a bunch of half-naked girls and tell me this wasn't a covert pedonigger thread from the get go.


Forms
Delete
Report
Quick Reply