Dude, the argument "You are wrong because you are wrong and we shouldn't talk about this because it is not time to talk about this and just say no" is fucking retarded. I am wrong because I am wrong! Oh damn dude you just ran circles around me. Now we better stop talking about this and plug our ears and just say no and maybe LALALALALA. Seriously, when the other side says "Just say no" I think it is obvious who has a foundation to stand on. I am trying to say that your attitude towards the viewing of CP is the result of cultural conditioning, and there is a very high chance that it is. Do you think if you were born and grew up in Japan that you would be in the 10% of people who are for the criminalization of child pornography viewing? I find that to be unlikely, although it is possible. You are naive if you think you are not influenced by your society. No I have never once said that because something is legal in other places it should be legal everywhere. I have specifically said that this is not what I think. Please actually read the thread before putting words into my mouth. I only mention that CP is legal to view in half of the world, and supported culturally in some countries such as Japan, to show that there is a significant probability that cultural conditioning has influenced your opinion on it, and that although you perceive your beliefs to be universal they are actually not so. Everybody who is against CP viewing and wants an age of consent at 18 thinks that the entire world agrees with them and has for all of history, I am merely correcting these people by explaining to them that their beliefs are both modern era and geographically restricted. Uhm, never said we should be able to sell kids for sex. Please if you want to debate me actually debate me instead of debating yourself by putting words into my mouth. I am so sick of people telling me in this thread that paying for CP causes abuse, kids shouldn't be molested, kids shouldn't be sold for sex, etc, because I never have claimed otherwise! You guys cannot actually debate what I am saying because it has a foundation firmly based on logic and truth, and this forces you to pretend that I am making different points than I am so you can actually pretend like you are winning. But you are just debating yourself by proxy, I am not the one making the claims that you implicitly attribute to me. I don't really consider myself to be a pedophile. I am not attracted sexually to people who have not reached puberty, or even people who have just recently reached puberty. I prefer tanner stage 4-5, with stage 4 being reached usually no earlier than age 13. By historic definitions of pedophilia (attraction to those who have not reached puberty) this would disqualify me. The DSM includes attraction up to age 13 as pedophilia today, although this age has slowly progressed over time due to political rather than scientific reasons. I feel pretty confident in saying that for the most part I am attracted primarily to those 14+ though, and as I have no attraction at all to those who have not reached puberty it seems like I would fall somewhere in between hebephilia and ephebophilia rather than pedophilia. Hebephilia includes attraction to those 11-14, ephebophilia attraction to those 15-19, however some definitions allow ephebophiles to also be attracted to 14 year olds. So I kind of overlap to some extent with all of the chronophilias, if you consider pedophilia to be attraction to those 2-13 years old you could make an argument that I am a pedophile as I find 13 year olds at tanner stage 4 to be sexually attractive, though hebephilia seems to make more sense to me as it includes 11-14, but I am not significantly attracted to 11 or 12 year olds or to 13 year olds who are not tanner stage 4, so probably ephebophilia makes the most sense if you grant a lowered starting age of 14 rather than 15 (which some allow for). Certainly ephebophilia is the only one which does not include attraction to an age group that I am not attracted to. I am also attracted to people who are in their 30's+ though. So the range of attraction to roughly 14ish-40ish could be considered a variety of different things, but none of them exclusive. Perhaps I am a non-exclusive ephebophile, that is probably what I would claim to be if asked. Personally I think it is probably the normal age range of attraction for somebody my age but most people like to pretend it is not. I also find that I am particularly attracted to those 14-20ish, so primary attraction could actually mean I am indeed an ephebophile, although lack of exclusive attraction or exceptionally particular attraction could mean I am non-exclusive. So I suppose I am a non-exclusive-preferential-ephebophile. Also, I do consider the majority of men to be similar to this, and can give a very good argument for this with several citations if you would like to hear it! I could probably even have some sexual response to some of those in late tanner stage 3, but it would be very little compared to stage 4 (which I am particularly attracted to) or 5 (which I am also quite attracted to). Anything below tanner stage 3 is universally asexual for me though. It is also worth noting that many people never progress past tanner stage 4 (which is characterized in females by adult quality pubic hair that doesn't cover quite as much area as in stage 5, and typically relatively smaller and particularly perky breasts with slightly upward pointing and more pronounced ends/nipples (as opposed to less perky generally more rounded breasts in stage 5, with level ends/nipples). I do also prefer petiteness and glowing youthful appearing skin, although this is not directly related to sexual maturation). So roughly 1 out of 4 adult females have tanner stage 4 breasts, but the large majority of those 13-15 do, with about 3/4ths of females obtaining tanner stage 5 breasts between the ages of 15 and 17, and 1/4th maintaining tanner stage 4 forever.