Female paedophile compendium & discussion on society and their enablers

  • 🔧 Site instability resolved. You can report double-posts and broken attachments. For bigger issues, use the Technical Grievances thread.
    🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
One major reason people think it's not a big deal when adolescent boys are sexually abused is they think abuse looks like a terrified young person unwillingly giving a vicious, controlling adult what they want out of fear. Since that's obviously not what happens in the vast majority of adult woman/teen boy abuse cases, people think it's not really abusive.

Problem is that is rarely what abuse looks like, including adult man/teen girl abuse. It looks like an adult taking advantage of a teenager's surging hormones outrunning their frontal cortex development, using their emotional vulnerability and poor self control to entice them into a damaging relationship they should not be in under any circumstances. In other words, Jimmy Page and Lori Mattix is the template most adult/adolescent abuse follows.

In other words, abuse generally looks like a hormonal teenager going gaga for someone who is way too old for them, and the adult who should create a safe distance and steer the teenager away doing the opposite of that.
 
no, i never said women can't rape men. in fact in a separate thread, i corrected someone who said women can't rape, and i said that women absolutely are capable of rape, just that they'd need to use objects (if you define rape by the US definition, which involves penetration).
khfjhgj.gif
Words because one-word or picture-only posts are auto-banned in Faggotdome.
 
The other day I saw a book at the store called "Evil Women" about female serial killers. Thinking it would be an interesting read, I took it to the front desk, but the clerk with told me that over 90% of serial killers are men. When I told him to ring it up anyway, it wouldn't scan. Then the book crumbled to dust in my hands, and all I could hear were the whispers from seemingly out of nowhere: "But men... But men... But men..."

I realized in that moment how silly it was to even acknowledge that women can sometimes be just as fucked up as men. Thank you, eternal gender warrior spirit, for showing me the way.

...

(But no joke if you leave your kids alone with a man especially a gay man you absolutely are a dunce)
 
let's have a thread about female pedophiles because people seem to think that because it's less frequent than male sex criminality, it's not actually bad, and if a woman rapes a boy, nobody should talk about it because only male sex crimes should ever be acknowledged

oh look

people are arguing that because female pedophilia is less frequent than male sex criminality, it's not actually bad, and if a woman rapes a boy, nobody should talk about it because only male sex crimes should ever be acknowledged
This makes complete sense when viewed from the perspective of how propaganda and activism actually work.

If you've ever read Mein Kampf (which I recommend, as it is a very interesting experience), you may recall how Uncle Adolf goes into detail about the British vs German propaganda machines and their comparative success in World War I. The British propaganda, he explains, assigned the blame completely and totally to the Germans, without giving an inch for reflection or doubt. The German propaganda was quite different - it acknowledged some concerns of the British propaganda, but maintained that Germany's enemies were still generally responsible for the conflict.

Hitler asserts that the British propaganda was far more successful (and single-handedly won the war, according to him) because the British understood the assignment. Propaganda is not a research paper. It is not a 'deep dive'. It is not fair, it is not balanced, it is not even necessarily true. Instead, it is a tool. Its purpose is to rally people to your cause - 'the ends justify the means' kind of deal. Of course, it's great if it is accurate, but accuracy is not their primary concern. Propaganda does not involve other perspectives, or counterpoints, or different topics altogether, as these muddle the message, distract from the point you are trying to make, and make you appear weaker than those who state their points with conviction and without nuance. The more easily you can water down your point to be comprehensible and unshakeable to the masses, the more you win - see slogans like 'Black Lives Matter' as an example.

It does not matter that black people are mostly killed by other black people. It does not matter that many people other than blacks are killed by police. It does not matter that black people really do commit more crime, especially violent crime, per capita. What matters is the message that, even today, so many people just passively believe via political osmosis: black people are being genocided by violent cops. That's why 'All Lives Matter' was attacked so viciously - because it muddies the waters of their own concerns, even if it's not technically false or even contrary to their own beliefs.

I doubt that most of the people gainsaying you seriously believe that there are zero female paedophiles. They merely understand (either consciously or subconsciously) that talking about female paedophiles distracts from the issue of male paedophiles, and may feed into whataboutism and 'both sides' arguments, which are topics that they want to avoid.

PS: All sexpests get the woodchipper.
 
Última edición:
Propaganda is not a research paper. It is not a 'deep dive'. It is not fair, it is not balanced, it is not even necessarily true. Instead, it is a tool. Its purpose is to rally people to your cause - 'the ends justify the means' kind of deal.

A point from history that drives this home even more is how many Rockefellers and Jews were involved in funding the civil rights movement, from the NAACP (which started almost entirely white, save for Du Bois) to the SCLC and then through Brown, before MLK ever showed up.

People think a bunch of black people just showed up. Or just MLK. Or maybe a bunch of brown pastors just showed up. Nope. People dedicated to spending millions and decades did exactly that. CEOs, lawyers, philanthropists, you name it.

The black people you were told about in school were groomed for it and backed up.

That's why when USAID(s) got shut down by Trump a lot of the propaganda disappeared for a while :story:
 
This video came across my YouTube feed (turn on English captions). It depicts a female pedophile (specifically, a mother going after her son) in a surreal, terrifying way:

This video supposedly references a Japanese phenomenon known as "リトルボーイフレンド問題" (literally: little boyfriend problem) or "リトルボーイフレンド症候群" (literally: little boyfriend syndrome). Women frustrated with or otherwise disappointed in their husbands project their romantic fantasies onto their sons, becoming doting and controlling. However, all of this comes from reading the YouTube comments, and as an Amerifat I have been unable to confirm any of this. If a Japanese Kiwi could confirm or deny this conclusively I'd be appreciative.
 
This video came across my YouTube feed (turn on English captions). It depicts a female pedophile (specifically, a mother going after her son) in a surreal, terrifying way:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=T9vg55DQDhk
This video supposedly references a Japanese phenomenon known as "リトルボーイフレンド問題" (literally: little boyfriend problem) or "リトルボーイフレンド症候群" (literally: little boyfriend syndrome). Women frustrated with or otherwise disappointed in their husbands project their romantic fantasies onto their sons, becoming doting and controlling. However, all of this comes from reading the YouTube comments, and as an Amerifat I have been unable to confirm any of this. If a Japanese Kiwi could confirm or deny this conclusively I'd be appreciative.
Hell, that's a pretty common stereotype of mothers here. I don't think it really has a name beyond something like 'boy mom' or whatever, but I've had a few friends in the wedding industry tell me that the only person who's potentially worse than a bridezilla is the groom's mom. The way my friend described it when I asked her what she meant by that was "some moms just want to fuck their sons" which is why they are so controlling. Some friends have even described meeting their boyfriend's mom in a similar sort of way.
 
This video came across my YouTube feed (turn on English captions). It depicts a female pedophile (specifically, a mother going after her son) in a surreal, terrifying way:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=T9vg55DQDhk
This video supposedly references a Japanese phenomenon known as "リトルボーイフレンド問題" (literally: little boyfriend problem) or "リトルボーイフレンド症候群" (literally: little boyfriend syndrome). Women frustrated with or otherwise disappointed in their husbands project their romantic fantasies onto their sons, becoming doting and controlling. However, all of this comes from reading the YouTube comments, and as an Amerifat I have been unable to confirm any of this. If a Japanese Kiwi could confirm or deny this conclusively I'd be appreciative.
Hell, that's a pretty common stereotype of mothers here. I don't think it really has a name beyond something like 'boy mom' or whatever, but I've had a few friends in the wedding industry tell me that the only person who's potentially worse than a bridezilla is the groom's mom. The way my friend described it when I asked her what she meant by that was "some moms just want to fuck their sons" which is why they are so controlling. Some friends have even described meeting their boyfriend's mom in a similar sort of way.

Newspaper/Magazine archive:
spectator1997.jpg
 
fucking crazy how this thread got derailed lol yes most sex offenders are men, so what... the remaining women offenders should still NOT be ignored...it is good to shed light on these topics.
woman offenders harm both boys and girls, just as men do.

At most they'll be able to tell you that it's wrong because children can't consent, even then they can't tell you why that is
thank you femboy fart huffer for possibly one of the most incoherent posts I have read in a while
a Japanese phenomenon
emotional incest and parentification in fact happens all across the globe, not just Japan
in a similar manner, other countries have names for it as well. the recent American "boy-mom" phenomenon complains and discusses this same situation
 
This video came across my YouTube feed (turn on English captions). It depicts a female pedophile (specifically, a mother going after her son) in a surreal, terrifying way:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=T9vg55DQDhk
This video supposedly references a Japanese phenomenon known as "リトルボーイフレンド問題" (literally: little boyfriend problem) or "リトルボーイフレンド症候群" (literally: little boyfriend syndrome). Women frustrated with or otherwise disappointed in their husbands project their romantic fantasies onto their sons, becoming doting and controlling. However, all of this comes from reading the YouTube comments, and as an Amerifat I have been unable to confirm any of this. If a Japanese Kiwi could confirm or deny this conclusively I'd be appreciative.
Speaking of japanese people, the feminazi ones tend to constantly mention about sexual harassment and rapes against women in the country, yet they either downplay the female-on-male ones or act indifferent. Bonus points if the male victims are underage.

20260622_135124.JPG

Western guys who think that japanese women are more "traditional" or something similar should be warned about those who think like western feminazis (or worse, like the mothers who sexually abuse their own kids). Obviously not all of them are like that, however not even asian countries are safe from hypocritical bitches who bash men and/or even downplay sexual crimes against them, regardless of their age.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo