Celebrities, public figures, current events, internet drama:Who can be a part of our community? All races, ethnicities, religions, gay or straight, cis or trans: We don't care. If you can rock with us: You are one of us
Community Featured Submissions will now be updated on a regular basis on our wiki(Onionfarms.online). Just click on the tab
Last Update January 21, 2025

Kiwifarms Gossip & Slap Fights Kiwi Farms Moderators

These threads cover general gossip and interacting with Kiwifarms (openly calling them out).
kiwifails said:
Nothing you have said disputes anything I have said you've simply picked apart the wording and then diverted the conversation back to your original point.

Worse you're willfully ignoring everything I said and then trying to twist it into your own logic.
If and when you're able to actually come up with a response to what I said then let me know
Click to expand...
Because you're arguing like a BPHag and moralizing about something to justify your dislike of something. An adult female with a following of adult males can never be equated to pedophilia because none of the people involved in this are minors. If Pokimane or whoever else are the top female streamers right now did a high pitched anime voice on stream, it would not be pandering to pedophiles. If they put on an outfit associated while minors while doing the same, it would not be pedophilia because the people involved are above the age of consent. Twitch and YouTube require ID verification for paying out anything so they're legally of age.

Gross furries putting on diapers and shitting themselves like a baby as the resident furries do means they should be lit on fire in their fursuits but it's still not pedophilic because again, the people engaging in it are all of age. This isn't saying that a vtuber can't be a pedophile because that would involve something other than their persona, like "cranking it to nekoshota" like Null. Or just outright involved with minors in their fan base.

It's just sad and pathetic that people watch streamers out of lust or desperation to begin with. That's all that's needed to ridicule it. You don't have to invent moral outrage to justify your ridicule. It's perfectly okay to just make fun of shit. But the same crusades that took over tumblr then twitter and now KF is equating everything they don't like with pedophilia because it's the easiest thing to dunk on. You're just being obtuse because you want a reason to be mad at it instead of just laughing at how sad it. This is the same as every KF thread that is now nothing but the same holier-than-thou while posting in the thread for twelve hours a day about it.

All of this is just a tl;dr of:
The Washington Ogre said:
We don't have to pretend it's some great evil.
You can just not like something. This isn't KF where you must convince yourself that everything and everyone you don't like is pedophilia.
Click to expand...
 
The Washington Ogre said:
Retardation
Click to expand...
I think you're completely missing the point here. The issue with VTubers catering to lolicon isn't about adult women using high-pitched voices or wearing certain outfits. It's about the fact that they're creating content that fetishizes children. You can't just hand-wave this away by saying it's "sad and pathetic" that people watch streamers for lust or desperation.

Your argument that it's not pedophilic because the streamers and their audience are adults is a red herring. The issue isn't about the age of the people involved, it's about the content itself. Lolicon is a specific genre that has a very clear and disturbing theme.

You're trying to deflect criticism of VTubers by comparing them to other forms of adult entertainment, but that's not a valid comparison. The issue is that VTubers are creating content that's explicitly designed to appeal to people who are attracted to children.

I'm not asking you to agree with me, but I am pointing out that your argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue.
You're focusing on the wrong thing. The issue is with the fact that VTubers are creating content that's designed to appeal to people who are attracted to children.
 
kiwifails said:
It's about the fact that they're creating content that fetishizes children.
Click to expand...
This is no different than a woman in a schoolgirl outfit who is fetishizing a high school or younger girl. They're explicitly invoking the image of an underage woman in this scenario. You're blurring the lines between fiction and reality to get to this point. The people watching are aware it's an adult they're watching no matter what fantastical elements being presented by the streamer's cartoon model. The cartoon is also not a 500 year old dragon either or whatever anime excuse there is. Attraction to an of-age female is not pedophilic no matter how you want to frame it, otherwise we're back to the height or bust of consent argument.

This has derailed a thread and I won't reply further.
 
The Washington Ogre said:
Retard
Click to expand...
"I think you're completely missing the point here. The issue with VTubers catering to lolicon isn't about adult women using high-pitched voices or wearing certain outfits. It's about the fact that they're creating content that fetishizes children. You can't just hand-wave this away by saying it's "sad and pathetic" that people watch streamers for lust or desperation.

Your argument that it's not pedophilic because the streamers and their audience are adults is a red herring. The issue isn't about the age of the people involved, it's about the content itself. Lolicon is a specific genre that has a very clear and disturbing theme.

You're trying to deflect criticism of VTubers by comparing them to other forms of adult entertainment, but that's not a valid comparison. The issue is that VTubers are creating content that's explicitly designed to appeal to people who are attracted to children.

I'm not asking you to agree with me, but I am pointing out that your argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue. You're focusing on the wrong thing. The issue is with the fact that VTubers are creating content that's designed to appeal to people who are attracted to children.
 
The Washington Ogre said:
This is no different than a woman in a schoolgirl outfit who is fetishizing a high school or younger girl.
Click to expand...
I've already explained the difference you're willfully ignoring it
The Washington Ogre said:
They're explicitly invoking the image of an underage woman in this scenario
Click to expand...
I know you're being willfully stupid however a woman wearing a schoolgirl outfit it's still a grown woman wearing a schoolgirl outfit that's not the same as creating a child like Avatar and pretending to be a child so you can attract pedophiles specifically
The Washington Ogre said:
You're blurring the lines between fiction and reality to get to this point.
Click to expand...
No I'm really not
The Washington Ogre said:
The people watching are aware it's an adult they're watching no matter what fantastical elements being presented by the streamer's cartoon model.
Click to expand...
Again not the point they are specifically creating content that panders to people that have an interest in pedophilia that is what lolicon is.
Even in Japan it's a form of child porn
The Washington Ogre said:
The cartoon is also not a 500 year old dragon either or whatever anime excuse there is.
Click to expand...
I don't know what the hell you're talking about
The Washington Ogre said:
Attraction to an of-age female is not pedophilic no matter how you want to frame it, otherwise we're back to the height or bust of consent argument.
Click to expand...
Go back and look at the clips and ask yourself if that's the same as a pornstar wearing a schoolgirl skirt
The Washington Ogre said:
This has derailed a thread and I won't reply further.
Click to expand...
That's because you don't have an argument and you never did but if you're into lollicon then clearly you have an attraction to children otherwise you wouldn't be cranking it two pictures of little girls.
 
The Washington Ogre said:
This is no different than a woman in a schoolgirl outfit who is fetishizing a high school or younger girl. They're explicitly invoking the image of an underage woman in this scenario. You're blurring the lines between fiction and reality to get to this point. The people watching are aware it's an adult they're watching no matter what fantastical elements being presented by the streamer's cartoon model. The cartoon is also not a 500 year old dragon either or whatever anime excuse there is. Attraction to an of-age female is not pedophilic no matter how you want to frame it, otherwise we're back to the height or bust of consent argument.

This has derailed a thread and I won't reply further.
Click to expand...
You're really grasping at straws now. You're trying to equate a woman in a schoolgirl outfit with a VTuber who's explicitly invoking the image of an underage girl? That's a false equivalence. A woman in a schoolgirl outfit is not pretending to be a child, she's an adult wearing a costume. A VTuber who's creating a character that's designed to look like a child is a completely different story.

And no, the people watching are not just aware that it's an adult behind the stream. They're also aware that the streamer is presenting themselves as a child, and that's what's driving the attraction. You can't just separate the fantasy from the reality here, because the fantasy is specifically designed to evoke a certain response.

And as for your 'height or bust of consent' argument, that's a strawman. No one is saying that attraction to an of-age female is pedophilic. The issue is that these VTubers are creating content that's designed to appeal to people who are attracted to children. It's not about the age of the streamer, it's about the content they're creating.

And finally, I love how you're running away from this conversation with your tail between your legs, claiming that the thread has been 'derailed'. That's just a cop-out. You can't handle the fact that your argument has been thoroughly debunked, so you're trying to retreat with dignity. Sorry, it's too late for that. Your argument has been exposed for what it is: a weak attempt to defend the indefensible.
 
Everywhere a sock sock.
autisticright.jpg
 
VAIDS Victim said:
Everywhere a sock sock.
View attachment 75612
Click to expand...
This guy has probably developed schizophrenia ever since a swatting incident was blamed on both Kiwi Farms and AltristicRight.

They've busted the swatter that actually did it (I think it was two idiots from Europe that did it) but this guy has been slowly losing his mind and keeps seeing sock puppets and glowies everywhere.

He's slowly turning into Terry A. Davis.
 
AltisticRight is dumb and doesn't know people still got older than 50 but the general life expectancy was lower because of infant and maternal mortality. The real reason girls got "married" at 12 is that they were actually betrothed or promised to someone, not married.
altisticrightdoesntunderstandlifeexpectantancy.jpg
I'm not even religious but the logic of "God impregnated Mary so paedophilia is okay" sounds so disgusting and batshit insane to me, it might as well be an r/atheism shitpost, completely devoid of (I hate this word) nuance and context.

The acceptable age of marriage for Jewish girls back then was 12, though often it was a lot older for the marriage to actually happen. Their logic is paedophilic and blasphemous because we don't know how old she actually was. Though the acceptable age of marriage is that, it often happens during the late teens and early twenties. This was the early years where the life expectancy of an average person is 50, child psychology wasn't even considered. The life expectancy effectively doubled, so was it really a stretch to establish an age of consent figure that corresponds with the general age of independency, which is 18 for normal people and 30 for groypers? If anything, the age of consent with groypers should be fucking 30. It should be classified as zoophilia because groypers are basically animals, or just necrophilia because they're as logical as a dead person.

I'm pretty sure there's a very special place in Hell for those that use the foundation of Christianity to justify their child rape fantasies. Maybe this is ragebait, but I feel like most are being genuine with their paedophilia.
Click to expand...
Here's an excerpt from an article, confirming my theory that Altistic is an uneducated dumbass who thinks everyone used to die young until the modern age:
The very term “average age at death” also contributes to the myth. High infant mortality brings down the average at one end of the age spectrum, and open-ended categories such as “40+” or “50+” years keep it low at the other. We know that in 2015 the average life expectancy at birth ranged from 50 years in Sierra Leone to 84 years in Japan, and these differences are related to early deaths rather than differences in total lifespan. A better method of estimating lifespan is to look at life expectancy only at adulthood, which takes infant mortality out of the equation; however, the inability to estimate age beyond about 50 years still keeps the average lower than it should be.
Click to expand...
www.sapiens.org

Did Ancient People Die Young?

Many of us believe our ancestors lived much shorter lives than we do. Cutting-edge archaeology shows otherwise.
www.sapiens.org www.sapiens.org
 
What is the point of ban appeals when you just get a random permaban? Its basically you get an arbitrary permaban, come back on a new account, and then they act like that's breaking the rules. When you don't know who exactly banned you or what you did wrong and the staff there don't take moderation positions seriously and do nothing but powertrip. So why the hell should anyone give a shit about what they think? They can just fuck off.
 
VAIDS Victim said:
AltisticRight is dumb and doesn't know people still got older than 50 but the general life expectancy was lower because of infant and maternal mortality. The real reason girls got "married" at 12 is that they were actually betrothed or promised to someone, not married.
View attachment 76370

Here's an excerpt from an article, confirming my theory that Altistic is an uneducated dumbass who thinks everyone used to die young until the modern age:

www.sapiens.org

Did Ancient People Die Young?

Many of us believe our ancestors lived much shorter lives than we do. Cutting-edge archaeology shows otherwise.
www.sapiens.org www.sapiens.org
Click to expand...
Apparently Altristic Right never bothered to read the Old Testament where God is shown to be perfectly okay with his people plundering other nations and take their virgin women and girls for themselves.

People make fun of Islam because its founder is a pedophile (the story of Muhammad and Aisha) but even in the context of Judaism and Christianity, God himself never seem to have an issue with his people engaging in the rape of women and forcibly take girls for themselves.

Here's some Bible verses that show God approving of kidnapping, rape, mass murder, and pedophilia:
Exodus 21: 7-10
Numbers 31: 1-18
Deuteronomy 20: 10-14
Judges 21: 7-11
Judges 21: 20-23

Altristic Right is not wrong that the Gropyers are freaks that use religion that justify doing bad things to other people but the Groypers aren't wrong that God doesn't seem to care about pedophilia because it says so in the Bible itself (it's not really blasphemy if it's down written in a holy book where said texts are considered canon).

Whether it's in the context of Judaism, Christianity, or Islam; the God of these three religions simply does not care about rape, kidnapping, pedophilia, mass murder, or other war crimes so long as it's done in his name (God described in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible and God described in the Quran does not care about the sensibilities of modern day people and this includes those on Kiwi Farms).

Obviously society has an obligation to protect children from dangerous predators but what I find laughable is that I don't even know why Kiwi Farms still shills for Christianity where if they want to oppose pedophilia so much then just convert to some form of European paganism instead (European paganism is actually white and you usually don't have a deity present that approves of war crimes).

Holy fuck, Christianity isn't even white, it was a religion that has its origins in ancient Israel (during the age of the Roman Empire) that was simply adopted by the white man as Rome began to decline. The ancient Greek religion, the ancient Roman religion, the ancient Norse religion, various forms of Slavic paganism, paganism found in the British isles, and other native European religions are more white than Christianity when you think about it. I don't understand why the vast majority of those on Kiwi Farms (and other similar groups online) promote Christianity when it's a religion that is the sequel to Judaism and half of the stuff written in the Bible are stuff that the Kiwis would oppose to anyway.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top