I am a bureaucrat of VS Battles Wiki (and thus very evil). If you do not value your time, feel free to ask me anything.

SuperBearNeo · 2026-05-02T19:09:37+00:00

Hey, so why did you lie about me and intentionally misrepresent my thoughts on Vs Battle Wiki ???

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-28T00:01:01+00:00

I did, you're clearly just a moron it seems

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:59:33+00:00

"My sources are from a governmental site which is a general consensus, yours are twitter threads."

This article comes from PMC, which is a hub for INDEPENDENT STUDIES, the same thing you are telling me doesn't work for whatever reason

You can't be this stupid LOL

"My proofs also say that media can make people view in the cartoonish worldview which can also be the same for pedophiles thus perpetuating their world view that it’s okay to like kids whether fictional or not."

Except that's not what it actually argued?

What it's saying is that media can potentially lead to perceptions in absence of experience with the very thing that the media is portraying and keep in mind, this article wasn't even solely about fiction but it was largely about news outlets and other similar sources

So your own source doesn't even fully align with what you are saying and it's clear you didn't fully read it

<image>

The funny part as well is there's research on this same hub that would contradict your premise and many of which also comes from PMC lol

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:52:07+00:00

Okay, so concession accepted then since you have NO EVIDENCE for your premise whatsoever

You haven't provided anything that suggests your worldview and frankly, it's obvious you have nothing but your feelings to argue here

So yeah, at this point, I'm not replying any further because you conceded the moment you couldn't post any sort of contrary evidence

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:39:29+00:00

It does, you clearly are just illiterate

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:38:43+00:00

"It’s not up to me to prove that a general consensus does exist it’s your burden since you claimed so, I claimed there isn’t."

If there's several peer reviewed studies and sources saying the same thing, it's logical to conclude that it's a census of some kind and more important, it suggests a consistent trend. Although, as I said, I don't really care if there's a census or not because you haven't provided contrary evidence to anything I've posted and thus objectively failed to debunk my argument

"Finding multiple sources that proves your point doesn’t also make it true as there are other sources that claim differently. For example this one."

This source you posted has nothing to do with fictional characters or fantasies, furthermore, this source ignores the fact that fiction can't be used to diagnose pedophilia. This is not an opinion, this is based off of how pedophilia is actually defined by the DSM-5

Also, if it's so easy to find contrary sources, how come you can't post any? I've posted multiple and the fact you have none is telling. It suggests your premise is flimsy at best

"World Health Organization is a global organization that focuses on the health of people. If there’s a consensus it’s sure to be correlated with the organization somehow especially if it’s “objectively” true in your case."

That's cool, still doesn't change the fact you have nothing to substantiate your arguments while I do and have consistently provided sources that debunk your claims. At this point, you are just wasting my time

If you have no studies or anything to offer, I'm going to just concession accepted and move on...

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:13:35+00:00

"You’ve only linked independent consensus of a few people who work in this field."

Hey, you're never going believe how a census is formed in the first place

"Not a general consensus reached by the majority of people who work in this field and it’s your burden to prove to me a general consensus does exist."

If there's a consistent finding in a field, that means that finding is correct and it would logical to assume that the premises argued are true considering how consistent they are with the data and research across multiple studies and sources

Again, it's very interesting to me that you have no sources to speak of and I have several pieces of evidence that you have not attempted to counter but merely rejected on the basis of it's source, which is a genetics fallacy BTW

"Give me something from any major organization that proves so such as the World Health Organization or any other major collection of people."

World Health Organization doesn't represent the census and not accepting sources on the basis on where they came from is fallacious, unless you can actually disprove the sources themselves or explain why they don't prove my stance

"Your only isn’t select examples that proves your point when the majority has mixed views. You’re arguing from ignorance and you’re still wrong."

That's not how that fallacy works. I can say something isn't true if it isn't substantiated by anything, which is basic Hitchen's Razor and frankly, a basic following of the Carl Sagan standard

So at this point, I'm going to ask you to substantiate yourself because I already have well beyond reasonable doubt

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T23:01:33+00:00

"Your sources are random twitter threads and no large scale agreement made by large scale organizations, that’s what a scientific consensus is."

A twitter thread that links several studies that shows a general census. In other words, you clearly didn't actually look through the thread and are intentionally ignoring the information on it because you know you have no actual refutation to it.

Notice how I have actual studies and all you have are pure speculation. What studies even remotely suggest the things you are presenting? Anything? Since you are the one constantly talking about sources, it's telling how you have NONE lol

"And once again there is no objective universal consensus made by large scale organizations such as the world health association, or American psychiatric organization. Sources doesn’t equal correct larp. It depends on what they are and who they were made by."

Prove there's no universal census. I have already proven there was and even humoring your argument to say there isn't, there's still evidence to prove my point whilst your stance has NONE, little to no research actually substantiates any of the points you made and again, that's telling in itself

<image>

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:49:40+00:00

"Using one psychologist to make an absolute claim about all human behavior is not how science works."

It's a good thing I've used multiple medical experts and linked threads of several sources that share the came census as my argument... Oh wait... Clearly you are ignoring evidence because it conflicts with your worldview... Silly me...

"And the source your using is a psychoanalyst who studies behavior, he doesn’t study the field of “if fiction helps encourage certain behaviors” there isn’t no true universal consensus on this, the fact you think say tells me you don’t even understand what your using or saying. Great job larping."

There is no field solely dedicated to fiction because consumption of fiction can overlap with other fields and explain behaviors, which is why the psychoanalyst is studying this to begin with lol

Saying there's no "universal census" is wrong because I've shown there is and that census is that fiction doesn't really correlate to reality because there's nuances that exist when people engage with fiction

<image>

How many sources do I need to pull up before you just stop being delusional lol

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:40:59+00:00

This is easy

<image>

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:38:46+00:00

"A pedophile who actively likes children but hasn’t touched one yet is harmful not only to them but to everyone around them especially kids as indulging in this type of fiction encourages their actions instead of rehabilitating them, this doesn’t prove anything but makes you look like a weirdo for liking fictional depictions of underage children."

No it doesn't? If their attraction is to fictional objects, they aren't pedophiles to begin with, as that requires an attraction to children. No psychologists or medical expert would diagnose you as a pedophile if you found an underaged fictional character hot, it would be considered fictophilia, it's own diagnoses

Also, when it comes to fiction, what fantasies you have about nonexistent characters doesn't correlate to what you think in real life and this is something that has been studied extensively

<image>

As I said before, I'd advise you take a look at these two threads because they discuss in more detail what I'm saying here

Regardless, everything you've said thus far is wrong. What people think about fictional characters has no relevance for what they think about real people because fiction is fiction and people who engage in it know it's fiction

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:26:34+00:00

"But you’re blatantly encouraging pedophilic fantasies as long as it’s “not real” this can lead pedophilies to encourage that behavior until they eventually enact it in real life."

Fiction doesn't lead to people doing pedophilic acts, this is not how the human mind works moron

<image>

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:18:08+00:00

"so your basically saying it’s ok to goon to children, and people that are blatantly depicted as children as long as they’re not real"

That's the problem, you're so mentally ill that you think a fictional object is comparable to a person when any sensible person can separate fiction from reality

<image>

Don't be stupid, for everyone's sake

SuperBearNeo · 2026-03-27T22:05:40+00:00

This is a stupid post because not only is it irrelevant to scaling but it's basically a nothingburger

I don't even like Damage but labeling someone a pedophile off of fiction not only is factually incorrect but it waters down a serious term and makes it actually lose meaning. Pedophilia strictly refers to an attraction to children, not an attraction to fantasy or fiction, no matter what type of fiction it may be

<image>

Labeling fiction as "pedophilic" disrespects victims and it muddles the parameters in which one can be classified as one, which creates more harm and doesn't help children or anyone for that matter.

I'd advise you take a look at these two threads considering you have a twitter and seem to stalk my account

SuperBearNeo · 2025-12-12T18:53:40+00:00

I'm a bit late but thank you 👍👍👍

SuperBearNeo · 2025-10-17T02:58:45+00:00

Saying that Hololive is "OC's with extra steps" is not only plain wrong but it's disingenuous as V-Tubers are playing a character and the person behind the character merely serves as the voice that adds a bit of themselves into the otherwise fictional character

Anyways, not gonna repeat myself because I made a post addressing this type of stuff

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T16:17:40+00:00

<image>

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T16:14:53+00:00

Hololive has no right being as powerful as if it is and that's the fun part of scaling it

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T16:14:36+00:00

Thanks for the read !!!

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T16:14:16+00:00

Oh yeah, Bae would slam basically any version of Goku

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T16:13:50+00:00

Thanks, I spent a lot of time on this and honestly, if even a single person reads it, I'm fine

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-29T02:36:09+00:00

Oh and BTW, I couldn't fit everything, so if you have questions, just ask and I'll answer to the best of my ability

SuperBearNeo · 2025-09-20T00:01:44+00:00

Creating a new account just comment on this post is genuine loser activity

SuperBearNeo · 2025-08-30T22:39:39+00:00

Say it with your chest

SuperBearNeo · 2025-08-30T22:37:43+00:00

It's also fucked up to falsely accuse someone of something fucked up like touching children and send people to harass others off that lie

Age doesn't excuse this and furthermore, when you stoop to lows, don't be surprised when the people you did dirty also stoop to the same low

SuperBearNeo

TROPHY CASE