About 4 years ago I was banned from Reddit after saying I might want to sleep with my daughter when she turns 12 if I can find her at the time. At that time, I was the highest rated moderator at r/incels subreddit. This subreddit was an offshoot of r/truecels, which I've moderated since January 2016 - for about 6 months. During that time these subs grew from tiny, insignificant specs on Reddit that had 50 or so subscribers to subreddits everybody was talking about.

After my ban, partially due to my bad choices of moderators, where I choose borderline retarded people like dsar, these subs suffered a sharp decline in quality after I left and became filled with insane, poorly educated and unreasonable scum. See, my moderation policy was never about keeping out "normies", "femoids" or whatever. Noncels and women participated there, but they had to adhere to the same rules everybody else had to. Terms like normies were barely beginning to emerge and I was using them in a different context . This wasn't a term for anybody who ever had sex like these freaks use it now but for "normal" people who weren't into politics much and who never had any trouble getting women throughout their lives. Nobody called women "femoids" there yet.

It was my ban that led to incel sites developing in such an awful manner - from what were once inclusive places where everybody who adhered to reasonable rules could participate to current echo chambers of very crazy people. And it had been my mistake that things turned out that way.

Anyway, that is all history now.

In this post, I will address some of the complaints people made about my daughter idea. Of course, I can't address the usual "but she's your daughter !" nonsense, as it lacks any substantial argument. But there were some people who expressed actual arguments against my idea, so I will attempt to tackle them here.

The age argument

This is a tired old argument that somebody is 12 "can't consent" because of their immaturity. It's the most common argument used. This argument is so well accepted today that it's now way outside of Overton window to question it. But this argument forgets that many historical legislatures, like canon law, had the aoc at 12 and that as late as in 1995 Spanish criminal code established the aoc at 12 (which had sadly been reversed by now). Ages of consent in Europe - Wikipedia

Were all those legislators just "pedophiles"?

From a standpoint of biology, this argument makes even less sense, as explained in this text Natural Age of Consent

The position of trust/nuclear family argument

This argument claims that it's unnatural and harmful to be having sex with your own child you are living with. It is, in my view, a better argument than the first one, but in my case it is irrelevant, as I don't live with my daughter, who in any case lives in a different country altogether and I've in fact never even seen her irl.

The pregnancy/genetic harm argument

This argument says that children born out of incestuous relationships can have genetic defects. Again, a good enough argument on its own but it doesn't apply to my case, as I have no intention of getting my daughter pregnant.

One argument against my position I've sadly never heard but would like to add here would be

The patriarchal/get your daughter married to a good man argument

This argument holds that fathers shouldn't sexually use their daughters as they should marry them off to good quality men as virgins. While completely true, this argument, once again, doesn't apply to my situation (or the situation of most fathers in the femisphere). In the feminist Western world fathers can't marry off their daughters to husbands of their own or their family's choosing. In fact, it's basically impossible to even raise your daughter right even without marrying her off. Home-schooling is prohibited in many parts of Europe and in any case asks for extreme sacrifices, especially if you want to hold a job.

Also, most women in today's feminist areas don't even hold the right patriarchal views so this makes it even harder. In my case, the girl's mother is a schizophrenic slut (I mean with an actually diagnosed schizophrenia) who holds very few opinions on anything at all. So raising a daughter that way would require me to 1) go to Netherlands, where she's been living since she was born, or get her to live with me here - very impractical in either case, especially since I've never been there and can't speak Dutch 2) get full custody, which is also basically impossible due to language barrier, huge expenses, the fact that I've not been taking care of her and the fact that femifascist courts in Europe will always side with a woman in child custody cases unless she is extremely ill and unsuitable for taking care of a child. For example, take a look at this disturbing video from Croatia -
As you can see there, this cunt female social worker and a cucked cop are trying to take this young boy into mother's custody due to a court order, despite him screaming and hiding in his room, obviously not wanting to go. His father is already in jail for obstructing this so he can't do anything. As seen here, courts obviously don't care about the lifelong psychological damage they're inflicting on this child, who is screaming in obvious extreme anguish. Such are the family courts in most of Europe outside of places like Belarus or Russia, where courts aren't just tools of feminism but actually try to do the best for the child.

All in all, it seems all the arguments against it are completely senseless so far.