>>76573
>there are photos
if you're talking about the one with balloons showing 14, I've yet to see that. if it does indeed exist and you've inspected the articles, again, metadata can be dubious. for all we know that (hypothetical photo) could've been taken over four years ago at the time of posting on /r9k/ or wherever you happened to see it.
>cunny
>14 meme
even if just a troll, that I think can fairly be considered normalizing grooming/pedrophilia in some capacity. but again, I've done none of that.
>uninvolved parents
whether her parents are involved or not, that doesn't prove either that she was actually groomed into taking those photos and videos or that she's underage; to the broader discussion sure, but to the specific discussion we're having that's not relevant.
>irl pedro allegations and cheeze pizza leaks
the criminal complaint is interesting and would be conclusive if MV-1 could be conclusively linked to pukara. some anon above has said that her name is mary valencia, but I don't know where that started - perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't.
>i can't stop how minors i don't know behave online i mean
that's not what I meant. I meant stopping people from normalizing grooming - however all you think that's done. obviously there too it's ultimately out of your control, but my point was that if you wanted to support your claim that discussions about her in the capacity they've been going on are wrong because she's underage, I would think you would be interested in getting evidence to prove that and perhaps influence people to stop. again, I acknowledge that people are going to do what they want at the end of the day, but I and perhaps others are not closed off from criticism and actual proof.