You be the judge - sexual assault?

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Beer w/Straw, Sep 21, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    Ask a question and I'll answer it.
    Not at all. In this thread, I equate rational with "hasn't accused me of being a pedophile" because rationally there's no reason in this thread to think I am a pedophile.
    There you go. That's what I'd call a raving silly false accusation, completely devoid of any rational connection to anything I've said in this thread.

    I haven't even questioned the illegality of child porn in general, much less attack it. I am entirely in favour of the illegality.

    What I have asked is whether drawings and/or stories which do not directly involve specific real children should be included in the illegality. Maybe they should. Maybe they should not. That's all.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    That's two separate questions. Do you think it's okay to hurt people if they provoke you?

    And no, you didn't hurt me but it seems like you're trying to. Is that because you're drunk/high again?
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,904
    So....

    You can create another thread?

    This thread (I started) makes my stomach turn.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    I have no reason to start another thread. If the people who are making false accusations against me want to start another thread and invite me over there so they can abuse me, that might work. You'll have to propose it to them.
     
  8. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,054
    please quit lying. no one has said you have done anything inappropriate. they have merely told you that you come across creepy and that way. again that your that defensive about being told your acting creepy only reinforces the idea. try being honest. that its perfectly rational to wonder why someone is so adamant to question the illegality of child porn. and im sorry im just asking questions just doesn't cut it.
     
  9. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,054
    no you won't. you'll just lie

    so you tell me im wrong and that flat out admit your criteria is agree with you.

    its perfectly rational though. just because you refuse to admit how creepy questioning the illegality of child porn is. try taking some responsibility for your actions instead of whinting about being called on it.

    which is irrelevant. your entire basis of your push is to suggest sexual representation of children should be legal.
    thats great but it does beg the question WHY THAN ARE YOU QUESTIONING THE ILLEGALITY OF IT.

    your fucking clueless. it has been explained to you repeatedly why it should be illegal. again you maybe sexual depictions of child should be legal. why are you so crazy that you cant get how that comes across.
     
  10. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,904
    Well, I guess you're a justice of the supreme court.
     
  11. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,152
    eh?
    Could you repeat this question in a way that prevents you from backpedaling or switching context later?
    Does drawing pornographic images of children make you feel like a man?
    Does drawing porn of children somehow return the power that you may have lost due to some other paedophile abusing you in the past?
    The fact that you need to ask this question when the answer is obvious, justifies the angst being directed towards you IMO.
    Sexual crimes are called crimes ...why?
    Stealing power from a child to replace that which you lost is truly a sad indictment of your parents, schools and society you grew up in. A problem that the world is inexorably and slowly seeking to address. "How to stop men from abusing their power?"
    Every one has the capacity to commit a crime ( any crime) and they are empowered to make decisions as to whether they do or not. Therefore one can surmise that any criminal act against the society in which you agree to live in, is an abuse of power. But never is it more obvious than when it is a sexual crime against "powerless" children.

    The mere fact that you have to ask this question in such a way is highly suggestive that you are defending the assault against a child's self development as being "non- criminal". You ask it as if you are surprised at the notion!
    Perhaps you can explain to the board why sexual assault against children is indeed severely damaging to the future welfare of the child and the community generally?

    Why is it illegal to sell your child for a hit of heroine? ( rhetorical)

    Why was it legal for a man to sell his wife and family for a couple of beers in a pub. (The Mayor of Casterbridge, Thomas Hardy, 1886)
    Why did they eventually make such a power illegal?

    but most of all how can a man call himself a man when the only way he can survive is to abuse his power over children and those that he deems weaker than he is?
    "With power (entrusted) comes the responsibility of not abusing that power (Trust)".
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
  12. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,081
    Porn is, quite often, in the eye of the beholder.
     
    sideshowbob likes this.
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,978
    When those questions have been answered repeatedly, links provided, evidence provided that shows:

    • It is a crime.
    • Why it is a crime.
    • The harm it does.
    • The risk and threat it poses to children.

    Repeatedly..

    And you respond with a virtual chin rub and a "ummm but is it still a crime......" while trying to find different ways it could not and should not be a crime and the subject matter pertains to child pornography (be it producing it, owning it, distributing it), not to mention sexual violence in general, then it is fair to say you have stepped well beyond the boundaries of just merely "asking a question".

    The question is why.. Why sell the farm to push these particular points when it comes to sexual violence?

    I do not know a single normal person who would push this hard when it comes to sexual violence against children, or adults for that matter. Even defense attorneys of people caught possessing child pornography, virtual or otherwise, do not push as you have pushed in this thread. Most people would rather roll naked on broken glass than "question" as you have questioned here..

    And your argument of merely asking questions rings false given your definitive statements about knowledge of crimes on the first page.

    So, please stop. Your questions were answered repeatedly. Repeating them as you are, trying to sugar coat them as you are (and didn't the subject of gingerbread houses enter the fray at some point?), it comes across as an attempt to normalise it.. It is skin crawling creepy..
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,855
    Priorities.

    I was thinking, last night, about a literal footnote in history, about the age of consent, and what makes the point about getting on little girls even more important is the matter of a man's priorities; in that particular case, the author really, really wanted a drink.

    By the time we got to Sherlock Holmes↑, all I can really think is to reiterate a certain point:

    • Whether one lands there as if just because, or calculates their path and ingress to that territory, it is still that particular territory. By the time we identify this or that person as the perfect test case, just how much effort will we have put into finding the perfect test case to justify what everyone else, including the predators who want it, would acknowledge is child pornography. (#218↑)

    • And the idea that we need to pick such nits in the first place is itself controversial. The answer, of course, is that we do because we must because we are asked to by people who think they need us to. And people perceive a dangerous question of proximity when they are expected to entertain such vagary so near to sensibility. And while I can remember an unsettled feeling in the time of Miller and Dost, what has become that much more evident in the time since is the consuming and escalating pathology of sex predators. (#252↑)

    We need to remember—

    —the point is just to make people talk about it; that's part of how these advocates get off. Kind of like Bowser's↑ two-bit, not-quite contribution; the only point of his post is to hope women feel compelled to talk about men ejaculating.

    Certain behaviors and iterations, more superficial than others, have demonstrated themselves relevant and significant. It's like the hundred forty-some year-old footnote. The author makes a very interesting point about having sex with ten year-olds, but as a comparative juxtaposition with assisted suicide, as a question of the difference 'twixt vice and crime, in service of getting a drink. Whatever else we might say, that's dedication to the cause; his priority is clear.

    To the other, the inquiries before us cannot engender such basic discrimination as to comprehend the difference between a drawing of a fictional character whose international fame spans well over a century, to the one, and the labor of depicting child abuse according to virtually impossibly rarified hypothetical circumstances in order to perform the stations of halfassed advocacy in order to keep people talking about sex crimes against children.

    At some point, the priority is clear.
     
  15. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,709
    Odd nugget

    Vatican City statutory rape law is violated when an individual has consensual sexual contact with a person under age 18. The age of consent is 14 for girls and 16 for boys when the couple is married (they can consent to their spouse only)

    https://www.ageofconsent.net/world/vatican-city

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    I said, "Ask a question and I'll answer it."

    So ask a question and I'll answer it. Don't pretend you can predict the future.

    Anybody who reads my posts can see that that isn't true. I have asked if drawings and stories should be illegal. I have never suggested that any other sexual representation of children should be legal.

    Do you really not understand the difference between "some media" and "all media"?
     
  17. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    If the answer is "obvious", why doesn't anybody answer it? Are sex crimes against children about exercising power?

    Because they're illegal. The only way to decide what should be legal is questioning the basis of the current laws. I, for one, am glad that somebody questioned whether or not homosexuality should be be a crime.

    But the child never had any power in the first place. That's why I asked whether power is the motivation for pedophilia.

    Now you're making my case. You can't go either way, either more legal or less legal, unless you question where the line should be.
     
  18. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    The question I asked was, "You still don't understand the difference between asking a question and defending?" How have I defended anything?
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,978
    Why are you still trotting out this argument?
     
  20. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    Nobody has addressed it honestly, so yes, I'll repeat it until somebody does.

    The "consent" gambit doesn't work. We're talking about drawings and stories here, no actual children involved, so consent is not an issue.

    Did people question the illegality of homosexuality? Yes. Were they accused of being gay? Probably. Were they all gay? Probably not.
     
    sculptor likes this.
  21. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,978
    For goodness sake!

    It's still CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!

    A child need not be be involved in its production. But the end result is still child pornography.

    Which is illegal to produce or possess, distribute or show, own or borrow, in most developed and under-developed nations around the world.

    The reason for this is simple. As has been posted numerous times, studies posted to explain and show.. Even virtual child pornography is dangerous and will lead to paedophiles harming children.

    What part of that didn't you quite understand?

    This was addressed. Numerous times. Studies posted. Articles posted.

    You ignored it, keep repeating the same question..

    Why?

    It makes absolutely no sense for any person to push this point, repeatedly, as you have done.

    Why do you want child pornography to be legal?

    What does homosexuality have to do with paedophilia?

    Why do you keep going back to homosexuals and homosexuality in this discussion?
     
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,081
    anecdote:
    A rather nice young woman artist/painter in a nearby town loved watching her children play naked in the wading pool in the backyard. So she decided to paint pictures of them doing that. The way she worked was to first take lots of pictures of her subject matter(she also did landscapes and old people's faces), then hang the pictures by her drafting table and do sketches until she found the scene she wanted to paint.
    Unfortunately, one horrible day, the storm troopers bashed down her door, confiscated the pictures, arrested her, and took her 3 and 4 year old babies away and sentenced them to "foster care" as wards of the court. She was charged with child pornography.
    For 2 long years she had to fight the overzealous prosecutor (who, just may have been unable to view pictures of naked children having fun in a wading pool without getting sexually aroused --- I wonder if he had the same problem when viewing pictures of a flock of sheep?)
    Many of us are somewhat outraged when ice separates children from their parents.
    That didn't matter, this bastard was "gonna get that woman" for something that existed only in his own mind with no regard for justice nor the emotional wellbeing of the children.
    Her long fight left her bankrupt and homeless. Meanwhile, her babies were left crying for their mommy.
    She was finally exonerated and reunited with her children having missed 2 very important formative years in their young lives.
    Lots of crying all around.
    I think that the emotional trauma that she and her children suffered was most likely much worse than what she would have suffered had someone grabbed her ass or breasts.
    It seems that the criminal justice system is far too often devoid of justice,
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
    sideshowbob likes this.
  23. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,627
    Why do you keep lying about that?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page