|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:25 PM June 24th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Of course it is ignored that women also molest teens, and are doing so with more freaquencey than ever. Not to mention the fact that HOLLYWOOD and the rest of the media tend to GLAMORIZE and ENCOURAGE older women to seduce minors! (GEEZE!)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
A member of the outlaw gender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but you're forgetting, in the case of women it's "a lifestyle choice".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:53 PM June 24th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Really,
They could have at least tried to hide their anti-male bias and made the warning a unisex one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:32 PM June 24th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
"What they are doing is unhealthy..."
It makes no sense that puberty occurs at 11-13 yet it is 'unhealthy', or 'illegal' for people to be attracted or have sex with these indivuals.
I guess half a million years of evolution is simply wrong, very wrong, and evil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:26 AM June 25th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Being attracted to a sexually mature 11 year old may be normal, but having sex with one should be illegal. Children did not used to hit puberty at such young ages. A hundred years ago the average girl did not have her first period until age 17. Changes in diet and possible additives in the food chain are causing children to mature physically before they mature mentally and emotionally. Teenagers of both genders need to be protected by law because nature is no longer protecting them by delayed physical maturation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:18 AM June 25th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting reply, it is nicely thought out.
"A hundred years ago the average girl did not have her first period until age 17. "
I am not sure about this, that seems a little high. It should be investigated further.
"before they mature mentally and emotionally"
What if a scientific study indicates that maturity is moot since no harm comes from the sexual act itself, but from the negative actions of society after the fact (negative actions such as a therapist saying to a 14 year boy who had sex with a custodian and enjoyed it: 'that sex is wrong, and bad'). If no harm is done is there any justification left to restrict child/adult sexual activity?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:33 PM June 25th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Ya, this seems true, esp. for Canada when which the 'King's Daughters', poor girls of age 13-15 under the protection of King Louis, were paid to goto Canada to populate it.
I think the recent trends towards puberty have been to very low ages, like 7-9 for girls. Less so for boys, probably because there is more estrogen polution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Females are attracted to males older than themselves and males are attracted to females younger than themselves and if a 19 year old boy is attracted to and having sex with a 13 year old female the only people that have a right to complain are the girls parents.And the only immoral act here is for goverments to describe the activity itself as immoral and then to bring there considerable force to bare upon the issue with the intention of punishing young males for following there insticts.This is a new age of moral fascisms gentlemen built squarely upon the logic of feminism which is why its so irrational and so destructive.
"All you fascists bound to lose" - Woody Guthrie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:15 AM June 26th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
NO, you are WRONG. There are VITAL reasons for minimum age of consent legislation, including but not limited to the increased psychological vulnerability of the age period, and the incapacity to exert one's rights competently.
Arguments for lowering the age of consent always reduce to nothing more than "I WANT!" -- specifically, "I WANT TO FUCK VEAL!"
Well, we're simply not going to let you, no matter how much you assure us that you can make it turn out okay for the child, so you can just stop trying to persuade us otherwise. We won't allow it for NAMBLA, and we won't allow it for NAWGLA, and we won't allow it for any other permutation --
-- except that we'll turn a blind eye often enough when it's a woman abusing a boy, of course; women can do no evil, and boys don't count.
That does NOT make "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,"; what it makes is the necessity to remove the biases in the system so that the goose is thrown in the hoosegow where she BELONGS.
So stop trying to BULLSHIT us. The 'cost' of restraining yourselves, compared to ALL the costs of legalizing sexual intimacy with early teens, makes it clear who's right and who's wrong from merely an economic bottom line *alone*.
You're just going to have to stick to fantasizing and role-playing with adults, perverts. Cut the self-serving, rationalizing, "I WANT!" crap -- we wouldn't buy it yesterday, we're not buying it today, and we're sure as hell not going to buy it tomorrow. Build a bridge and get over it.
And Cain? If you can't distinguish between good reasoning and bad to this extent, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE MEN'S ISSUES MOVEMENT.
DO *NOT* ARGUE FOR LOWERED AGE OF CONSENT.
WE WILL *NOT* CONDONE IT.
WE *WILL* DRIVE YOU INTO THE WILDERNESS.
BECAUSE YOUR 'SUPPORT' WILL *NEVER* BE WORTH THE MORAL AND ETHICAL COST OF ASSOCIATING WITH YOU.
PERIOD, END OF STORY.
Here endeth the lesson.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My my how moral avengers do like to spew.Is this whats its about for you stepping up to prove just how morally righteuos you are by spewing as much petty hate and distortion as you can squeeze out of that little mind of yours.This isnt about Nambla you idiot nor is it about pedophilia this about fascists like yourself drawing a moral line in the sand so that you can describe the instincual attraction that exists between teenage girls and young adult males as pedophilia.
And to have the fucking nerve to acuse me off arguing in favour of child abuse you fucking simp.Your the perfect example of the hysterical moralizing frenetic frightened irrational knee jerk posturing so evident in every position taken by the PC left.What frightens you so much Boy is it your your own inability to distinguish between the subteties of life and reason that lead you to these shotgun blasts of accusation and hysteria to cover your own confusion.To defend the right of a 19 year old boy and his 13 year old girlfriend to continue with the natural evolution of their relationship whithout the threat of imprisonment for the boy simply because he has crossed the age limit imposed by your frightened little morality is not actually the same thing as me wanting to "fuck veal" sweetheart.And as far as the age of consent its already 13 it doesnt need to be lowered it just needs to be viewed rationally and honestly and not used as one more tool in the hands of dyke feminists to beat young men over the head with.
So whats the next lesson boy!!!!!
"All you fascists bound to lose" - Woody Guthrie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:19 PM June 26th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
No.
It's about integrity.
It's about self-control.
It's about doing what's fundamentally objectively RIGHT, rather than what's merely subjectively desired.
"Natural evolution of their relationship," my ASS.
As I said, nothing more than "I WANT!"
You don't fool us.
*Date* your -- presumably, exceptionally mature -- 13-year-old GF all you want. Be as happy to spend time with her as you like.
But *do not* cross that sexual line.
Because REGARDLESS of whether you want to admit it or not, you have a civil obligation to not only follow but *defend* the same rules which exist to protect those children who are *not* as exceptionally mature as your GF, and *vulnerable*.
YOU DO NOT DESERVE AND WILL NOT RECEIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT.
And your attempt to argue for the relaxation of those rules is nothing more than a pathetic, amoral gimmick to excuse you from the *consequences* of demanding that special treatment.
Nothing but "I WANT!" "I WANT!" "I WANT!"
It IS pedophilia. By DEFINITION. REGARDLESS of how much your 13-year-old GF may be 'ahead of the curve' where intellectual and emotional responsibility and maturity are concerned.
And NOTHING can change that.
It doesn't *matter* how much you love each other or are uniquely mature. Because you have a civil obligation to protect the *other* children protected by the rules, through protecting the rules themselves.
We know that. And that's why you don't fool us.
Not for a picosecond.
So Learn Better, or get the hell away from us.
Because there is no room in men's issues advocacy and activism for your "I WANT!" point of view.
NONE.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Such big words from someone who has absolutely no understanding of them.Integriy?Self Control?
Hahahaha......you mean like the integrity you are dis[playing here by continually accusing me of harbouring the very desires that seem to frighten you so much.When my posts become about me your use of the I Want I Want mantra might begin to make at least some sense but so far its just more hysterical rambling which is something you do seem to be very comfortable with.
Now little boy since you dont seem to be able to distinguish between reality and your own rantings let me say again that this is in fact about young relationships and the danger of a morally fascist movement imposing its view and sense of value with prison sentences.Something again you seem to be in favour of which is very clear but what is aslo very clear is that you exemplify the very reason the mens movement is so important,if only to fight the desperate me me look at me posturing that has taken over public debate in this culture with everyone lining up to assume the most currently acceptable moral high ground in order to protect themselves from the very venom you just hurled at me.We all know its there and we all no what we are expected to say in order to avoid it.But the thing little boys such as yourself never seem to understand is that venom has no real power and is easily swept aside especially when its as desperately irrational as the brand youve chosen here today.
And the definition of pedophilia moves with the line used to define it which is why the line becomes so dangerous when it is moved to include 19 year old boys simply in order to define them as pedophiles and have them imprisoned.
And what is "fundamentally objectively right" is to create a society and legal system that is governed by wisdom and reason not by frightened little lines in the sand especially when those lines are drawn by feminist ex cardinals such as yourself.Man but you do have that hysteria thing down.Good for you i know im impressed.
"All you fascists bound to lose" - Woody Guthrie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:35 AM June 26th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
. . .that you're a fifth columnist fucktard trying to make us look like child abusers or their associates.
Either that or a child abuser yourself desperately looking for acceptance -- which you are NOT going to find here.
So either way, you can just FUCK OFF AND DIE, sweetheart.
Oh, I suppose that there's a tiny, miniscule, infinitesimal possibility that you're simply as dumb as a box of rocks and don't really understand what you're saying. In which case, you're welcome to stick around and Learn Better -- as long as you get an ID, so we can keep an eye on you, and promise never, EVER, to argue in favor of legalizing child abuse ever again.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the bottom of the page it reads:
For more information on sexual coercion, statutory rape and this campaign visit the Web site at www.varapelaws.org. You can also e-mail Robert Franklin at robert.franklin@vdh.virginia.gov, or call the Virginia Department of Health's Center for Injury and Violence Prevention at 1-800-732-8333.
Please contact Mr. Franklin with updated information...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:12 AM June 25th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, He NEEDS updated information!
Appearantly the information he has, has an expiration date of B.C.!
Thundercloud
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:01 PM June 25th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Hell,all the guy has to do is read this site for a week and he`ll see men aren`t the only perverts out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:14 PM June 25th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, Ah, Ah, It's like "Deepthought" said; it is only perversion when MEN do it.
When WOMEN do it it is a "lifestyle choice"
(Sarcasam off)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
