Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Sun)   Garbage men track down pedophile and turn him in to the police. It's a dirty job but someone has to do it   (thesun.co.uk) divider line 186
    More: Spiffy, recycling bins, pedophiles, documents  
•       •       •

13857 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Nov 2012 at 10:50 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-02 11:44:32 PM  

doglover: The FBI nabs would be hitmen customers all the time. The people they contact are LEOs and would never follow through on anything, so no one is in danger, but the perps want a murder, so conspiracy to commit murder is the charge, even though arguably the would be victim is safer with their enemy in the FBIs cross hairs than they ever were in their life.


"Conspiracy to commit" is not quite the same (as what I was saying) though, is it?
 
2012-11-02 11:44:40 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: So if the same was done -- photo was digitally regressed to appear 12 even though it was an of-aged model -- and was promoted as "adult entertainment", then it should be entirely legal, despite the fact that the end result (the image) is exactly the farking same. Right?

"Sorry, your honor, that's not child pornography, that's merely 'adult entertainment'."

Right, and it's not 'child molestation', it's 'man-boy love'.


Wow. You just went full retard.

So I've gone from pointing out your understanding of the law is false and you trying to point out the law is broken because someone might get arrested for reading a hentai novel, to being a champion of child molesters?

images.wikia.com

people.virginia.edu
people.virginia.edu
 
2012-11-02 11:45:12 PM  
So the garbage men turned the pedo over to these guys?

i773.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-02 11:45:22 PM  

andyfromfl: kriegfusion: CruJones: We all agree pedophiles are sick. But is it possible that digital porn may keep some from actually committing real life crimes? Not a position, just a question.

I don't believe pedophiles are sick, especially since there are degrees of it and most people don't know that. I think there's something wrong with finding younger-than-pubescent humans attractive, but only wrong in a scientific sense. I won't pass judgement on them.

I think you question regarding digitization is an interesting one. Sometimes you just want to kill some people, cause explosions, see people pay for their crimes (as uncivilized as that is), but instead of going out and committing these crimes, you go home, kick back, cook up some popcorn, and play some video games or watch DieHard. I think it may both make the problem worse for some, and bearable/forgettable for others. When i'm feeling randy, I find some porn on the pc and some minutes later relieves the bug, and i'm able to refocus on my work. YMMV.

Unfortunately the concept of scientifically wrong doesn't exist.


I do agree science does not claim anything to be right or wrong, which is why we need to create the right and wrongs ourselves. I simply think the current witch hunt with pedophiles is no different than the hunt against homosexuals and blacks of the past. In time, society will I hope become more tolerant (of healthy, consenting relations) between those of large differences in ages.
 
2012-11-02 11:46:35 PM  
I guess they...

*puts on glasses*

... Took out the trash
 
2012-11-02 11:47:28 PM  

CygnusDarius: I guess they...

*puts on glasses*

... Took out the trash


Sigh. Guess I have to do it, then.

miniganb.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-11-02 11:47:28 PM  
I know you are, but what am I?
 
2012-11-02 11:51:45 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: BronyMedic: ArcadianRefugee: Actually, it says precisely what I think it says: material which is not, in fact, child pornography, can be prosecuted as such.

You might also want to read more on the actual case.

Wiki Link to the US v. Williams (2008) entry. The whole issue at hand was could the person be charged and convicted for trafficking in child pornography because he was passing around pictures of women which he tried to promote and distribute as child pornography, not drawings or hentai. The photo was digitally regressed to appear 12 even though it was an of-aged model, and was promoted as actual child pornography.

So if the same was done -- photo was digitally regressed to appear 12 even though it was an of-aged model -- and was promoted as "adult entertainment", then it should be entirely legal, despite the fact that the end result (the image) is exactly the farking same. Right?

"Sorry, your honor, that's not child pornography, that's merely 'adult entertainment'."

Right, and it's not 'child molestation', it's 'man-boy love'.


Pretty much, yes
 
2012-11-02 11:53:11 PM  
BronyMedic:

Why you continue to claim that my understanding of the law is faulty is bizarre to me, despite the fact that I repeatedly point out exactly what aspect of the law I am questioning, and wondering about your vantage point.

But if you want to post trite little 'argumentum' images,

Wow. You just went full retard.

how about 'ad hominum'? When you can't answer a question, attack the questioner.

Also, I don't think you grasp what a 'strawman fallacy' is.

I am questioning you directly (as I did earlier). Do you feel that your same 'image-regression' should be legal simply because it was "promoted" differently?

Me? I say no. The two should be treated exactly the same: neither should be criminal -- well, not a felony, anyway -- as neither has a victim. Now, if you want to claim "society is the victim!" (like "Drunk in Public" laws do) then fine, but that's a wimpy low-level misdemeanor.
 
2012-11-02 11:56:09 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: BronyMedic: ArcadianRefugee: Actually, it says precisely what I think it says: material which is not, in fact, child pornography, can be prosecuted as such.

If the material is promoted as child pornography.

So no, it doesn't say what you think it says. Taking the previous example of Hentai, the material is presented as adult entertainment, not child pornography.

So? Promotion? So, if I 'promote' something as an actual murder, despite no one having been murdered, it should be prosecutable as such? That's ridiculous.

Last I checked, promoting something as something it was not was fraud, not (CP, murder, whatever).


You really should read up on that case. Or at least just the link BronyMedic so helpfully provided. The statute at the center of the issue was pandering child porn. Further, the person distributing the digitally altered image was the cop. Finally, the court said that its ruling doesn't impact "virtual" child porn.
 
2012-11-02 11:58:05 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: Why you continue to claim that my understanding of the law is faulty is bizarre to me, despite the fact that I repeatedly point out exactly what aspect of the law I am questioning, and wondering about your vantage point.


My vantage point is that while I find things like Shota-Ai and Lolicon distasteful, there is no victimization of children done by drawing them. Creating digitally altered child pornography, on the other hand, fuels the demand for child pornography, and leads to further victimization of children. The two aren't even comparable.

ArcadianRefugee: how about 'ad hominum'? When you can't answer a question, attack the questioner.


Ad Hominem would assume that I am arguing you're wrong because you're "full retard". I'm not. But, to add to that:

people.virginia.edu

ArcadianRefugee: Me? I say no. The two should be treated exactly the same: neither should be criminal -- well, not a felony, anyway -- as neither has a victim. Now, if you want to claim "society is the victim!" (like "Drunk in Public" laws do) then fine, but that's a wimpy low-level misdemeanor.


Society is not the only victim. Creation of fraudulant, but digitally altered child pornography that is not able to be differentiated from actual child pornography continued to further a market that fuels the victimization of children by predatory pedophiles, human trafficing rings, and organized child sex groups both in the United States and abroad.
 
2012-11-03 12:03:50 AM  

JWideman:
You really should read up on that case. Or at least just the link BronyMedic so helpfully provided. The statute at the center of the issue was pandering child porn. Further, the person distributing the digitally altered image was the cop. Finally, the court said that its ruling doesn't impact "virtual" child porn.


To be completely honest, I am not interested in the specifics of the case. I'm more curious why Brony automatically lumps pedophiles and child molestors together as equals and wherein he draws the line.
 
2012-11-03 12:05:30 AM  

BronyMedic: Creating digitally altered child pornography, on the other hand, fuels the demand for child pornography,


Why draw the line there? If images promote the action the images depict, why should we have violent movies and video games?
 
2012-11-03 12:08:08 AM  

BronyMedic: Creation of fraudulant, but digitally altered child pornography that is not able to be differentiated from actual child pornography continued to further a market that fuels the victimization of children by predatory pedophiles, human trafficing rings, and organized child sex groups both in the United States and abroad.


Bullshiat.

I would counter that it takes advantage of and even detracts from the above by creating a substitute outlet.

But keep posting cutesy little ready-made retort images. I'm getting a kick, etc.
 
2012-11-03 12:08:11 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: To be completely honest, I am not interested in the specifics of the case. I'm more curious why Brony automatically lumps pedophiles and child molestors together as equals and wherein he draws the line


Why do I lump them together? Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. They both destroy the lives of their victims, and the majority of their crimes go unreported. For every Sandusky, you have thousands of others who will never be caught until decades after their crimes.

Where do I draw the line?

When they can be isolated away from children, or successfully treated to not have a third sexual orientation which leads them to get hard-ons every time they see a toddler on the playground is when I'll be happy..
 
2012-11-03 12:08:59 AM  

BronyMedic: Why do I lump them together? Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet.


AH! okay.

Curious.
 
2012-11-03 12:11:39 AM  

12349876: BronyMedic: Creating digitally altered child pornography, on the other hand, fuels the demand for child pornography,

Why draw the line there? If images promote the action the images depict, why should we have violent movies and video games?


Because a fueled market for violent video games doesn't require actual violence to feed. You can kill BILLIONS of virtual enemies across 1000s of titles without harming anyone or anything.

Child pornography REQUIRES the victimization of children to create. Allowing the market to exist in the first place makes it likely children will be victimized. Virtual images only fuel the fire.
 
2012-11-03 12:12:45 AM  

12349876: Why draw the line there? If images promote the action the images depict, why should we have violent movies and video games?


Because we have research that shows that "violent movies and video games" aren't primary escalatory impetus for violent crimes, but rather a moral panic based on poor understanding of the pathology behind violent offenders, especially those who - for lack of a better word - snap under years of peer abuse at school or work.

ArcadianRefugee: I would counter that it takes advantage of and even detracts from the above by creating a substitute outlet.


Except that in reality it enables an escalation of their fantasies, which is why in the last 20 years, with the wide availability of cheap high speed internet access and easily used anonymous browsing and darknet software, it has seen new prominance since international law enforcement cracked down on IRC and Usenet rings in the 90s..
 
2012-11-03 12:13:40 AM  

BronyMedic: Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet.


So you're claiming it's impossible to stay celibate for a lifetime? Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?
 
2012-11-03 12:13:55 AM  

12349876: BronyMedic: Creating digitally altered child pornography, on the other hand, fuels the demand for child pornography,

Why draw the line there? If images promote the action the images depict, why should we have violent movies and video games?


Yeah, that's not a comparable analogy. You're assuming child porn is as popular and widespread as video games. Sorry, child porn doesn't have mainstream appeal. If you're into it, you've got a serious problem.
 
2012-11-03 12:16:36 AM  
I'm pretty drunk and just skimming the thread. Are people really defending pedophiles? WTF.
 
2012-11-03 12:18:36 AM  

12349876: So you're claiming it's impossible to stay celibate for a lifetime?


If you want to falsely assume Pedophilic Sexual Orientations are the same as Adult Sexual Orientations, yes, I am. The only ways a pedophile is going to stay celibate in terms of pediatric sexual abuse is either 1) Isolating him//herself completely from the age group they are attracted to, or 2) the development of an effective pharmacological treatment which can treat the neurological features of pedophilia, or therapy which can treat the third sexual orientation.

Pedophilia does not replace sexual orientation like heterosexuality/homosexuality, it either develops in lieu of it, or develops separately from it. It's the way people like Sandusky can bone their wives one night, and then rape a boy in the shower the next night.

12349876: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?


Of course I do. Because we know for a fact that's the case. In addition, the Catholic church has been rocked by numerous sex scandals regarding the cover-up of predatory pedophiles.
 
OKO
2012-11-03 12:18:55 AM  

BronyMedic: ArcadianRefugee: To be completely honest, I am not interested in the specifics of the case. I'm more curious why Brony automatically lumps pedophiles and child molestors together as equals and wherein he draws the line

Why do I lump them together? Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. .


Oh, fork fark's sake. You know, s/he actually may not have molested or broken the law. However, sweeping generalisations tarring people with the same brush works as an internet argument.
 
2012-11-03 12:19:10 AM  

BronyMedic: Except that in reality it enables an escalation of their fantasies, which is why in the last 20 years, with the wide availability of cheap high speed internet access and easily used anonymous browsing and darknet software, it has seen new prominance since international law enforcement cracked down on IRC and Usenet rings in the 90s..


Yes, yes. But the same argument could be used against anything. "Violent video games enable an escalation of their fantasies" is, no doubt, one of the more common ones. I don't really like to dabble in "omg something is possible". I prefer to deal with more concrete stuff.

Anyway, you've asked the question I actually wanted answered (the same question I hedged around at the very beginning. Forgive me for that; I'll be more direct in the future).
 
OKO
2012-11-03 12:19:40 AM  

BronyMedic: Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. They both destroy the lives of their victims, and the majority of their crimes go unreported.


[citation required].
 
2012-11-03 12:21:58 AM  

BronyMedic: Of course I do. Because we know for a fact that's the case. In addition, the Catholic church has been rocked by numerous sex scandals regarding the cover-up of predatory pedophiles.


I'm well aware of the pedophile problem in the Priesthood. That's why I said 100%. Are you seriously saying EVERY SINGLE Priest or Nun that has ever existed has had sex. Show me a citation or STFU.
 
2012-11-03 12:24:38 AM  
Eventually personal computers are going to get to the point where anyone can make photorealistic kiddie porn movies, featuring anything they can imagine. I'm sort of curious as to what will happen then. Will all movies be preceded by a disclaimer like "The actress in this film is CG and was 18 when she was imagined?" Not to mention the freedom of speech issues.
 
2012-11-03 12:26:32 AM  

OKO: BronyMedic: Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. They both destroy the lives of their victims, and the majority of their crimes go unreported.

[citation required].


Time Magazine: Most Child Abuse goes Unreported
Why does so much child abuse go unreported?

The fact of the matter is that most sexual abuse between an adult and a child is done within their family or sphere of close adults, and that the majority of it goes unreported or unrecognized. In addition, female offenders are far more likely to get away with their crimes than male offenders.
 
2012-11-03 12:29:21 AM  
I'm curious how a picture of a naked boy would do harm, if a boy found it? I mean, all the finder
would have to do is look down and see the (roughly) same thing..Provided they were simply JUST
nudie pics. But that same logic doesn't hold true when mom and dad buy the kid the latest splaterfest
game or movie..I'm just a little dubious to the idea of harm of that..Especially if it's the same gender.

/just askin the questions...
 
2012-11-03 12:31:41 AM  

12349876: I'm well aware of the pedophile problem in the Priesthood. That's why I said 100%. Are you seriously saying EVERY SINGLE Priest or Nun that has ever existed has had sex. Show me a citation or STFU.


Let's play a game. Troll or Deliberately Disinginous? I'm leaning towards the second, but you've got the dial kind of twitching both ways.

I don't have to say every single one, nor did I claim to. I just have to point out that we know your statement to be false by the astounding number of clergy sex abuse cases, as well as the laws of averages. In addition, most denominations that are non-catholic do not place the same celibacy standards on their priests, and many are married. As well, the Catholic Church states one not be a virgin, but rather simply take a vow.

12349876: Show me a citation or STFU.


You're the one making an appeal to authority on the virtue of someone claiming to be a priest or a nun means that they could not possibly be lying when they say they are celibate. Go do your own research to prove Strawmen like that.

If you don't like what I have to say, you can either leave the thread or ignore me. It's really that simple.
 
2012-11-03 12:33:40 AM  

BronyMedic: Let's play a game. Troll or Deliberately Disinginous?


My money's on troll.
 
2012-11-03 12:35:21 AM  

BronyMedic: You're the one making an appeal to authority on the virtue of someone claiming to be a priest or a nun means that they could not possibly be lying when they say they are celibate


I'm not saying none of them are lying. I'm just saying at least a few are telling the truth. You're saying that 100% of them are lying.
 
2012-11-03 12:35:58 AM  
I'd like to point out that anyone with the name "brony" in their user name is guaranteed to be an expert on children and bizarre sexual fantasies, so you should all listen to them.
 
2012-11-03 12:36:10 AM  

RealAmericanHero: The comments section on that page is a dazzling example of why we have representatives make decisions and don't put everything up to a public vote. If everyone had their way, the death penalty would account for punishment for like the 20% worst crimes, life in prison for the next 30%, and we'd round off the 50% of least serious crimes by only giving people a decade or two. I think everyone should actually be subjected to their own brand of what they consider justice for one week, and after that week the world would be a much more humane and rational place.


Ack now I hate enforced therapy.
 
OKO
2012-11-03 12:36:43 AM  

BronyMedic: OKO: BronyMedic: Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. They both destroy the lives of their victims, and the majority of their crimes go unreported.

[citation required].

Time Magazine: Most Child Abuse goes Unreported
Why does so much child abuse go unreported?

The fact of the matter is that most sexual abuse between an adult and a child is done within their family or sphere of close adults, and that the majority of it goes unreported or unrecognized. In addition, female offenders are far more likely to get away with their crimes than male offenders.

Neither link proves your point. One deals with abuse, focusing on mental and physical abuse/neglect.
The other deals with neglect again, and a rape.

A "review of research" came up with a claim of under reporting. Well, that is absolutely conclusive. Conclusive of what I am unsure. The best example point of speculating from unseen data I have seen since the last birther discussion.
 
2012-11-03 12:37:07 AM  

BronyMedic: 12349876: I'm well aware of the pedophile problem in the Priesthood. That's why I said 100%. Are you seriously saying EVERY SINGLE Priest or Nun that has ever existed has had sex. Show me a citation or STFU.

Let's play a game. Troll or Deliberately Disinginous? I'm leaning towards the second, but you've got the dial kind of twitching both ways.

I don't have to say every single one, nor did I claim to. I just have to point out that we know your statement to be false by the astounding number of clergy sex abuse cases, as well as the laws of averages. In addition, most denominations that are non-catholic do not place the same celibacy standards on their priests, and many are married. As well, the Catholic Church states one not be a virgin, but rather simply take a vow.

12349876: Show me a citation or STFU.

You're the one making an appeal to authority on the virtue of someone claiming to be a priest or a nun means that they could not possibly be lying when they say they are celibate. Go do your own research to prove Strawmen like that.

If you don't like what I have to say, you can either leave the thread or ignore me. It's really that simple.


You have gone completely off the deep end lately in nearly every thread you've been in. I think it's time you take a vacation - I think your job stress is bleeding over into your home life.
 
2012-11-03 12:39:37 AM  

12349876: You're saying that 100% of them are lying.


I am? Really? Where? Because I'm pretty sure what I said was the fact that they are a priest or nun does not mean they are being truthful on the virtue of it's own. When it comes to celebacy, 100% of Nuns and Priests are NOT celibate as they claim. While a large majority might be, it is fallacious to claim that is the case because we know it not to be.

BronyMedic: 12349876: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?

Of course I do. Because we know for a fact that's the case. In addition, the Catholic church has been rocked by numerous sex scandals regarding the cover-up of predatory pedophiles.


It's not my fault you asked a deliberately loaded question, and then tried to muddy the argument when I didn't fall into your trap of answering in the manner you hoped. So, when are you going to stop beating your wife, and when are you going to confess to the girl you raped and murdered in 1990, sir?

cdn.churchm.ag
 
2012-11-03 12:43:27 AM  

BronyMedic: I am? Really? Where? Because I'm pretty sure what I said was the fact that they are a priest or nun does not mean they are being truthful on the virtue of it's own. When it comes to celebacy, 100% of Nuns and Priests are NOT celibate as they claim. While a large majority might be, it is fallacious to claim that is the case because we know it not to be.


From your 12:18:36 posting

Me: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?

You: Of course I do.

My point is that if even a few priests and nuns can stay celibate, then so can a few pedophiles.

And from that pdf you cited earlier, it cites a study that says viewing child pornography alone is not a risk factor for committing contact offenses (2nd full paragraph page 12) and concludes that online and offline behavior can be very different (last full paragraph page 13)
 
2012-11-03 12:46:33 AM  

12349876: BronyMedic: I am? Really? Where? Because I'm pretty sure what I said was the fact that they are a priest or nun does not mean they are being truthful on the virtue of it's own. When it comes to celebacy, 100% of Nuns and Priests are NOT celibate as they claim. While a large majority might be, it is fallacious to claim that is the case because we know it not to be.

From your 12:18:36 posting

Me: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?

You: Of course I do.

My point is that if even a few priests and nuns can stay celibate, then so can a few pedophiles.

And from that pdf you cited earlier, it cites a study that says viewing child pornography alone is not a risk factor for committing contact offenses (2nd full paragraph page 12) and concludes that online and offline behavior can be very different (last full paragraph page 13)


Well that's great that you aren't raping the kids you jerk off too. Keep it up.
 
2012-11-03 12:50:17 AM  

OKO: BronyMedic: OKO: BronyMedic: Because a pedophile who claims he's never molested a child or broke the law is just one who hasn't been caught yet. They both destroy the lives of their victims, and the majority of their crimes go unreported.

[citation required].

Time Magazine: Most Child Abuse goes Unreported
Why does so much child abuse go unreported?

The fact of the matter is that most sexual abuse between an adult and a child is done within their family or sphere of close adults, and that the majority of it goes unreported or unrecognized. In addition, female offenders are far more likely to get away with their crimes than male offenders.
Neither link proves your point. One deals with abuse, focusing on mental and physical abuse/neglect.
The other deals with neglect again, and a rape.

A "review of research" came up with a claim of under reporting. Well, that is absolutely conclusive. Conclusive of what I am unsure. The best example point of speculating from unseen data I have seen since the last birther discussion.


Maybe the Department Of Justice would be a reliable source for you, then?

60% of Child Sexual Abuse cases go unreported, and 25% of Adults do not report recognized child sexual abuse.
 
2012-11-03 12:52:01 AM  

farkingismybusiness: 12349876: BronyMedic: I am? Really? Where? Because I'm pretty sure what I said was the fact that they are a priest or nun does not mean they are being truthful on the virtue of it's own. When it comes to celebacy, 100% of Nuns and Priests are NOT celibate as they claim. While a large majority might be, it is fallacious to claim that is the case because we know it not to be.

From your 12:18:36 posting

Me: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?

You: Of course I do.

My point is that if even a few priests and nuns can stay celibate, then so can a few pedophiles.

And from that pdf you cited earlier, it cites a study that says viewing child pornography alone is not a risk factor for committing contact offenses (2nd full paragraph page 12) and concludes that online and offline behavior can be very different (last full paragraph page 13)

Well that's great that you aren't raping the kids you jerk off too. Keep it up.


How did you get that idea? Probably from what you were doing before getting on this thread.
 
2012-11-03 12:56:40 AM  

12349876: farkingismybusiness: 12349876: BronyMedic: I am? Really? Where? Because I'm pretty sure what I said was the fact that they are a priest or nun does not mean they are being truthful on the virtue of it's own. When it comes to celebacy, 100% of Nuns and Priests are NOT celibate as they claim. While a large majority might be, it is fallacious to claim that is the case because we know it not to be.

From your 12:18:36 posting

Me: Do you wish to claim that 100% of Priests and Nuns aren't celibate?

You: Of course I do.

My point is that if even a few priests and nuns can stay celibate, then so can a few pedophiles.

And from that pdf you cited earlier, it cites a study that says viewing child pornography alone is not a risk factor for committing contact offenses (2nd full paragraph page 12) and concludes that online and offline behavior can be very different (last full paragraph page 13)

Well that's great that you aren't raping the kids you jerk off too. Keep it up.

How did you get that idea? Probably from what you were doing before getting on this thread.


You're the one comparing cgi child porn to violence in video games. You're coming off extremely creepy.
 
2012-11-03 12:57:42 AM  

farkingismybusiness: You're the one comparing cgi child porn to violence in video games. You're coming off extremely creepy.


Since when is intellectual consistency creepy?
 
2012-11-03 12:57:55 AM  
I always avoided Sun links based on the fact they seem to be considered a huge, worthless joke here on Fark. Read a couple stories, the tone is all retarded and everything is full of suppositions, weasel words and seeming half truths. Googled to see who owned it and IMAGINE MY TOTAL LACK OF SURPRISE

When I become president I am going to war with Australia.
 
2012-11-03 12:58:36 AM  
As someone who hasn't gotten lucky since 1989, when my last girlfriend dumped me, I certainly believe it's possible to live a lifetime without sex. Though I don't know why you'd want to.

The trouble I have with the claim that even computer generated images of pedo fantasies leads to children being victimized is that there is a subset of feminists who argue that plain vanilla porn leads to rape. And they will trot out all sorts of studies to back up their position. As a longtime consumer of plain vanilla porn, I've never even considered raping a woman (if a woman isn't attracted to me, it makes me sad, not rapey). Anecdotal, I know, but it makes me very doubtful of feminist claims of the causal link between nude images of adult women leading to the rape of adult women. But child molesters aren't people whose mindset I can comprehend, so maybe it would lead to pedophiles escalating into child molesters. If that's true, then it justifies a crackdown on images of that sort.
 
2012-11-03 01:01:01 AM  

12349876: farkingismybusiness: You're the one comparing cgi child porn to violence in video games. You're coming off extremely creepy.

Since when is intellectual consistency creepy?


Since you compare violence in video games to cgi child porn.
 
2012-11-03 01:02:11 AM  

farkingismybusiness: 12349876: farkingismybusiness: You're the one comparing cgi child porn to violence in video games. You're coming off extremely creepy.

Since when is intellectual consistency creepy?

Since you compare violence in video games to cgi child porn.


And why shouldn't I? What's the difference? Both have simulated images of illegal acts.
 
2012-11-03 01:02:50 AM  
Two things this article taught me.

1) throwing away an illegal item is distribution of said item
2) Putting pictures of child porn in someones garbage is a great way to make them look bad.
 
2012-11-03 01:02:57 AM  

12349876: farkingismybusiness: 12349876: farkingismybusiness: You're the one comparing cgi child porn to violence in video games. You're coming off extremely creepy.

Since when is intellectual consistency creepy?

Since you compare violence in video games to cgi child porn.

And why shouldn't I? What's the difference? Both have simulated images of illegal acts.


Whatever you got to tell yourself. Seek professional help.
 
2012-11-03 01:03:16 AM  

Carousel Beast: You have gone completely off the deep end lately in nearly every thread you've been in. I think it's time you take a vacation - I think your job stress is bleeding over into your home life.


This topic has nothing to do with job stress. I hold a special hatred in my heart for pedophiles and their white knights. And I sure as heck wouldn't share the details on FARK with a group of people well known for calling sexual abuse victims attention whores and making fun of them.

But I appreciate the concern, even if it is in jest. I have a vacation next week, actually. :)

12349876: Since when is intellectual consistency creepy?


You're not being intellectual. You're asking loaded questions and trying to trap people in misleading statements.
 
Displayed 50 of 186 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report