Apparently pre-pubescent pedophilia is ok as long as you don't give the victim quaaludes beforehand

[BuckSwope 654]

11 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No, the battle is not over if there is life. Human, viable, yes, those can be debated. What can’t be is that it is ending a life. It is. 

My interpretation when I see people post this in relation to this topic is that the bolded = murder, because we are talking about humans.    Feel free to clarify if that is not what you mean when you post that.   

So often I do disagree with that because I think there is a window between conception and ? where it's not murder, it's not ending a life - I view that human similar to a loved one life support where a machine is keeping them alive.    If you mean that it's ending 'life" in the general sense, then yes I agree - but again, we don't protect all life, so that doesn't move the needle for me.  

That's just my personal feelings, but mostly I just fall how I normally do - less government telling people what to do and making choices for them.   That's why I am against the extremes of the debate, which seems to be where many states seem to lean towards.  

[Fireballer 2,383]

As if anyone is surprised that @The Real timschochet is a piece of shat...

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Well now you're down to 2 teenagers, but the broader point is trying to rank the horribleness of sexual assault to me is just a disgusting activity.

I'm out. Enjoy.

To be honest it’s not my favorite thing to do either. I’ve done it in this thread because Strike’s attack was so full of sh!t

But I’m out too. 

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Hey, I’m not getting into the morality of it. I can see instances where it’s warranted. But let’s just call it what it is. Ending a life. And if you ask me, sometimes the woman’s life is more important than the unborn life. 

That's fair, I guess what I am saying is I can understand why some people might dance around that because the usual follow up is "murderer!!!" in this debate.  

(I am not saying that is what you are doing, to be clear). 

[WhiskeyCash 65]

30 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

What hypocrisy?   Yes, it's life.  So is a fish, a tree, a bacteria, etc.     But we don't protect all life, right?    So whether or not it's life shouldn't be where the debate lies.  

So the battle is about if it's human, alive, viable - things like that.   I know 0 people on either side of this debate who thinks cells inside the mother = bacteria on Mars.  

Thanks for playing 

[BuckSwope 654]

Mostly I am just sorry for destracting from the gripping "your a pedo"/"no I'm not" posts.     Lol.  

[BuckSwope 654]

8 minutes ago, WhiskeyCash said:

Thanks for playing 

Gotcha.  An alias that I need to weed out and ignore.  Thanks.  

[Horseman 1,514]

41 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

But CONSENSUAL sex with a minor past puberty, while also a crime, is not as bad as having sex with prepubescents. Sorry but it isn’t. 

 

39 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t think the age matters so much as the physical development. Again I have to stress- it’s all bad, it all should be punished, but one is not as bad as the other. iMO. Whether you agree or disagree with me, it is a lie to present my position as somehow pro-pedophilia. 

 

36 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I mean it’s illegal in most states for a 20 year old to have sex with a 17 year old, but most of us aren’t going to condemn that in most cases are we? Are we really going to treat that situation as pedophilia, the same as Sandusky? So it’s a matter of degrees. 

Perfect.

Here is where the big LIE comes out.  You really believe this disgusting crap.  You really do.  Yet when you took heat from all your circle jerk buddies at FBGs you lied about it.  Even tried to blame it on someone else.

Quote

I've also reconsidered my original statement:  it was still pretty stupid, and not representative of my true thoughts on the matter. I was trying to draw a distinction between sex with a teenager and sex with a child. It was dumb. Both are wrong. I've apologized for it several times. I have 2 daughters.

Quote

I was going on wrong information. I had watched an interview with  the star of The Pianist, Adrien Brody, about whether or not he had any moral qualms about making a film with Polanski. He said he did not, and offered a defense of Polanski's actions in the 70s. Either he misstated the facts, or I misunderstood him (probably the latter). So I made some dumb arguments and then attempted to defend them. My worst moment in the FFA.

Everything that comes out of your mouth is complete bull crap. The scarlet letter L.  Confirmed LIAR.

[Mike Honcho 4,038]

 

[Casual Observer 597]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

@Strike deliberately lied in the title of this thread, because that’s what he does. He’s a piece of crap. 
 

I am not OK with pre-pubescent pedophilia. I am not Ok with sex with minors period- but if they’re past puberty I don’t regard it as quite as evil. Strike and others deliberately misrepresent my views in order to attack me, Fuk them.  

 

[Strike 3,979]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sorry that I haven’t been around to address this thread. I’ll make 3 points: 

1. I stand by my conviction that having sex with a post-pubescent minor is wrong, illegal, and whoever does it should be punished- but it is not as wrong as having sex with a pre-pubescent minor- that’s far far worse. And if I’m to be condemned for making this distinction, so be it. 
 

2. My attitude about this is not politically motivated. So when people try to chalk it up to my supposed “leftism” they’re just being dumb. 
 

3. I don’t personally know Roman Polanski. I would assume therefore that the condemnation that is thrown around at me for my comments about him should be even stronger against those who have continued to work with him after his scandal- for instance, Harrison Ford and Adrian Brody. And, I assume, musicians like Jimmy Page, Iggy Pop, and Ted Nugent deserve shunning and condemnation as well (among scores of others.) 

This post has nothing to do with the point of this thread, which is YOU saying that the problem with Roman Polanski's incident wasn't that he had sex with a pre-pubescent minor but that he gave her drugs.   Your assertion, by your own words, is that if he hadn't given her drugs what he did would have been perfectly fine.  That's a disgusting stance to take.  This forum doesn't have many lines but I'm pretty sure just about everyone here except you finds that stance abhorrent.

[Horseman 1,514]

There should be no "but" after "I'm not ok with sex with minors, period".  

He's sick, can't help himself.  Should seek professional help.

[Strike 3,979]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t think the age matters so much as the physical development. Again I have to stress- it’s all bad, it all should be punished, but one is not as bad as the other. iMO. Whether you agree or disagree with me, it is a lie to present my position as somehow pro-pedophilia. 

So a physically developed 7 year old is ok in Tim's demented, disgusting, mind.  Hey dumbass, the reason age is an issue is because of the development of the brain, not the physical attributes of the body.  Are you too focking stupid to realize that?

[Strike 3,979]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

@Strike deliberately lied in the title of this thread, because that’s what he does. He’s a piece of crap. 
 

I did not.  I used your own quote and paraphrased the meaning for clarity and brevity.  Sorry if your own thoughts make you uncomfortable.

[Strike 3,979]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

To be honest it’s not my favorite thing to do either. I’ve done it in this thread because Strike’s attack was so full of sh!t

But I’m out too. 

Yeah, probably a good idea considering how indefensible the quote I posted is.  And you call ME the piece of sh*t. 

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

2 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Yes it is, you're disgusting.

I'm going to sign the guest book at Tim's camp on this one as I am camped there too.  You can ridicule me if you like.  incrementally less condemnation to one of two very contemptable acts is in no way support of the incrementally less heineous act. Rather it means you focused your condemnation full throatedly and then were a bit horse when the call for the next condemnation arose.

[Strike 3,979]

2 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I'm going to sign the guest book at Tim's camp on this one as I am camped there too.  You can ridicule me if you like.  incrementally less condemnation to one of two very contemptable acts is in no way support of the incrementally less heineous act. Rather it means you focused your condemnation full throatedly and then were a bit horse when the call for the next condemnation arose.

How about commenting on the actual quote this thread is about?  Tim thinks it would have been ok if Polanski simply had not given the 13 year old girl drugs.  Where does that fall on YOUR condemnation scale? 

[BuckSwope 654]

6 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I'm going to sign the guest book at Tim's camp on this one as I am camped there too.  You can ridicule me if you like.  incrementally less condemnation to one of two very contemptable acts is in no way support of the incrementally less heineous act. Rather it means you focused your condemnation full throatedly and then were a bit horse when the call for the next condemnation arose.

Sure, and this is typically how these conversations go.  But we can't deny that tim's post came off a bit as though he was saying the only thing Polansky did wrong was drug the girl.  

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

11 hours ago, Strike said:

How about commenting on the actual quote this thread is about?  Tim thinks it would have been ok if Polanski simply had not given the 13 year old girl drugs.  Where does that fall on YOUR condemnation scale? 

I have already been clear I completely condemn Polanski's actions.  I also have been clear I don't believe Tim when he takes the stand he had to be educated on the event as the facts were very knowable, and were thrust in his face in that debate.  I don't feel I have to reiterate my condemnation every few posts, but since you ask so nicely, yes, I condemn rape.  I condemn rape of 13 year olds.  I condemn rape of 13 year olds where 40 year olds use power and influence and then alcohol and drugs and isolation to rape young girls.  I condemn the rape proceeding even as who was it, Lynn Rtegrave or Vanessa Redgrave (I don't know which is which)  pounded on the locked door to try to intercede.  I condemn prosecutors not pressing the matter more vigourously.  I condemn the French for shielding him. I condemn Tim for defending him for a long while.

 

All that said I believe on the narrow issue Tim is trying to direct this thread to so as to avoid the ugly discussion, he has a point.  I share that view.

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

Sure, and this is typically how these conversations go.  But we can't deny that tim's post came off a bit as though he was saying the only thing Polansky did wrong was drug the girl.  

I do not deny that.  I join in that condemnation.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

How about commenting on the actual quote this thread is about?  Tim thinks it would have been ok if Polanski simply had not given the 13 year old girl drugs.  Where does that fall on YOUR condemnation scale? 

Tim did say he's not ok with 13 year olds having sex.  You're being a douche.  Stop.

[Horseman 1,514]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I'm going to sign the guest book at Tim's camp on this one as I am camped there too.  You can ridicule me if you like.  incrementally less condemnation to one of two very contemptable acts is in no way support of the incrementally less heineous act. Rather it means you focused your condemnation full throatedly and then were a bit horse when the call for the next condemnation arose.

Cute, but you really need to read the whole thread maybe before commenting? You're in the camp with a guy that's made these statements.

 

Quote

 

the problem was not that it was pre-pubescent pedophilia, but that he gave her quaaludes beforehand

a 13 year old with the body of a 20 year old

so long as the 13 year old is physically mature, it's not on the same planet

far far worse.

don’t think the age matters so much as the physical development

 

Any one of those said out load makes you sound like you have, thought about or want to have sex with a teenager.   HTH

[BuckSwope 654]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

I do not deny that.  I join in that condemnation.

I also agree with your position that there are levels of wrong to wrong deeds.   All sorts of factors involved, and I'd guess most here would also agree to that ifwe start putting side by side examples.  

[Horseman 1,514]

4 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Tim did say he's not ok with 13 year olds having sex.  You're being a douche.  Stop.

You're missing Strike's point.  Tim has a condition call diarrhea mouth.  He regularly says things he believes and then spends an inordinate amount of time lying to get out of it.  In this case decades.  Reminds me of someone else that posts here.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

22 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Sure, and this is typically how these conversations go.  But we can't deny that tim's post came off a bit as though he was saying the only thing Polansky did wrong was drug the girl.  

Sigh. I didn’t mean to return to this thread but here I am, because people apparently misunderstood what I wrote- again. I never wrote that the only thing Polanski did wrong was to give the girl quaaludes. I was making a comparison between Polanski and Jimmy Page. By giving the girl Quaaludes, Polanski committed rape. If he hadn’t done that, then it would have been analogous to the Jimmy Page situation- not rape but STILL WRONG, still deserving of punishment. I would not be OK with this under any circumstances. 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

Bro, if Jimmy page had sex with a 13yo, that's still rape

[TimHauck 1,801]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

I did not.  I used your own quote and paraphrased the meaning for clarity and brevity.

Weird, when I did this you attacked me

[Voltaire 4,562]

11 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Exactly, run away like the little b1tch you are.

 

I have a job and responsibilities (again, yay me) so entertaining amoral degenerates online isn't a priority, it takes a backseat to providing for my family as we go through this rough patch.

The thread about Drag Your Kids to Pride in Texas is seemingly gone but I'm sure you remember it. It should have only been 2-3 pages of everyone agreeing, but instead it went on for like 25 pages because you were going off on everyone. This is a video of the event, similar to the one we'd discussed in that thread, the reason the thread dragged (ahem dragged) on so long is that most of the rest of us were disgusted with your take as you were with ours. Decent people see the "It's not going to Lick Itself" sign,  hear the striper music, and see small children tipping the drag queen and are angry and abhorred, but you had a different response from everyone else. Putting words into your mouth over what you'd said is unfair, I'd rather quote you if I could find it, but that thread was IMO really your lowest point. 

Then there was the thread with the trannies at the NAMBLA convention or strip club or wherever where kids were invited to dance and the trannies tipped them. The kids' dance was non-sexual, in any other venue it would have been appropriate; if he'd done that same performance for 101 Dalmatians or Peter Pan I would have applauded him myself. The problem there was it should have been an 18+ event and it was billed as family friendly. 

On 5/30/2022 at 5:35 PM, GutterBoy said:

Agreed.

I do think it's wrong for the kid to be at a drag show, and taking money, but this whole groomer movement is insane.  They just repeat what they read on libsoftiktok like a bunch of sheep.

This post here is an example of you admitting it's wrong but still attack us for complaining about it anyway, is a perfect example of why I would identify you are pedophile enabler.

---------------------

 

This thread is locked but on page five, here's what you have to say about people who criticize the pedo movie "Cuties."

Quote

The alt right is obsessed with pedos, as are many people here.  It's disgusting and offensive but they can't stop talking about it.

I would argue that this post is another at your worst, an example where you rather clearly identify yourself with a pedophilia.

-------------------------------------------

On 5/11/2022 at 9:33 PM, GutterBoy said:

I'm hyper sensitive?  No, I'm the opposite, I'm apathetic.  I don't care what these people do.  If my school wanted to have a drag party, I wouldn't go, but I wouldn't freak out calling them pedos and demand they pay the electricity bill for focks sake.  There is a lot of stuff the school does that I either disagree with or don't support, but I'm not gonna be an ass hole and protest everything.

Here you don't care about a teacher inviting drag queens to perform at a school and pass out their contact information to students without parental notification or consent.

---------

On 8/26/2022 at 10:27 AM, Shooter McGavin said:

I don't have a party.  It is your party that constantly cries about groomers. Maybe stand up and tell them to get on real issues.

Here you don't think grooming is a real issue.

------------

On 6/12/2022 at 7:34 AM, GutterBoy said:

Digny can't stop creating threads about kids and gay sex. What a creep.

 

Another one of your worst: California legislators want to pass disturbing legislation to make Drag Queens part of the K12 curriculum and your reaction is to criticize the person who created the thread about it.

-------

On 6/8/2022 at 2:25 PM, GutterBoy said:

Do you think men will just decide to become women so they can dominate the female sports?

Not giving a sh*t about boys who become girls to beat them in girl's sports

-------

 

Quote

You guys got lots of issues.  It's a little kid dancing for focks sake.  Why you gotta make everything sexual?  And then complain that everything is sexual?  And then complain that women are wh0res, and then watch all kinds of pron looking for wh0re women.  Shake my damn head, you focking people.

--------------

Anyway, here's a compilation across many threads of why a large number people find you sick and disturbing. I don't have time to do sh*t like this anymore.

[Fireballer 2,383]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sigh. I didn’t mean to return to this thread but here I am, because people apparently misunderstood what I wrote- again. I never wrote that the only thing Polanski did wrong was to give the girl quaaludes. I was making a comparison between Polanski and Jimmy Page. By giving the girl Quaaludes, Polanski committed rape. If he hadn’t done that, then it would have been analogous to the Jimmy Page situation- not rape but STILL WRONG, still deserving of punishment. I would not be OK with this under any circumstances. 

And then you told us how you really felt and stated that body development was really the key factor.

[Horseman 1,514]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sigh. I didn’t mean to return to this thread but here I am, because people apparently misunderstood what I wrote- again. I never wrote that the only thing Polanski did wrong was to give the girl quaaludes. I was making a comparison between Polanski and Jimmy Page. By giving the girl Quaaludes, Polanski committed rape. If he hadn’t done that, then it would have been analogous to the Jimmy Page situation- not rape but STILL WRONG, still deserving of punishment. I would not be OK with this under any circumstances. 

Actually it started with you defending Woody Allen. 

Quote

Depends on what your definition of stretch is. I'm always leery of child sexual abuse claims in divorce cases. My best friend went through hell when his psycho wife played the abuse card. Was total BS. Many people (including many on this board) have made bad decisions involving 18-20 year olds. 7 year olds? Not so much. Not saying it didn't happen, just saying there's a ton of vagueness in her account and I'd hesitate to say guilty. Was he ever even accused of being with being with another prepubescent child? Usually with child predators it's a pattern with many victims.

Then someone asked you about Polinski and you said 

Quote

His "crime" was to have sex with a promiscuous 13 year old with the body of a 20 year old. I don't approve of such behavior, but it's hardly worth lifelong comdemnafion.

You're a sick fok pedo defender.  

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Bro, if Jimmy page had sex with a 13yo, that's still rape

Is it? It’s awful, for sure. It’s illegal and should be. Anyone caught doing it should go to prison for sure. 
But is it rape? The same as forcing somebody to have sex against their will? I’m not going there. You can if you want. 

[Horseman 1,514]

I just so everyone has a frame of reference this is what PedoTim calls a "body of a 20 year old" 

http://samantha-geimer-pictures.blogspot.com/2009/09/samantha-geimer-pictures.html

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

Actually it started with you defending Woody Allen. 

Then someone asked you about Polinski and you said 

You're a sick fok pedo defender.  

Yawn. You can bring this up as many times as you want. Won’t change a thing. I’ve explained now my thoughts on these issues as much as I’m going to. If folks want to condemn me so be it. 
 

Personally I regard your obsessive focus on my posts from so long ago as far more disturbing than anything I wrote, then or now. But that’s just me. I wouldn’t give a nickel for your good opinion of me; if I had it I know I would be doing something wrong. 

[seafoam1 1,879]

Liberals really love defending the pedos. Gee, I wonder why? 

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sigh. I didn’t mean to return to this thread but here I am, because people apparently misunderstood what I wrote- again. I never wrote that the only thing Polanski did wrong was to give the girl quaaludes. I was making a comparison between Polanski and Jimmy Page. By giving the girl Quaaludes, Polanski committed rape. If he hadn’t done that, then it would have been analogous to the Jimmy Page situation- not rape but STILL WRONG, still deserving of punishment. I would not be OK with this under any circumstances. 

Tim, I said I agree on your larger point, but for some unknown reason you used an example that was quite extreme (Page and a 13yo), and then keep coming back to it not being rape.   

If only there was a term for it - oh yeah, statutory rape.

You put your foot in your mouth bigly, and are now spinning your wheels a bit.     

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Actually it started with you defending Woody Allen. 

Then someone asked you about Polinski and you said 

You're a sick fok pedo defender.  

He called a 13 year old that was raped promiscuous. Disgusting and is worthy of a severe  ass kicking. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, BuckSwope said:

Tim, I said I agree on your larger point, but for some unknown reason you used an example that was quite extreme (Page and a 13yo), and then keep coming back to it not being rape.   

If only there was a term for it - oh yeah, statutory rape.

You put your foot in your mouth bigly, and are now spinning your wheels a bit.     

It was statutory rape. Whoever does that deserves to be punished. I’ve never said anything else. 

[BuckSwope 654]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It was statutory rape. Whoever does that deserves to be punished. I’ve never said anything else. 

Then my advice to you is to stick to that - it's rape.       

No need for all this was it really rape or just rape-light type of rabbit hole after that.  Like I said, for some reason you used an extreme example and and came off as though you were saying that wasn't the or a bad part of the the situation, it was the drugs.    For some odd reason most people aren't interested in those types of fuzzy distinctions when 13year olds and younger are being talked about.  You know, because sex with kids that young is wrong and rape.  

[Horseman 1,514]

11 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Yawn. You can bring this up as many times as you want. Won’t change a thing. I’ve explained now my thoughts on these issues as much as I’m going to. If folks want to condemn me so be it. 
 

Personally I regard your obsessive focus on my posts from so long ago as far more disturbing than anything I wrote, then or now. But that’s just me. I wouldn’t give a nickel for your good opinion of me; if I had it I know I would be doing something wrong. 

According to you this is a body of a 20 year old. 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pyylukR2xyI/SsJJ8xGmsKI/AAAAAAAAAMQ/MGF1S9ockLc/s1600-h/samantha+gailey+polansky+rape+1.JPG

You're a sick fok. The end. 

 

[Horseman 1,514]

13 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

He called a 13 year old that was raped promiscuous. Disgusting and is worthy of a severe  ass kicking. 

100%