Argent Towers, your argument is ridiculous to me. There are many more appropriate rebuttals to “Christian demagoguery” than child pornography. And I’m sure there are plenty of atheists and people of non-Christian religions who would find this just as inappropriate as I do. There’s a thread going on right now in GD in which the OP asks to hear stories about how members here converted from religion to atheism, and so far, no one has mentioned Hogg (or transgressive literature at all, for that matter). I’m willing to accept your explanation as to why you would make such a recommendation (though it sure doesn’t seem as innocent as you claim), but I’m sure you could think of a better way to do it, if you really try.
If we have to treat personae as real, then all of you need to start taking me seriously as a pistol-packing 15 year old Japanese schoolgirl who has the ability to summon elemental creatures. Just to be cautious, you know.
People were tired of hearing about it. Bringing it up in some obviously oblique way doesn’t make people any less tired of hearing about it. We all knew immediately what book you were talking about, you know.
I’ll respond to this (very valid) inquiry by simply repeating something I already said upthread, but which is quite relevant to your post:
Unlike a lot of other people here, I don’t believe in debating the religion itself, picking it to pieces, and telling others how stupid they are for believing in it. That is just an endless cycle that goes around and around because of mutual intolerance.
Instead what I did is attempt to open a whole other door of thought - issuing, as it were, a challenge to this ideology based in literature.
I think the question isn’t do YOU believe that Curtis is really 13 years old, the question is does Argent Towers believe that Curtis is really 13 years old.
I’m of the same mind as you on this. I’m guessing a dogmatic, fundy, conservative posing as a teen so others will go easy on him, think he’s very clever, and compliment him on his intellect.
Also the fool that is Argent Towers deserves to be sanctioned for this action, regardless.
I believe that he is 13. And if he was some 13 year old kid who was just posting about baseball and video games and his English homework and what movies he liked, or whatever, it’s not like I’d barge in and demand that he read something vulgar and potentially upsetting. But he is a 13 year old kid who apparently possesses both a high degree of self-awareness and an aggressive, stubborn insistence to push his ideological views on others.
What bothered people was that you mentioned it incessantly. Being obsessed with a book about a sexually abused 13 year old is creepy. Recommending that book to an actual 13 year old is way beyond creepy. It is, at best, fucking retarded. At worst, well… sorry kiddo, but it comes off sufficiently vicious circle as to make me wonder what YOUR childhood was like.
Well, these written words apparently hold such power over you that you have been obsessing about them for months (annoying people so much that you promised you wouldn’t talk about the book anymore) indicated that you would find the book sexually arousing if you were gay, and are now recommending them to children for the nonsensical reasons you have given in this thread.
Take the mote out of thine own eye before you accuse us of taking Hogg too seriously.
A lot of hockey, basketball, swimming, karate, sailing, Super Mario 3, listening to The Beatles and Yes albums with my dad, reading World Book encyclopedias with gilded-edged pages, teasing girls I actually had crushes, building forts in the backyard with my friends, exploring all the little secret passages in the huge century-old house I grew up in…what else…drawing scenes from Star Wars, buying comic books, and climbing trees. God, it was traumatic!
You obviously don’t get the difference between children and adults, and how we, as adults are supposed to modify our interactions with people when they are (way way) underage. Yes, children sometimes lack subtlety in their own self-expression. This is something we learn about with age and experience. The correct reaction to dealing with a young person who is communicating this way is not to aggressively communicate the same way back to him. Plus, it’s our responsibility as adults to realize that even when children act mature or like they know what they are doing, they usually don’t have a clue.
I’m sorry, I just don’t see it that way. I don’t think there is some universal procedure for dealing with “children.”
Communicating, as we are, in a text-based medium, takes away a lot of the subtleties of interaction that are present when you are actually speaking to someone in person. One of the effects of it is that it puts people on equal ground who might not otherwise be on equal ground. It allows “children” who have the wherewithal to compose an articulate piece of writing to compete ideologically on equal footing with people much older.
The idea of “normal” behavior varies wildly depending on who you’re talking to and doesn’t have a definition that’s set into stone and handed down from heaven. But if you’re unhappy with things I’ve done, I don’t begrudge you that. I accept that not everyone is going to like me.
Somehow, I’m not getting to the level of umbrage I apparently should over this. On the other hand, I recall the salad days of daily discussions of goat felching at this board, so what the fuck, you know? If a 13 year kid wants to hang out here … let the poster beware, I say.
Although, yeah, the PM part of it was a little bit of a stupid move (which it sounds like **Argent **has half-assedly acknowledged).
I wouldn’t PM anything to a minor on the internet anywhere.
Why do you have children in quotes? Do you not believe that someone who is 13 is still a child?
And while I agree that some 13-year-olds might be able to hold their own in a philosophical discussion with adults, that doesn’t make it appropriate to expose them to child pornography. That’s where adult judgment is supposed to come into play.