He really does make a very, very nice absence.
You misspelled “abscess.”
haha!
Why doesn’t he just eat a sandwich?
He fills a much-needed void here.
… in the shower?
Only a perverted mind takes something like a shower hug between a grown man and an unrelated child and turns it into something salacious. Back in the good old days, you used to be able to have some good wholesome playful slap and tickle with the kids, naked, before liberals twisted everything around.
SA permanently marred his reputation in the Paterno thread. His later comments on Woody Allen are of no relevance.
The relevance, IMHO, is just that when a guy is doing something creepy with his dick, Starkers comes to his defense.
And I’m sorry, but fucking the daughter of a woman you had a relationship with, a girl your “son” considers his sister, ain’t cool.
Well, if you get one of the thick, heavy-duty tubes, they can take a surprising amount of abuse…
He has graciously refrained from posting in this thread, which would likely just stir the pot and arouse people’s ire, and we can’t have that.
:D:D:D
So in your opinion these two adults should have consulted with the woman’s fifteen years younger 4 1/2-year-old adoptive brother before beginning their relationship to see if he might find it “creepy”? :rolleyes: The reason Ronan finds it creepy is that he’s been trained to view it that was by his mother and those in her circle for the last twenty years.
To the rest of you, I can see that, having been deprived of your false convictions and left with little choice but to suck it up and acknowledge that Woody Allen was indeed never married to Mia Farrow; that he never lived in her house; that he never adopted nor functioned in any way as father to Soon-Yi Previn; and that Soon-Yi was actually older than Mia Farrow was at the time her sexual relationship with Frank Sinatra began, you are reduced now to having to make lame assertions along the lines of “Oh, yeah? Oh, yeah? Well…well…he’s still creepy (for this or that reason that somehow never survives the light of day), and so are you for defending him!”
Well, I’m having a busy and productive day today and so the incredible amount of dishonesty in this thread about what I’ve said, thought or believed is going to have to go unanswered, but it’s safe to say that any neutral reader may safely ignore all of it and they miss very little that’s the truth.
In point of fact what I have defended regarding Woody Allen is the same thing I defended in the Paterno thread: the truth! Here, let me capitalize that just to make sure it’s unavoidable since so many of you prefer to ignore it: THE TRUTH!
It is not my fault that Joe Paterno was not guilty of the idiotic things he was being accused of early in the Paterno thread, and it is not my fault that Woody Allen was not married to Mia Farrow, never lived in her house, never adopted Soon-Yi or functioned as her father, and was not fucking her even as a minor approaching majority much less as a child.
And so what has been the result of my making these facts known here on this highly enlightened message board whose stated purpose is to fight ignorance?
Why, it’s to call me a pedophile of course. :rolleyes:
And to hate me with the fury of a thousand suns for depriving them of a factual basis for the beliefs they have every intention of carrying anyway, which is that Woody Allen was fucking his and Mia’s own child, and that I’m a defender of pedophilia.
Trust me, I couldn’t care less about my reputation amongst people who hew to this type of behavior.
Well, that lasted all of thirteen minutes.
You pays your nickel and you takes your chances.
Sure. However he was also accused of molesting his 7 year old daughter. And that daughter now wishes they had let her testify against him. That is pedophilia.
That is alleged pedophilia.
And yet, here you are posting in this thread.
We are not in court. The victim can call it whatever she wants. But of course I know it wasn’t proven in front of a jury. That wasn’t my point. I was responding specifically to and in the same manner as Bricker using the same language. If he had thrown in “alleged” I probably would have mirrored his language.
That’s because I make a distinction between the sort of person who feels the proper response to known false allegations of pedophilia is to ignore them and join in on calls for the head of the accused (or at the very least keep quiet and pretend they don’t exist) and those whom I consider (and hope) are more normal people who actually place a value on the truth and may be reading this thread.
Absolutely. No argument there.
Of course. The context is, “That [subject] is pedophilia.” The discussion concerns pedophilia.