From the site turned up by google using that spelling…
I honestly don’t know what to say, it defies description.
I would love to read some of the hate mail that “Sensitive Stephen” gets.
Probably the same people who dress little girls up in skimpy costumes and Tammy Faye Baker style make up and push them onto stages in so-called “beauty pageants”.
Jon Benet, anyone?
Tir: when I looked up Chippendiddies on Google, I found something disturbing—I don’t know if it is the same page you found. I haven’t delved into it other than the first page. It defies description. It discusses perfectly respectable movies and actors, and sullies and slimes them in a warped and perverted way.
OH MY GOSH.
And another description of another child star in a film:
Need I say more? This is pure evil.
Yep—I was being redundant, Tir. You quoted from the same page. (I can be dense.) That page just gets ickier and ickier, doesn’t it?
This thread is disturbing.
I wish I had never opened it.
I also wish I hadn’t done a Google lookup on “Chippendiddies”.
Only one entry, but gaaaaag…
I need to go rest now.
Yosemitebabe I don’t think “icky” is quite how I would describe it, but yep, thats the same site.
Sorry Xyzzy, I probably should have let that one lie, and not drawn more attention to it.
Please, please, please lets hope that this oh so “sensitive” guy is only looking. God, anything else is too horrible to think about.
By the way Xyzzy, your name ROCKS! 
Tir: yes, I guess “icky” is far too mild. Icky is a word that could be used for snail slime, or a rotten potato you find in your fridge. This is something quite different altogether. Quite worse, and beyond description.
I wonder if the web host of this particular site is aware of what this site is about. I know that all the web hosting companies I use would not allow such a site to be hosted by them. But I guess some people have no scruples.
Like this crap, passed off as erotic stories on self pics.org.
Why this shit is legal, I have no idea.
ooh, they promise it won’t stain. Lucky bidder, indeed.
EWWW EWWW EWWWW EWWWW ICKICKICKICK!
::goes off in search of bleach, strong acid and a wire brush to clean his brain and eyes::
Jesus. Use the spelling “Chippendiddys” on Google and you get several pages of disturbing results. Eeesh. Nasty.
This thread was bad the first time I opened it.
And now it’s a whole lot worse.
Excuse me but I need to go to the Home Depot to buy a saw and a power washer, because I’m going to saw off the top of my skull and power-spray my brain to get this sick, sick shit out of my memory forever.
The outfit is undeniably tasteless. I agree with the general sentiment that the buyer is a freak, and I agree with Esprix that the seller designed the auction to specifically attract the freaks. That out of the way…
Or in other words, you don’t hate the “big brother bullshit,” provided its used against people who disgust you. They’re asking for it, yeah, just like women who “flaunt it” are asking to be raped. :rolleyes:
For grossing you out?
Riiight, since we have no evidence whatsoever that he’s harmed anyone or taken steps to harm anyone.
Assuming it was followed up on, this post is the worst of the bunch. JohnBckWLD has crossed the line between fantasy and reality, something our eBay buyer has not done, to our knowledge. It’s one thing to be sickened; it’s quite another to actually hurt someone. The most bizarre sexual fantasies are not on the same page, morally speaking, as even the most innocuous of actions, and reporting someone to the feds is far from innocuous. :mad:
Am I defending perversion? Damn right! I don’t care if you’re titillated by thoughts of puppies, toddlers, and Osama bin Laden all doing things that would make the Marquis de Sade blush. Since the alternative to allowing such fantasies is crimethink, cound me in with the hentai. If I had to choose, I’d rather live in Sodom than Oceania.
I don’t know what the fuck your “asking to be raped” comment is all about, but it sickens me how you’d try to use that as an comparison- the two aren’t even close.
As much as I dislike the idea of big brother looking over one’s shoulder, I’m not against the notion of people like this, who in my opinion are flaunting their near illegal activities, being checked out by the authorities.
Just because I’m against big brother tactics by our government doesn’t mean I’m against good law enforcement when it’s needed. The two don’t necessarily have to contradict each other.
So, yeah, I’m all for this guy being looked at, especially when he posts his fucking shit for all to see. Quite honestly, I don’t see where this guy should expect that his actions don’t get checked out- he’s a fucking sicko who’s advertising it to the world.
*On a personal note, how you can defend this guy, and people like him, is beyond me. As much as I support his freedom to do what ever it is that he wants, and be left alone in doing it, the second he crosses the line from law abiding citizen, to sicko fuck-up, I’d want to be the first in line to throw the fucking book at him.
there’s a big fucking difference between ‘big brother/thought police’ and reporting suspicious open to the public behavior.
Ebay is a public auction site. The information that led some folks here to suspect that the seller is catering to child molesters and that the buyer is interested in such products, is public info.
Since, however, ebay is also a large site, it cannot check out each posting individually. However, when people notify ebay of potential problems, they take action.
Well, when that happens, I’m sure you’ll let us know, since you seem to be so clearly aware of it.
Go fuck yourself matt.
Sorry! I still have the archaic habit of assuming anyone on the internet is male unless it’s somehow obvious otherwise. Clearly, I should have shed that habit years ago.
Cnote, I don’t want to get into semantics here, but I fail to see how one can’t be a law-abiding citizen and a ‘sicko fuck-up’ at the same time.
Are you saying if some has a predilection for young boys and gets his jollies, so to speak, by collecting non-pornographic pictures and costume of and for young boys, he should be locked up?
I’ll step up and say I’ll defend you as long as you don’t cross the line (the line being owning child pornography, touching young boys, luring young boys into thinking sexual situations with adults is OK, etc.) Who am I to say someone’s wrong for being sexually aroused by that which is taboo? I subscribe to the school of thought that one can’t help to what one is attracted but one sure as hell can help not acting illegally on those attractions.