Thank you. This mess could have been avoided if you had just given a straight answer in the first place.
No, I do not and it would be very thick headed of me if I did. I hesitated to post this earlier because this really isn’t the place for it: the FBI is already keeping tabs on everyone via random checks of public libraries to see what books people have checked out. The Homeland Security bill reinstated this ability after some 25 years without it.
I guess I better not check out The Anarchist Cookbook as I was planning to do…
That was a joke; I have no intention of checking out that book. But it IS available at the Los Angeles Public Library. http://catalog2.lapl.org/cgi-bin/cw_cgi?resultsScreen+27225+1+10+1 :eek:
I’m still wondering how a simple question was construed that I was advocating racial profiling.
I would just like to repeat for emphasis something that has already been pointed out in this thread, but that made a particularly strong impression on me:
OH MY FUCKING GOD! IT’S "USED!"
You also have to wonder at what kind of companies make this sort of thing?
Wait-probably Aberzombie and Bitch-aren’t they the ones who did the thongs for ten year old girls?
I am shocked. I looked up the domain information (WHOIS) on that web site that has the lecherous “reviews” of the cute little boys in film. The web host who hosts the site is quite large, and, dare I say, generally considered “reputable”. I almost signed up with them once myself.
Pretty shocking that such a slimy and revolting site can find its way onto a mainstream web host. Maybe someone needs to drop that host an email.
Well, if it really exists for the purpose stated in the product description, then it was used for non-sexual purposes. The seller claims that it was worn in competitons.
People were saying, earlier on, that the photo had to be fake because no one would want their kid to wear this…thing…and pose for a photo wearing it. Except that if this mythical kid performed in it, then he was already seen in it, and perhaps even had photos taken at the competition.
I’m willing to believe that the picture is a Photoshop fake. I’ll take others’ word for it because I can’t bring myself to scrutinize the photo myself. I did, however, look at it long enough to realize that the one of the selling points is ridiculous. “Show off his muscles?” A pre-pubescent boy does not have muscles! Whoever or whatever is in that photo looks like he/it is made out of Tinkertoys! There is nothing to show off there!
So, if the photo is fake, the seller is a perv, pandering to other pervs. If it’s real, then one young man is going to need years of therapy.
:::flesh crawling:::
Even if it is a real photo, after looking at the buying history of the guy who purchased it, as well as having read the text of the auction (Ich Bin, on the previous page, did a great job at picking up on the ‘boylove sto’ “typo” - sorry, it’s not concrete proof but there’s no way that’s a freakin’ typographical coincidence), the person who posted it is probably still pandering to pervs and the person who purchased it probably purchased it for that very reason.
twitch
A psychologist friend of mine who works with troubled teens currently but has done extensive work in the drug addiction and sexual deviancy fields, once posted to a thread about a paedophilia book having been banned in Canada, saying that the reason it was acceptable to ban a book like that is because those who act on paedophilia do so because they are incapable of keeping their fantasies to themselves, and any sort of media that can fuel those fantasies is quite capable of pushing them to a point where the mere fantasies themselves are not “enough” any more, and they feel the need to act upon them, and they do. I can’t personally verify this as I have no particular expertise in psychology and especially not in the workings of a paedophile’s mind, but if this is true, and I have no reason to doubt this person’s knowledge or words, then I think there is ample reason for this particular auction and this particular buyer’s purchase history to indicate a true reasonable threat.
Again I just can’t imagine that “boylove sto” is an innocent typographical error, not with all the history behind the buyer’s purchases. And even if it is a typo on the seller’s part, the buyer’s history seems to indicate that perhaps the buyer was unaware it was a mere typo, and was searching for something less than innocent.
Throw in the obvious photoshopping of the photo, though (and at first I, too, thought it was hopefully because the seller realised it would be tacky to the extreme to actually have the outfit modelled on a child for all the world to see), and the seriously creepy description of the item, and I think it’s far more likely that some sick people have found a fairly under-the-radar way of trading their fantasy material. And I’m personally glad that JohnBckWLD sent something to the authorities about it - if this information isn’t enough “evidence” (circumstantial though it may be) to prompt an investigation by people whose job it is to enforce the law, then they’ll do nothing with it - the same as they do nothing with any other sort of uninformative or unhelpful “tip” they may receive - and if it is enough to legally mandate an investigation, then that would seem to indicate that there is some legal precedence for this buyer’s behaviour being indicative of a real threat, and that’s something that needs to be looked into. If my psychologist friend is right, then I think the potential threat is clear.
When I read it it, it said:
I don’t see ‘boylove’ there.