Yes, I saw that prior to starting this thread. I noticed that, including Cesario, there are at least 3 people willing to address their pedophilia here.
But we have squashed down any meaningful discussion before it even gets started.
So what if they are advocacy? That is what makes it interesting to me, Sun Tzu’s “Know the mind of the enemy” or something like that.
Or maybe I am the only one here that doesn’t have anything they could learn about pedophilia? If that is the case,t hen surely a thread would be pointless.
But if you don’t want to participate in such a thread as “Ask the pedophile” then don’t participate. No big deal. If no one participates, it will die a quick death.
But I don’t get why you object to the mere existence of a thread that I would be interested in but you wouldn’t be, other than squickiness.
So, if you think it would just be meaningless name calling back and forth, that’s not the case. I still think you should open a thread in GQ. I would participate (and not in a negative way) if you did.
[/QUOTE]
Is pedophilia, which I have already shown is a topic of research academic and treatment and management by professionals, something that we here on this board must remain ignorant about ?
Maybe you ought to join me then in calming down the teeming masses who seem to have interpreted your call to action and now demonstrate the widespread belief that ALL Cesario posts is squicky advocacy of child porn and pedophilia.
Just so you are clear on the most objectionable parts, let me break that down for you:
This tells up exactly what you think of Cesario, and what your aim is: To shut him up because you don’t like the nature of what he says.
Here you explain that our collective fight against ignorance, including our own, stops at your squickiness. You want to stop me from learning what he might say in a future thread because what he has said in the past has bothered you.
Here you explain that Cesario, and by extension anyone else that discusses something you don’t like, is a “shitty human being”.
Here you again make him into a shitty human being, one who must never discuss a topic that squicks you out, as though you get to decide what is fair or not.
And we also have the meat of the matter in this quote: You plainly allege that in any thread “remotely bordering on sex and children” he will make a gross remark.
Then, you listed some such threads. One of them, the Australian Free Speech thread, you included of your own free accord. Unlike the 5 threads you listed prior, where at least you made the attempt to show the posts that concerned you, in this case, you merely asserted there was similar stuff in that thread:
And that is where my objection lies: That you missed the boat by including that one, suggesting that it fits your earlier criteria, when it clearly does not.
And so you set off a (now) 6 page shitstorm in your pit thread, and this one well into page 2 pitting your pitting, because of your unnecessarily inflammatory rhetoric.
I have been gracious in not saying directly that the Free Speech thread, as a counter to the absolute certainty in the words of your argument posted above, disproves your argument.
But it does.
Your argument could have been stated well enough for whatever purposes you wanted to stir people up even if you had left out that thread from your list, or qualified your terms somewhat.
I know you are smart enough to realize that. It doesn’t require you backing far off your argument, only acknowledging that you fucked up rhetorically, and set off a resulting shitstorm where people are now echoing your false beliefs loudly and without willingness to reconsider.
How does it feel to be leading a group of people who are ready to stomp out the thoughts and expressions of someone, simply because of who he is? Isn’t there a word for that?
I imagine that explains the disconnect, then. I would characterize the following post (for example) as “being about child porn”:
…whereas you would characterize it as not being about child porn. I suggest most people might agree with me, and further suggest you consider tailoring your arguments to take that into account.
Neither true, nor responsive. One more time: Do you actually think that “some sort of news specifically regarding legal vs. illegal porn in Australia” is the same thing as “a very current proposal regarding a country-wide internet firewall a la China for Australia”? Do you understand why I’m asking this?
The point is Cesario likes discussiong child porn. Do you agree or disagree?
Eh. First of all, I didn’t know about that thread until you started this thread. I really don’t think you’re in a credible position to complain about me noticing that thread when you’re the one that brought it up. Second of all, the only reason I posted here at all was because you were factually incorrect about that thread. Third of all, I can call Giraffe a retard if that will make you feel better.
Well, now I just feel terrible. If only I’d had the foresight to post something stupid that no one could possibly agree with, I wouldn’t bear the terrible responsibility of forcing countless posters to do my bidding and sweep across the message board like locusts, driving the innocent and wicked alike before them as they devoured all that was just and good.
I have truly learned my lesson about sharing my opinion on a message board. If only I had learned it sooner.
Because I don’t want to waste my time with someone as pedantic and obtuse as you appear to be. I just thought it would be better to point out something ironic.
False dichotomy. There are innumerable other references, books, research papers, and sites where one can find out everything they need to know about the pedos. I can assure you that anyone on here who deeply, deeply is missing out on learning more about child rape probably has access to all the information they would ever need - except of course the dubiously-valued sample-size-of-one testimonial from an anonymous person on a message board who alleges that they are a pedo.
Many subjects do not necessarily belong on a PRIVATE message board. For example, I don’t need to hear any more about the many SDMB’ers who have danced at Dopefests wearing nothing but a tasseled butt plug. But if I ever want to know, I’ll just drop an e-mail to one of them.
Yeah, it is not like the difficulties of defining porn at all are not well known in the world of legalities and justice. So why should it be any different for kiddie porn or anything else specific you would like to ban?
The truth is, there IS great controversy around evolving legal defintions of kid porn, particularly drawn or computer generated porn.
You can close your eyes and pretend these are not important current topics in any free Speech debate, and particularly with Australia’s pending firewall, but sticking your head in the sand does not make the world the way you want it to be.
That is why it is really important for you to understand the context of the discussion.
Apparently I don’t understand why because the news I was referring to was precisely about the proposed Aussie Firewall, and what is or isn’t allowed, and how it is determined, and how people are going to know about it in advance.
Instead of making me guess what you mean, perhaps you can actually say it the best you can.
I dunno. Before I came back to this board yesterday, the only time I had seen him was in the Aussie Free Speech thread, and as you can see, he started it, and then generally didn’t participate at all until after I was gone.
Even if he does, so what? Basically, it appears to me that the guy is admitting he has a mental illness. Mental Illness is not often pretty. And it is not something we often get the chance to discuss with people. I would welcome a discussion from anyone willing to start a “Ask the person with [some diagnosis from DSM IV]” thread.
Maybe the difference here is that as an undergrad, I took a course from one of the earliest and leading academic researchers in sexual deviations (for lack of a better term right now). We regularly had guest lecturers - pedophiles, rapists, transgender, you name it, they came to discuss in a classroom setting, and we learned how to treat people as people.
Because it is a recognized mental health issue, I don’t see “Ask the Pedophile” as substantively different than “Ask the Bipolar” or “Ask the Borderline Personality” etc. I really don’t. I know it squicks people out, but those are the people who might benefit from learning actual facts about mental illness instead of hiding their daughters from guys in the neighborhood IMHO.
No doubt true. Yet you are jumping on the bandwagon about what was a thread, by Cesario, that NO ONE OBJECTED TO in its original context. Thereby destroying the belief that everything he posts is immediately objectionable.
I am not “factually wrong”. That Free Speech thread is essentially the same as every other thoughtful Free Speech thread onm teh internet since time immemorial. They are not all promotions of child porn are they? You are simply parsing to try to make a case against Cesario, and it is not necessary to look there to make your case. It weakens your case to look there actually.
Why would I want to disparage anyone by attributing other mental health issues to them? Mental health issues <> “pejorative terms”
Plus I know that Giraffe is smarter than he let on in his Pit OP, he just fucked up this time. And I know what topics I won’t look for a decent discussion on his board
That seems to be a common approach among your kind here - assert something as obvious, then when asked for a rational explanation, you know, the way we do things here, you simply say “If you don’t get it I am not going to tell you”.
not_alice, you do realize this is a private message board, don’t you? When your original accusation fell flat you switched to trying to shame everyone by "skwicky"bomb and the skewed notion that there is some higher purpose to be met. “Fighting Ignorance” is a corporate tagline - not a decree from God. Members here are quite capable of deciding what they do and do not prefer to discuss. As to your OP you are demonstrably wrong - no harm no foul. To your continued harangue I haven’t seen anything quite so bizarre in quite a while on these boards. Originally Posted by Giraffe
How does it feel to be a fucking Pedophile apologist, you stupid fuck?
You’re not only stupid, you’re a fucking asshole who can’t form two cogent thoughts or string together a whole sentence without sounding like a pissed off 2 year old who’s having a tantrum. For your next ridiculous act are you going hold your breath or stomp your feet?
You lost the argument. Your ass has been kicked. There is nothing left for you to do but withdrawn and nurse your sore ass.
I don’t consider that it “fell flat”. Quite the opposite, it drew tons of little-before-seen brain-dead Giraffe supporters out of the woodwork.
The only one who should be ashamed here is Giraffe, for almost but not quite admitting his error.
I think you will find many of us don’t believe in God or any such decrees. So we agree that it is not a decree from God.
It sets the tone of the board btw. Maybe search on “ignorance fought” or even just “ignorance” to see that.
So we are in agreement? That Cesario wants to discuss something, then those that also want to discuss it can, and the rest simply move along?
Or do you mean that “Members here are capable of deciding what other members may or may not discuss”?
Sorry, but no, I am NOT wrong.
You stack the quotes from the 1st 5 posts by Giraffe in the OP with anything in the Aussie Speech thread prior to that post, and tell me if, like you remember from Sesame Street, “One of these things is not like the other, one of these things doesn’t belong”.
Because you are not used to what it looks like when people defend Free Speech, particularly unpopular speech. I am sure you can find such things all over the internet, and all over American History if you look.
Labelling this thread bizarre only belies your ignorance in such matters. It is in fact pretty typical the rhetoric being used by you and your supporters - you can hear it on talk radio and Fox News pretty much at will.
And it does disappoint me to see it here.
But in the end, you agree with me, right? Members are capable of deciding what they would like to discuss and what they would not like to discuss? And that they have the tools to simply not participate in any thread they are not interested in, and that we all let probably at least 90% of all threads go buy unnoticed in exactly that way?
Maybe you never hard of “I don’t agree with what you say but I defend your right to say it”?
When a group of neo-nazis showed up in my small town, you didn’t see me saying they should not be allowed to say what they want. I was comfortable their words and actions would betray them, and they did.
I am also an activist for same-sex marriage, even though straight. People call me a “fag lover”, that says more about them then me.
And you may have noticed I said earlier, the issue of pedophilia and sexc offenders mental health in general is a near-daily topic in my social sphere, because most of the people work precisely in that field.
Are they “pedophile apologists” too? :rolleyes:
Are you talking to me, or are you talking to all the people who are afraid of words on the internet that might expose them to facts that betray their hate and prejudice regarding mental health in individuals and communities?
You lost the argument. Your ass has been kicked. There is nothing left for you to do but withdrawn and nurse your sore ass.
[/QUOTE]
