This one?
Posted on 11/11/2014 12:44:00 AM PST by Secret Agent Man
The Cranberries prior posting about the gal singer who assaulted the flight attendant and cop was the last stupid straw about posting about guilt based on looks. (Note I am not a big Cranberries fan, I have no dog in this particular hunt - it's just an example.)
I am not against posts that discuss a person's looks per se. Particularly if it factors into the issue being discussed. If it's relevant, it's relevant.
What I am objecting to are the stupid inane posts that add nothing of value to the thread and detract from the reputation of this site as being a far better place than any liberal discussion site out there.
I am just so flipping tired of idiots claiming to be conservatives posting comments of absolutely zero value about the guilt or innocence of - almost always - a female person, based solely on her looks.
It's stupid. After being done a billion times, it's not even funny. Why so-called conservatives here think this is appropriate every time a female is in a news story that has potential criminal/illegal actions, what it really is is just tiresome. It adds nothing substantive to the thread. It makes the image of this place look crass.
And it makes light of actual crimes committed by people based on if they have breasts and vaginas. And it's entirely one way. Note we do not have thousands of post replies over the years discussing the guilt or innocence of male criminals based on how good looking they are. The female conservatives here (and the pervy guys who post all the time about females) have somehow restrained themselves from any posts of this kind, yet they cannot help themselves to go this way when there's a legal controversy with a female. Then it's find a photo, and let the idiotic guilt or innocence comment postings commence.
Can we just try to keep it classy here? Do we always have to devolve to appeal to the lowest common denominator of gutter humor here when women make the news for bad behavior/crimes? Don;t we have better standards as conservatives? Having a sense of humor is important, but why is it funny that a woman is innocent or guilty because of her looks? What makes this funny? Because ugly women deserve to be locked up? Because hot women can always get out of crimes or bad behavior and ugly women can't? This is the funny stereotype these comments are playing off of?
And when the crimes are sexual crimes, as they often are, in the articles these comments surface in, why should this be made fun of? Because there aren't any negative consequences that occur to a young boy or girl when an adult female decides to satisfy their sexual urges with usually an underage boy or girl? The same stuff isn't treated lightly or humorously when an adult male does it, in fact death threat statements and the like are posted. But it's all fun and games and smart-ass humor when a woman does it.
What makes it wrong is conservatives ought to know better. They do know that there are negative consequences to teens who have sex with adults, BOTH men and women. It's not victimless only if a woman does it. It screws up their viewpoint of sex and male-female relationships. In both cases these posters KNOW that it's wrong to have an adult authority figure having sex with kids they are in positions of overseeing. It's wrong for male and female adults to look at students as potential personal sexual conquests.
This is sick behavior for a site supposedly made up of conservatives.
It’s pointless to reason with you so I’m just qoinq to leave you with the quys, claiminq that people like me don’t know the difference between a quy and a qal, or that we don’t want quys to be quys. Anybody who knows me in real life would lauqh wildly at what you seem to be intimatinq about me and/or those like me on this thread. But it’s a free world so I’ll just stay away from you and let you do what you’re qonna do.
What the heck is a "quy" or a "qal?"
I made no such claim; if you need to employ dishonesty to try and make a point, you have no argument at all. Or maybe it's a reading comprehension problem...I don't know.
What I said is that a fictional TV show can't be used to make your point about rape. We have to understand the difference between reality and television...yes?
" or that we don’t want quys to be quys."
That's precisely what it seems to be.
" Anybody who knows me in real life would lauqh wildly at what you seem to be intimatinq about me and/or those like me on this thread."
What am i intimating?
" But it’s a free world so I’ll just stay away from you and let you do what you’re qonna do."
All righty. Flounce off in outrage if you must.
Lighten up, Francis.
Start with Debra LaFave.
Why are you using a “q” instead of “g”?
“g” key on keyboard broken?
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
Nicely played, sir.
Im just stunned that we are deciding on the nature of men who look at women and like or dislike their physical appearance. And that this has gone on so long here on FR! I mean I can get the ZOT and Undead UnZot and then get a Thread pulled for two things: pimping a website that outs bad Repubs, and pimping a book that does so as well. BUT FR is going to debate this! We are doomed.
“The oriqinal poster’s concern was partially for the harm to victims if people act as if there’s somethinq wronq with a male (usually adolescent) if he doesn’t WANT to have sex with a beautiful woman in a position of power over him,”
“Position of power over him”??? Where do you get such language? That crap is pure recycled feminist bilge.
Teenage males do not cower in fear when a beautiful woman hits on them. Their egos go through the roof. Quit conflating your female mind with that of males, you haven’t the slightest clue what you’re babbling on about and you come across as just one more fool who insists on trying to feminize males.
The whole Guilty/ Not Guilty game is nothing more than those of us on the male side of the aisle amusing ourselves with how we react to good looking women. Obviously this sticks in the craw of the oh so serious crowd of female concern trolls and their pet eunuchs who have to make a Big Deal out of the rest of us having some fun while they get in a huff over the “poor teenage male victims of sexual aggression by beautiful older women”. Sometimes I marvel at the utter stupidity some people are capable of.
Gaaah! Wow that is crazy guilty! Lock that moose up.
“At qunpoint or other severe risk, an “uninterested” boy/man could force himself to perform “
That sentence deserves to be featured in FR’s hall of all time most brainless posts.
” I don’t buy it, and I bet there are a LOT of people who don’t buy it.”
Of course you don’t. You’re a woman who lives in the world of her own imagination when it comes to male nature. Good luck with that.
This one?
Now that there is funny ... I don't care who you are.
By the way, where is this bar you speak of?
I'll see that and raise you one:
LOL!
Oh, don't fret, Dearie. You are a qem - one of a kind.
You have proven to be a deep and seeminqly endless source of amusement.
Don't ever chanqe. And don't Qo fixin' that keyboard, Qirl!
Spot-on, and well said.
Quilty!!
Not Quilty!!
You sound like the perfect "wingman". Able to find the "inner beauty" and "personality" in the Hot Girl's fat ugly friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.