This thread is now over 500 posts, and you are still in violation of policy. As I can't stand to see this situation not remedied, I will assist you by providing a courtesy image for our viewing pleasure.
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.
This thread is now over 500 posts, and you are still in violation of policy. As I can't stand to see this situation not remedied, I will assist you by providing a courtesy image for our viewing pleasure.
I agree with shibumi. Stay just the way you are, Butter.
Although we might guibble, your guirky guips never fail to entertain. So don’t guit.
And you can guote me on that.
You say “butter”, I say “marqarine”.
NOT guilty!
If I was 15-16 I would have to bite the bullet and suffer the indignity.
Not Guilty
Way, Way far ahead of you Brother!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3225720/posts?page=28#28
Not Quilty!
If it’s not “quilty”, is it still plush???
It wasn’t automated, it was a stuck mouse button. I’ve had it happen to me.
Finally...I get to meet the holder of the defintion of what a conservative is.
I for one think one definition is not to whine about stupid stuff like liberals with their panties in a wad.
(It’s reverse psychology.)
That’s “psycholoqy”...
C’mon, now...qet a qrip!!!
Good that your wife is NOT GUILTY. But shame on you for noticing such external superficial things.
How can a stuck mouse button do that? A mouse click event is singular. Mouse up is too. I program. I know. Mouse move events are a stream, but click and unclick are singular. Keyboard events are multiple. A stuck keyboard key does that. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Just holding down my x key for a second does that, but a stuck down mouse button sends a single event, not like the keyboard.
LOL
Thank you, that’s sweet.
Although I will say, that was one of those days I could have put on a little makeup...maybe let the hair down...
The only way to successfully prove this is to show that you care not for superficial things and date really ugly, fat women.
This will prove to all the hot chicks that you are really cool and with it. Unfortunately it will also (pardon the inherent metaphor) "saddle" you with some really disgusting Hose Beast for a girlfriend.
This is OK if you can convince one of the hot chicks to "save" you by stealing you away from the Hose Beast.
Good luck with that.
(I, myself, have chosen another route. We call it "The Hyborian Option.")
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.