Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
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.
You have a Nafs in you, and must perform Dua. You are Haram, and in order to get into the site, you must perform the first two Rakats of the Esha Salat with the Taraweh Jamat. After the Witr Salat you should complete the missed Rakats of Taraweh, then you will be granted access.
And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best,
Imam Zat Amazal
I seem to remember Abu Qhraib photos where men who probably had no attraction to the female in charqe would still have been able to penetrate her if she forced them to...
I don’t know. Can a man keep himself from beinq stimulated if he’s touched a certain way?
(Hey...uh Laz.....Ping to question in #302 !!)
You say all that, but when I brought up the same topic a few years ago, I was eaten alive. One of the posters who was attacking me on the child/minor sex thing was later banned for defending Sandusky and adult/child sex.
Many of these people are NOT joking or trying to use wit to make a point and it’s disingenuous to say that they are.
Yes, at least for me. I have a lot of control either way, then again I am master coxswain.
Right, then, they say the memory is the second thing to go, and I suppose this proves it.
I used to know about the leg in the painting, but that was some time ago and I have not thought about it in years. Can you help refresh the memory banks and post a reminder about what is known about it and the leg?
In a word: yes.
Yeah? So does this guy...
We need to find out right away. I am a willing test subject.
We should date. You’d freakin’ LOVE me.
That happened to my just the other day on a Trailways Bus on the way to Memphis.
I don’t use slang (faggot or gay) when speaking about homosexuality. Thanks.
I was wondering where the foot would go.
I doubt it.
Some of these guys are 12.
Are you saying it only counts as sex/rape if penetration occurs? Sounds like logic from Bill Clinton.
Here we go.
There was an article about a teenager who tried to commit suicide after having sex with his female teacher. FReeper ‘men’ spent over a hundred posts calling the boy names and saying that he should be ‘honored’ to have slept with such a pretty woman.
So even if shown proof that some kids can’t handle being manipulated and used by a grown woman (hell, some men can’t handle a manipulative woman) they’ll deny it.
For every one of you who think that it’s acceptable for a woman to use a boy as a play-thing, go give your ex-wives a little hug of appreciation.
After all, if you were a real man, you would’ve been able to handle anything that a woman could throw at you.
Women can be evil and most men here know it.
(Don’t forget Pamela Smart. A teacher who used sex to get two teenage boys to murder her husband.)
Not something I think about a lot but according to the law unless penetration has occurred then there has been no rape. I believe the law calls that sexual assault not rape. I am sure a FR legal eagle can straighten us out on this.
I feel I must point out that yes, men can and have been raped by women. Technically.
Sometimes when drunk and passed out even. Happened to a friend I knew a few years ago, when a mutual acquaintance (female) was determined to have his child even though he wanted nothing to do with her. Without going into the details, she availed herself of an opportunity which presented itself one evening, and did indeed wind up having his son -proven by a blood test. He swears he has no memory of that night or how she achieved her purpose.
I did enjoy the second half of your post, however. :)
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.