Will FreeRepublic Finally Stop Posts Equating Guilt or Innocence with (Females') Looks???

[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.

[poobear]

Dude, how small is it?

[Swordmaker]

Whow! This thread is heading for the all time deleted reply record.

What did you unleash? Misogynists Anonymous?

[TigersEye]

Post in cursive. Da mods can't read it.

[exit82]

No, the moderator must be the original poster.

I have had two tame posts pulled already.

This will make three.

[glock rocks]

Concur.

[TigersEye]

Only a mod could post a thread with no keyword function.

[Jimmy Valentine]

How about “all your base are belong to us”?

[DesertRhino]

Not guilty. Oh, and Obama says you can serve openly in the military now.

[exit82]

Seriously—”Da”?

You cannot use “da”.

New rules, donchaknow.

[NY.SS-Bar9]

We need a “Like” button for posts like yours!

[twister881]

Abuse of mod privileges.

[period end of story]

comment removed by fun police

[LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget]

What got your panties in a wad?

[Caipirabob]

Oh crap, wrong thread...

Missed again...

Dang it!

Crikey, this is messed up...

I give up.

Point being, yes, we mess with people all of the time. It's part of the joy of FR. Sorry it carries over into something that upsets you, but it's all in good fun.

I miss a lot of our deep thinkers who used to post some really bell-ringing points on conservatism. We've lost a lot of good FReepers to competition and minor skirmishes here over the years. Still, no one's intentionally trying to offend you with these posts. Please don't take offense where it's not intended.

[cynwoody]

What got your panties in a wad?

Nothing to see here, folks. Please move along!

[The Duke]

Please post a selfie so that I can determine if I agree with you on this,

Oh...wait...you're a DUDE, so I guess I have to disagree with ya! :O

[caver]

Of all the things to get worked up over and you pick this?

[fatnotlazy]

Does FR keep track of threads with the most deleted posts?

Now I wish I could read all the deleted comments.

[rlmorel]

Arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic is a time honored tradition, even on FR.

[Principled]

+1