[pa28Pilot]

Originally Posted by Dodecahedron ↗

Puberty doesn’t “end”. So what do you mean by post puberty? Cos some girls get their period and breast development at 10. It’s natural is it? Do is a favour and go hand yourself in.

Puberty doesn't end? What planet are you on man... Do me a favour and take a biology lesson

[Kinalace]

Originally Posted by Budd Dwyer ↗

A 17 year old is not a child ...
(You also had a kid at what, 18 or 19? You should know better....)
I mean I'm not condone a sexual encounter like this one, but this is not pedovan territory.... It's borderline ephebophila at "best"...
Would you wrote the same if she was 18? In Brazil, these subhumans breed at 15-16, some of them have multiple kids at 16....

Girl was a hooker anyway....
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankin...nt-by-country/
Age of Consent

14 Years Old

The age of consent in Brazil is 14 years old. Engaging in sexual activity with a minor under 14 is considered statutory rape, while sexual activity with a minor between the ages of 14 and 18 is considered a criminal offense. Brazil has implemented measures to combat child sexual abuse, including a national registry of sex offenders and increased penalties for those who engage in child pornography


So, stop with this bullshit please

I'm sorry if a 40 year old dude talks a dumb teenaged kid into doing something that she doesn't really want to do that is not ever ok. Kids are stupid you can literally manipulate them to do anything. Ever heard of grooming? That's why its not ok. 14 is definitely too young and last I checked the laws in Brazil are shit anyway. If she was prostitute that's even sadder and its still not ok.

[Kinalace]

Originally Posted by William May ↗

If, by "Grooming", you mean a male approaching a female for sex, yes, that would be a pretty normal and natural part of the breeding imperative.

OH! "GROOMING"! Of course! How silly of me! If the girl is 17 years and 364 days old, it's "GROOMING"!

But if she's 17 years and 366 days old, it's normal natural sex!

I see the distinction there!

NOT!

"Grooming" is a mythical reimagining of natural human mating and selection, arbitrarily assigning certain values to things that don't even exist.

Girls WANT to have sex! Boys WANT to have sex! It is a biological imperative placed in our DNA through evolution!

Perhaps you could pass a law that forbids sex for ANYONE under the age of 30! Think how beneficial THAT would be!!
EVERY BRIDE WOULD BE A VIRGIN! Wouldn't THAT suit your goal?

You sound like the Taliban. YOU need to decide about everyone's behavior, and whether it's right or wrong, based on YOUR own thoughts.

It's almost like the Republicans efforts to ban drag shows. I assume they are doing this because they secretly think they might like going to them, and would wind up sucking some guy's weiner backstage.

Most everyone else (including ME) don't really give a crap about drag shows. They don't interest me. I don't care about them. But, I have NO interest in banning something that is of interest to other people, but not to me. Adults can make their own decisions (And will anyway, even if they are Trumpies secretly hanging out in gay sex clubs, which apparently is a pretty frequent occurrence!)

Perhaps you could turn your attention to supporting "Fappy The Dolphin" in his efforts to end heterosexual masturbation for ALL ages.

An admirable goal! Get on it, Tiger!

Once you master that, you can start making decisions about biological mating rituals next.

Consensual human behavior should never be anyone's business except the participants. If there is no coercion or force involved, then it doesn't matter.

You need to study "Transactional Analysis" about why people do the things they do. THEY DO THEM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO! That's all there is to it.

You can add on all the made-up theories and words that you want to. None of them make any difference, and none of them will EVER change fundamental human relations.

No grooming means realizing that kids are dumb and easy to manipulate and using that to manipulate them into doing things they don't want to do. You keep saying boys but we're talking about grown ass men in their 30s and 40s here. Teenage girls and boys banging is perfectly fine. See kids are not fully grown up in their brains and 40yr olds are. Therefore a 40 year old can easily manipulate a teenage kid to do something they will regret later on. I don't know anywhere a 14 yr old can't fuck a 17 yr old so that's bullshit it's not illegal. I got invited to party a lot and I went. I kept my virginity until I was 20 and my fiance took it. Just because a girl accepts an invite to go party does NOT mean she has to fuck anyone. A woman is not a sexual object just because she goes to a party you sexist pig. I'm sure your wife went to parties. I went to parties and never had sex that's just plain misogyny right there. All you accomplished with that retarded rant was making yourself look like a creep.

[Kinalace]

Originally Posted by Simone ↗

I had my son when I was 19 years old, my (ex) husband was 18 - both legally adults + only a year apart. So what's your point? My son is nearly 21 years old now + I see him as a child, I cannot even comprehend how an adult would find a 17 year old CHILD sexually attractive. Just fucking sick.

No matter what you fucking say, 17 is a child. A man in his 30s has no business sticking his dick in a teenager.

Fuck all you vile perverts.

It's sick they're acting like grooming is ok. Everyone with a brain knows teenagers are dumb, impulsive, and easy to manipulate. An adult person can easily manipulate and control a young teen's whole life until the fucker destroys it. They're sickos.

[Kinalace]

Originally Posted by Yoloman ↗

Simone: I am in my late 60s; my five year exclusive partner is 41. She wants to get married every day. Am I a pedeo?

Is a 41 year old an underage kid? Pedophile means you're attracted to kids. That was retarded even as joke

[cardsharksam]

Originally Posted by lovelylucinda ↗

Brilliant post thank youit has me very intrigued as to how it was an accident? If so what caused the carbon monoxide? Did they lose consciousness before they realised anything was amiss? So many questions

Like the blood all over the sheet

[William May]

Originally Posted by Dodecahedron ↗

So the concept of grooming doesn’t register with you then?

"Grooming"

Pure, unadulterated BULLSHIT!

Invented by a sociologist 30 years ago, trying to make their mark on science with a "new" (read idiotic) "Concept"

If it was a true concept, and actually worked as advertised, and young adults were actually as retarded and gullible as you make them out to be:

A. All kids would clean their rooms, (because, like, they do EVERYTHING an adult tells them to do, right? Because they are so gullible and simple-minded, right?)

B. The "Bay City Rollers" would have been as big as the Beatles, because adult marketers told kids to like them. And kids are so simple minded, they just do what they're told, right?

C. Kinnalace would have 12 kids by now, because there is NO WAY she could stay a virgin, because she was just a dumb, impressionable kid who would do anything.

Oh!......Wait!.......It looks like EVERY BOY SHE KNEW WHO WANTED TO HAVE SEX WITH HER, WAS unsuccessful, due to their "Grooming" efforts being insufficient. Are you telling me that "grooming" is just BS and doesn't really work?!?!!?

That CAN'T BE!! Everyone knows "Grooming" is real, and dangerous hazard to any young person!


So kids really shouldn't be out in public all alone, without a keeper or attendant of some kind.

[akyan]

Originally Posted by William May ↗

"Grooming"

Pure, unadulterated BULLSHIT!

Invented by a sociologist 30 years ago, trying to make their mark on science with a "new" (read idiotic) "Concept"

If it was a true concept, and actually worked as advertised, and young adults were actually as retarded and gullible as you make them out to be:

A. All kids would clean their rooms, (because, like, they do EVERYTHING an adult tells them to do, right? Because they are so gullible and simple-minded, right?)

B. The "Bay City Rollers" would have been as big as the Beatles, because adult marketers told kids to like them. And kids are so simple minded, they just do what they're told, right?

C. Kinnalace would have 12 kids by now, because there is NO WAY she could stay a virgin, because she was just a dumb, impressionable kid who would do anything.

Oh!......Wait!.......It looks like EVERY BOY SHE KNEW WHO WANTED TO HAVE SEX WITH HER, WAS unsuccessful, due to their "Grooming" efforts being insufficient. Are you telling me that "grooming" is just BS and doesn't really work?!?!!?

That CAN'T BE!! Everyone knows "Grooming" is real, and dangerous hazard to any young person!


So kids really shouldn't be out in public all alone, without a keeper or attendant of some kind.

I donot disagree with you, but I want to say that Kinalace is right. Teenagers are no match for adults in mind games and resource. “Grooming” or whatever term people like to use is irrelevant to the her logic.

The logic is simple, older you are the more experience and wisdom you have, also the amount of resources at your disposal is vastly greater than when you are younger. Therefor you are far more capable of manipulating and taking advantage of a much younger person.

I am nearly 40 years old, I can confidently say I can manipulate the shit out of the 16 year old me. Same when it comes to dealing with women. I can’t say that for all men, but you know what to look for if you are looking. But ultimately in my experience, it’s the resource difference that is the most dominant factor. The 40-year-old me would not need to plan elaborate ways to ask a girl may or may not be named Nataly to homecoming dance and ending up getting rejected. The 40-year-old me would just say “Fuck you Nataly” drop $20k and have 2 girls flown in for the weekend and just have a baller time at the homecoming.

Went off on a tangent there, Kinalace is saying older, more experienced, and better resourced individuals have much more advantage than the young, poor, and inexperienced. Which is very solid logic.

[William May]

Originally Posted by akyan ↗

I donot disagree with you, but I want to say that Kinalace is right. Teenagers are no match for adults in mind games and resource. “Grooming” or whatever term people like to use is irrelevant to the her logic.

The logic is simple, older you are the more experience and wisdom you have, also the amount of resources at your disposal is vastly greater than when you are younger. Therefor you are far more capable of manipulating and taking advantage of a much younger person.

I am nearly 40 years old, I can confidently say I can manipulate the shit out of the 16 year old me. Same when it comes to dealing with women. I can’t say that for all men, but you know what to look for if you are looking. But ultimately in my experience, it’s the resource difference that is the most dominant factor. The 40-year-old me would not need to plan elaborate ways to ask a girl may or may not be named Nataly to homecoming dance and ending up getting rejected. The 40-year-old me would just say “Fuck you Nataly” drop $20k and have 2 girls flown in for the weekend and just have a baller time at the homecoming.

Went off on a tangent there, Kinalace is saying older, more experienced, and better resourced individuals have much more advantage than the young, poor, and inexperienced. Which is very solid logic.

I agree the points you make are all valid. This may be how Weinstein brought his plans forward.

But the chicks STILL had to say "Yeah, I'm getting on that plane to Paris to go shopping" or "Yeah, I'm going to the Bahamas to lay on the beach in the sun"

I didn't hear a single one of them say "Yeah, they tased me, bro, tied me up, and threw me into the Learjet like I was a sack of potatoes!" So it still comes down, even in Weinsteins case, to the fact that women were perfectly happy to say "Yes" when it suited what they wanted to do.

That's where MY beef is.

[pa28Pilot]

The thing is, SOME of these 'kids' are fucking wise and know exactly what they want. When you're an adult it's easy to forget how smart they can be. Ironically, it's the ones who WEREN'T street smart at that age who are likely to run the argument that all teens are gullible little darlings who will jump into bed with the first 50 year old who offers to buy them a pack of cigarettes. You lot were safe from the likes of me, trust me. No interest whatsoever.

But a 17 year old (real life example), ten years my junior, high IQ, who has the same hopes and dreams I had at that age and can spend hours talking with on a high intellectual level? That shit is encouraged by our DNA, and the healthy ones amongst us can tell if they're gonna be damaged by our engaging with them or not, and respond appropriately. Whether that be by running a mile in the opposite direction or fucking their brains out!