@ pax
So that's where this confusion comes from. red_avatar isn't talking about 13 year olds, when it comes to the other funky names (i cant be bother to look them up again).
We don't even to buy what milo says, i mean you already sourced that legally speaking sand in the land appears to be the age of 13. Although their definition stems from prepubescent as well.
So you simply don't want to detract from the core problem with definitions, legal details bodytype, the number of acts between the parties, etc, and whatnot may matter?
Because I would be fine with that.
here is what i wrote before my edit above - not worth opening, it's just in case someone read my original post and wonders
Spoiler:
So you're saying the actual definition of pedophilia and the other 2, where body types become relevant (imo), is a tangent that should be avoided here to focus on the actual issue?
Yeah I was overthinking that thing way too much while trying to keep it compact
But you basically just don't want to detract from the core matter. At least for this discussion, you want to set aside details, like legal matters about definitions for pedophilia, hebephilia or ephebophilia. Is that correct?
When this body type thing started it already wasn't about 13 years old. It was, e.g., about girls that 'clearly' look mature and developed but haven't actually reached the age of consent yet (jailbait?).
It was never meant as an defense to milo or pedophilia. It's possibly one of the reasons for different definitions.
he is self-deluding and he in deluding others purposefully.
No chance he really is just self-deluding and flippant about events that happened to him? It remains problematic in public, because it will seem like endorsement at the worst, but less in conflict with his actual position. I mean he does say that he regrets some statements. And George Takei seems to speak out similarly? Maybe it is a coping mechanism, comparable to stockholm syndrome.
That was a question.
This controversy may have simply sprung forth from his debatable way of dealing with his past in public. Maybe his defense is mostly sincere.
Lengthy video that does a good job of balancing defense and criticism of Milo:
Spoiler:
One thing he brings up hadn't occurred to me before - Milo prides himself on outing pedophiles, so why hasn't he given the name of the priest who molested him - a priest who could still be molesting kids to this day? And why didn't he go to the cops when he supposedly saw kids having sex with adults at a party?
Well there were plenty of things that Miley Cyrus look-a-like says that don't make sense. Like in the Bill Maher lip where he basically says that homosexuality is a disorder because he felt disordered.
Or when he plays the "race card" when talking about the alt-right.
Last edited by Mr.Tinkles on Wed, 22nd Feb 2017 22:21; edited 1 time in total
Actually I just wondered why you were so sure of your position, but I think I no longer have a problem with that.
I find the whole situation sad though, because I don't think Milo is that bad or insincere about all of it. He, being an actual victim, just seems to have dealt badly with his experiences, which I won't blame him for. In this case his style of humor doesn't really help in public situations either.
This is the part that made me less sure about the thing than you seem to be.
But as you pointed out, his facebook defense doesn't really add up.
Something tells me Maher won't receive any backlash from it.
People are trying to excuse it as a joke. George Takei is taking more heat for his comments, I've seen his story pop up on a few mainstream sites and CNN's Jake Tapper called his comments "horrifying".
Bill Maher is a terrible smug condescending liberal. I mean I'm in the liberal spectrum generally, but when people talk about smug liberals they probably mean Bill Maher liberal, not John Stewart liberal. Bill Maher is to the left what Alex Jones is to the right. Both should just be excluded from public discussion and not be given any platform whatsoever.
And that's the problem with the world today.
It shouldn't matter what Bill had said YEARS AGO.
It won't matter what Milo said in a few years.
You can't go down someone's past and pick and choose the things they have said to fit your own agenda. It's what the idiots are doing now who are trying to discredit earnest individuals. It works for them, but you can't do the same to them. They will find ways to justify what they said and make it OK. Which in turn will become ok only for THEM to say it.
I'm pretty sure most if not all in this very chat room, at one point, while staring at the fine cock of their colleague in the showers post some sweaty, strenuous physical activity made some racy comments that NOW would have them hanged.
What idiots are doing now, by calling out idiots for using similar speech in the past is exactly what the idiots want now. Policing speech. Making sure NO ONE EVER will say anything damning, or hurtful publicly. Because words now have consequences. Stop it. Bill Maher, as smug as he is after he fucks ann coulter, has a right to say what he wants, how he wants it whenever he wants it. Same with milo. Same with Hitler. Same with Stalin. Same with Trump. knit picking shit to suit your agenda... helps the SJW's win.
Our own mainstream media is jumping at the chance to trash Milo too - I'm surprised they heard of him. Of course, since our own media are slaves to the left-wing parties, I'm not surprised but to see them calling Milo "a right extremist" ...
"The fall of the extreme-right 'riot faggot' and provocateur Milo who defended paedophilia"
The whole thing reminds me a little of a Dutch song called "En het werd zomer".
Rob De Nijs talks in this song about his first gay experience when he was 14 years old and the guy was much older. He changed the song to hide the fact that he was gay by turning the guy into a girl which somehow made it right. It just goes to show how hypocritical society can be.
And you're right about the hypocrisy. I was listening to Joe Rogan recently, and as an example he mentioned this commercial from a few years ago:
Spoiler:
Although it's a funny commercial, he said "imagine if it was a baby girl surrounded by men fighting for her affection, the writer would be thrown in jail when he submitted the script."
Last edited by randir14 on Thu, 23rd Feb 2017 20:09; edited 1 time in total
Rob de Nijs ? That song came out in 1977 too.. That's simply incomparable.
For both the song and the baby ad, those conceptions are just deeply rooted within our mindsets: if a young boy somehow seduces a woman of age, he's a beast.. turn it the other way around, and now the man of age is a predator. You can call that hypocrisy, I'd rather call it the remnants of a way of thinking that's currently being challenged. I won't go into patriarchal blabla, but it has to do with it.
The ad could have been turned with a baby girl as long as the humour was adjusted accordingly. I don't think many people would take issue with a baby girl stepping upon handsome men if it's obviously humorous.. you just have to find what the hell you can sell with it. The joke of a baby with a beard simply isn't immediately translatable to a girl - but it allows that guy to say "imagine if it was a baby girl..".
I don't blame the mainstream media for not talking about Milo Y. much ( there were newspaper articles/TV news' reports about him in France, don't know about the Netherlands ), in what way would it be worth doing so ?
Everything he says is obvious controversy for the sake of it, I wouldn't want someone as dangerous as him broadcast on TV news..
R5 5600X - 3070FE - 16GB DDR4 3600 - Asus B550 TUF Gaming Plus - BeQuiet Straight Power 11 750W - Pure Base 500DX
Lol. Milo says a shit load of things that are meant to deflect.
I wonder how many times Dore stared at porn with broads as young as 18. But because it's legal... it's OK. I love how many of these individuals have an issue with this age thing - look at porn that includes someone half their age. To me that's pretty much the same thing. One's "legal" the other isn't... but doesn't change the fact that you're thinking of fucking someone waaaay younger than you.
That's my opinion on the matter. You can't be talking about some 20+ wanting to fuck at teen, while being in your 50s looking at an 18 year old taking it in both holes. But again one is completely legal...
Age of consent is different in every country. People go to fucked up countries where AOC is 14... quick C/P from google
Code:
But while the UK is tightening up the rules this map shows how the age of sexual consent is drastically different around the world. Here the age is 16, whereas in Germany the age is as low as 14. Over the pond in the US, California allowed consensual sex from 18 while in New York the age is 17.
So an american talking about AOC means a whole lot different to someone listening to it from germany.
AOC should be the same worldwide. AOC should be at least 21 (if you're still living with your parents) 18 If you're living on your own taking care of yourself.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
