Doesn't get much sweeter than this.

Post #37,705 by Mike 5/6/02 11:03:15 PM 5/6/02 11:41:59 PM Reply	Doesn't get much sweeter than this. >>And, it seems that Dr. Finkelhor's opinion is that, at age 15, >>you would have been "abused" if you had sex with a woman age 25 or more. >>Which does seem to contradict your claims. The schoolmistress was 24 when she had sex with the boy. -- William Shatner's Trousers -- Edited by Mike May 6, 2002, 11:05:03 PM EDT Edited by Mike May 6, 2002, 11:09:19 PM EDT Edited by Mike May 6, 2002, 11:11:38 PM EDT Edited by Mike May 6, 2002, 11:41:59 PM EDT Doesn't get much sweeter than this. >>And, it seems that Dr. Finkelhor's opinion is that, at age 15, >>you would have been "abused" if you had sex with a woman age 25 or more. >>Which does seem to contradict your claims. The schoolmistress was 24 when she had sex with the boy. Thoughts? -- William Shatner's Trousers -- Expand All History \| Collapse All History
Post #37,719 by Brandioch 5/7/02 1:25:50 AM Reply	Whatever. So, that is TWO data points that you've admitted to. (if you can call that last one an admission). 16 - 30 is "okay" -and- 15 - 24 is "okay". All the rest are "okay" as long as the state says they're okay but you don't like the state telling you what is okay. Yes, that was your original point. Now, you have "won" because Dr. F.'s professional opinion is that, if you, at 15 had sex with the woman in the story (24), it would not be abuse. Now, find where I said it would be abuse. :) As I said in the beginning, all I'm doing is establishing the criteria you are operating under. I don't recall ever saying it was "abuse" or "wrong" or anything. All I've done, so far, is ask you what the criteria you operate under are. And point out where you contradict your previous statements.
Post #37,737 by Mike 5/7/02 7:59:28 AM Reply	"Just say prosecute" ............<wink> -- William Shatner's Trousers --
Post #37,739 by Brandioch 5/7/02 8:19:56 AM Reply	Again, proof that you lie. Here's the link to the post of mine that you referenced. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37395\|Just say "prosecute".] Allow me to quote myself from said post: "okay" or "legal"? You will notice that I did not address what the age of consent should be, only that it should apply equally to boys as well as girls. Again? "okay" or "legal"? Again, I haven't stated what I feel the age of consent should be, just that it be applied to boys as well as girls. Another time? Hmmmm, and here I thought the discussion was about adult/child sex. Yet you're using two 14yo's as an example. Whatever. Do you need me to quote it again? #1. It is about adult/child sex. Not about two 14yo's. #2. "okay" and "legal" are NOT the same. #3. I did NOT say that >I< would be traumatized. One more time? Again, is there any test or measurement to determine where each individual child is in that continuum? If not, then setting a "legal" age of consent is up to the society that the child/adult inhabit. And I'm saying that that age limit should apply to boy and girls. Now, could you point out where I said that X aged child would be wrong with Y aged adult? I didn't think so. The reference "Just say "prosecute"." was in response to your title "Just say no - yeah right!" Again, you started this thread with a rant about "the state" telling >YOU< what is good for you. My point was that if the laws were violated, they will be prosecuted. As I've pointed out, "okay" is not the same as "legal". You seemed to have a problem, in your initial post, with what was "legal". That being , what the state was telling you was good for you. So, prosecute what is illegal. Then I asked you for the criteria under which it would be "okay". And you retreated into what would be "legal". And now you've resorted to lies, again. In my previous post....[link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37719\|Whatever.]I asked: As I said in the beginning, all I'm doing is establishing the criteria you are operating under. I don't recall ever saying it was "abuse" or "wrong" or anything. All I've done, so far, is ask you what the criteria you operate under are. And point out where you contradict your previous statements. You seem to imply that my post "Just say "Prosecute"." was where I contradict your previous statements or where I said it was "abuse" or "wrong". Yet, when I read it, it seems to, explicitely, request you to clarify your position. My only comments are that such criteria apply equally to girls as well as boys. So, what were you saying?
Post #37,748 by Mike 5/7/02 9:32:58 AM Reply	1,2,3,4 ....You take the low road..... Dude, your posts are festooned with questions about adults fucking children. Did you supply specific ages? You were intentionally evasive of this. You see ... you were so busy trying to learn my position from me, that you couldn't spare time to address this, despite my question. Guess the 'ole fact finding missions don't work both ways do they? >>Now, could you point out where I said that X aged child would be >>wrong with Y aged adult? <Brandi Mode On> So you DO think its okay for an adult to fuck a child? <Brandi Mode Off> -- William Shatner's Trousers --
Post #37,761 by Brandioch 5/7/02 11:00:06 AM Reply	Again, more lies. I'll provide links to the truth. Dude, your posts are festooned with questions about adults fucking children. Did you supply specific ages? Yes. I supplied specific ages. Over and over and over and over again. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37502\|Very interesting.] [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37516\|"okay" == "do you see any problems with it".] [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37524\|Allow me to quote you.] [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=37547\|How much EASIER can it be?] You were intentionally evasive of this. I believe the above links speak for themselves. They specifically ask for you to say "okay" or "not okay" for specific ages. Yet you claim I was evasive. You could not do so. Instead you said that "the state" was the best judge for what was best for everyone. A position that does seem to contradict your earlier statement about how you did not feel that "the state" knew what was best. Most curious.
Post #37,773 by Mike 5/7/02 11:58:18 AM Reply	Haw haw haw >>Now, could you point out where I said that X aged child would be wrong >>with Y aged adult? >>Yes. I supplied specific ages. Over and over and over and over again. Which is it? Let me guess.....out comes the "out of context" argument. -- William Shatner's Trousers --
Post #37,774 by Mike 5/7/02 12:02:03 PM Reply	Hee hee hee. So, is it okay for an adult to do it with a child? -- William Shatner's Trousers --
Post #37,779 by Mike 5/7/02 12:28:06 PM Reply	Har har har The schoolmistress was 24 when she had sex with the boy. -- William Shatner's Trousers --
Post #37,948 by marlowe 5/8/02 2:36:53 PM Reply	Made me look. I suppose I should know better. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Truth is that which is the case. Accept no substitutes. If competence is considered "hubris" then may I and my country always be as "arrogant" as we can possibly manage.

Welcome to IWETHEY!