If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
younger girls
This discussion has been closed.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Maybe because I don't spend my entire life online. Unfortunately I have a life to lead so cannot be expected to respond immediately, although it was fairly obvious that I would do so at some point. After all, it's not every day someone randomly tells you to fuck off when you state common sense. How you can manage to find fault with my statement amazes me, and if I was a slightly more cynical person I would suspect that you decided to pick a fight because of who I am, not what I said.
I didn't label this guy a paedophile. Go back and read what I said.
For the more rational people arguing in this thread, I would like to point out that this guy was not being attracted to an individual who happened to be 13. He was finding 13 year olds sexually attractive. 13 year old girls, as a general stage, are not physically mature. They quite often still look like children. Why this is not considered paedophilic in Mist's world I'm not sure.
I haven't stated that this guy would hurt girls, or be a danger to them. But that's completely irrelevant to the definition of paedophilia.
It's one bitchfest after another.
You're really not vigilantes. Please make a note of that.
If you are somehow suggesting that you meant paedophillic in some literal sense that practically noone in the world other than yourself and your boyfriend would read it as, then of course you are technically correct to say that the behaviour is paedophillic in nature, because it means "someone who is attracted to children".
However, I think that you and I both know that that wasn't what you were trying to get across, and it certainly wasn't what kermit was suggesting with his "hanging up by the balls" comment. The average reader these days would not see the word paedophile in its strict, dictionary, sense. They would see it in the sense that the media portrays it now, of old, dirty, dangerous men praying on their innocent victims.
Now, to address your other points :
Wrong. Firstly I was telling you to fuck off because you called me stupid. I can find fault with your statement because you know nothing about this guy, and how mature he is within himself, or of his interactions with these girls that he apparently is attracted to, yet you are willing to be judge, jury and executioner. Thirdly whilst I would agree that there is no love lost between us I would have said the same to anyone who comes along and randomly says that something I've said is stupid, it's nothing to do with who you are - though the fact that you'd think that it is suggest something about your own level of self-import.
Although of course there is the possibility that you don't even realise that you are insulting people when you do it. Care to explain why I am meant to be "irrational"?
Dont worry, you don't need anyone to call you stupid, you often make yourself look stupid without anyone else saying a word.
Muppet.
You're not helping. I'm quite enjoying this debate between Mist and GWST, as they both do make good points. But then you have to come in with your childish insults, just to back up your wee buddy :-/
Your incredibly well-considered opinion on this matter has been noted.
Sooo..let it lie, dude.
Glad to oblige
Mist, I wasn't trying to get anything across. Any insinuation you have read is there because you have read it, not because I put it there. As for the rest, I can only reiterate my earlier suggestion of learning how to read. I didn't call you stupid, and I didn't call the guy a paedophile. Hence the irrationality. I should have called you stupid. You're either being wilful or you really are that dumb.
It is not my responsibility if people wrongly interpret a definition when it is correctly applied.
Shame you have to be nasty, I thought you looked thrilling in those pictures you posted, I was about to hop on a plane and propose. Oh Well
Probably not (Hey, just like your post), but I figured while JsT was on a role of backing up those who are in his little clique, I thought I'd comment on what I felt was not needed in this thread as I was genuinely interested in Mists' and GWST points.
Ahh. Is it not?
Of course, there is something known as implication. The implication of your original statement was that I, as the person who had said the things that you were calling stupid, was stupid. My response was an addressing of that situation. Far be it from me though to credit you with the intelligence to realise that.
Of course, if you really want to be pedantic about exactly what was said, I didn't explicitly address you when I said that people are quick to judge, but you still saw fit to reply to me, did you not?
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. Of course, technically, he is your boyfriend
it was proofed or somethin that jojo is actually 16. she was said to be 13 to get a name for herself.
on the topic, im 17. it is quite hard for you to distinguish a 13 year old aprt from say a 16 year old. you would say that there is a lot of difference but there isn't really. you can find a lot of 13 year olds who look much older then they are.
although what this bloke is sayin is quite wrong i feel. he knows they are 13, and says he lusts there bodies or somethin. i mean u can look at a 13 year old and say she is pretty, but any further is very wrong. i kno this is bit extreme but just the thought of them not having grown any pubic hair is enough to put me off.
It is perfectly possible for intelligent people to do stupid things. It's also perfectly possible for stupid people to do stupid things. You can make your own mind up about what I was implying there.
C2BK - JsT isn't in a clique with me. I'm not sure what you mean.
That was me almost 2 years ago, at 14. I realise it's a bad picture. I don't exactly look "adult", but I don't look 14, and I know it.
to be honest i think that if you are 17 and you are lookin for a sexual relationship then going below 16 isn't just illegal but wrong. fair enough if you aren't but from my experience most of us blokes are looking for a shag, and for some going for a younger girl is the easiest way. although that isn't always true!
I am 16, and I was 14 when that was taken. Put into the equation that I was almost 6' then (and have reached it now)...well, you get ze picture.
But yeh...he did say he liked them looking 13. Which does, indeed, make it wrong.
No matter what you were saying or implying there I don't see how saying that I do stupid things is any better than calling me as a person stupid. Not that I actually make the abstraction myself, being as I tend to judge people by their actions and not their latent self.
Which would you prefer? Me to refer you as part of their clique or their shadow?
Awk ya know what, it don't matter. This thread has been ruined now.
I'd just like to add that from the start I did agree with Mist as I felt it was uncalled for to even bring up the word Pedo into this thread, but GWST, you did make very good points... and without the guy who started this thread, to explain exactly what he meant about being attracted to younger girls; I can't see how this thread could go any further.
i think this thread should be closed now. cos its makin a lot of unneccasry arguments!
But why would you want it to go further? Isn't it the done thing to simply go around in circles ad infinitum until Jim V closes the thread?
I don't know, i'd just like you to explain what 'cliques' I'm actually in. Muppet.
Cause I was enjoying the little debate that was going on
please end this discussion!!
They can. But whether they actually will is another matter. One of them has to be about for that to happen, and they have to consider it closeworthy.
Methinks it has run it's course.