hahaha for a while i forgot all about this site

[Al Swearegen]

Scrap states biological features, like a hand full of titties or "grass on the field" is how to see that a girl is fair game.

I disagree.

It's that simple.

Yes and I have stated that he has said contrary things too which is why he needs to clarify what the hell he is on about. That simple.

But why do you ask whether I have changed my stance? I have not indicated in anything I have said a difference of opinion.

[Arya Quinn]

Scrap says a lot of weird and wacky stuff and while he is certainly a bit delusional I don't think he's a paedophile. Before anyone goes pointing fingers and calling him this or that he should at least be able to explain himself. Start a call-out if you need to, but don't be branding him a monster when he's not here.

I've called him a lot of shit in the past few years, from a gun-toting lunatic to a Zionist wanker but I've never called him a pedo. That draws the line, even for me. I drew my line in the sand, but the people calling him as such have crossed it and gone into the fucking ocean.

Wait, what's this? Some_Bloke defending Scrappy?!



No but seriously, that's a big word to be thrown around and it's been pointed at everyone from Stephen Fry to Stan Lee to George Takei in recent years. Cunts (well, I would call them that if they had depth or warmth to them) like Saville and Weinstein are to blame, of course but that hasn't stopped others from jumping on the train for the sake of either publicity or money (even if found innocent that can end a career so some will pay money to hush it).

Those people are almost as bad as the offenders themselves. Fuck 'em. 

Steps off of soapbox

[Lestat]

Y'know, I could actually use an opinion on this...y'see, there is this girl I like, I've liked her for VERY long time. Since we were both about 11-12, now, AFAIK, she is either 32, 33 or 34. Thing is, she's got that LFA autie trait where you don't look like you age physically. She literally, looks now, as if we were back in that spesh school, and we were 12, she's autie, and, well, I fancied her then, and I still do now.

Think it would be wrong of me to ask her if she'd like to come out with me on a date, because of the way she looks? it isn't BECAUSE she  looks about 11-12 that I fancy her, not at all, its because I have fancied her since we first met, and since we go way back, I just haven't stopped, its not changed over time, I just like her, the same  as I always have. Sweet girl, tiny, but cute as buttons, and a delight to be around. Even her voice sounds kinda squeaky, but I didn't really have the stomach to ask her out back then, I know someone, a friend of mine, and she went to a different spesh school with this girl, laura, to the one i did, and she still knows how to find her place. We both went there a few years back to drop by and see how she was doing (well, it seems, I'm glad  to say), but since then, haven't seen her.

Idea would be not to ask her straight out, but see her again socially, ask her if she'd do me the honor of coming out to dinner on me, see a movie, etc., and then ask her, once I'm sure she'd be comfortable with me at least posing the question.

So...what do you think? obviously I'm not going to think about the age of consent law, its just she does LOOK young. Really young, although she is older than I am. She's one of those auties who doesn't age, don't know if any of the rest of you has seen that phenomenon, an autistic, usually but not always female, but they do not look like they age a single day physically. So this would be, IF she decided upon being asked, that she would assent to taking me as hers, a relationship in spite of, not because of, her apparent visual age.

It sort of unnerves me, in that respect. Because people aren't meant to look 11-12 and look sexy. Its just that she always has been to me, since I first knew her when we were close to that age ourselves, and I find I can get over the uncanny valley effect, because logically, she is not a child, she just looks like one. It shouldn't be possible. But she is.  A really sexy kid, who isn't a kid, but someone i've known for maybe 20 years. It takes a conscious effort, to get over that, its weird, but I genuinely care about and for her, and she is one of the very, very few people, who I know I could be with, that I could, maybe, get out of the dark and icy place in which I am currently stuck.

I don't know how much I can take of that. Its been so long, and so desolate. I mean, if I can't relocate the girl you know I mean, this other girl, is someone I could ask, who I like, a lot, her folks have met me, and were fine with me visiting, were lovely to me and my friend kel, Laura's folks brought us all coke and cookies, nice people, relatives I could get on with, her brother seems decent enough, I never knew him in school, but he went to the same one as his sis and me, just different parts of it because he was younger. Last time I saw him, we ended up playing a round of his pokemon cards together, lounging by the fire. So, the environment is one that a trust could be built up and if Laura would want to be with me, it could be done, in respect of the whole 'wholly shit hun you look like you did 20-25 years ago, as if it were yesterday' factor, and her folks already know who I am and that the two of us go way back.

So can anyone actually find a reason I shouldn't ask her? and no, her being autistic doesn't count. If it did then I'd have dated maybe three times or four, and it be a nuclear disaster or else about as exciting as watching a puddle of piss evaporate on an icy cold day. If I didn't ask autie girls or aspie girls then I'd never ask anyone. I mean, the looks. I DON'T care what total strangers think. I'd want her family's welcome, I like them, but for random bypassers if they decided to accuse me of anything, I'm fine with just seeing them off with a growl and an evil stare, maybe 'piss off, she's older than I am', but only one I'd NEED to be happy with it, is the lady herself, and I'd very, very much want her family's blessing. They seem like people who would give it, if they know that all will be well, and that if she wanted to get into a relationship at all, it would be with a boyfriend who would go all out to make her happy and bring light to her life and a smile to her day, and of course, anyone of a bullying mindset, would be seen off by a MOST displeased  me.

['andersom']

Scrap states biological features, like a hand full of titties or "grass on the field" is how to see that a girl is fair game.

I disagree.

It's that simple.

Yes and I have stated that he has said contrary things too which is why he needs to clarify what the hell he is on about. That simple.

But why do you ask whether I have changed my stance? I have not indicated in anything I have said a difference of opinion.

You did not change your stance, when it comes to your morals. But your stance towards Scrap does look different to me. In the thread of 2013 you used the word pedophile a few times towards Scrap. I reposted a few of those posts in this thread. You were fiercer on Scrap than I was.

Now you give him a possible way out, because he may have meant girls that have gone through puberty.

To me, that seems a difference with five years ago.
S

['andersom']

All that I ever did was articulate the position that as soon as a girl goes through puberty, then she's physically fair game.

It depends what definition you are using. By the legal definition in Australia, for example, it is age based rather than physical maturity based. So if you come to Oz and shag underage girls you are a paedophile.

I was talking about the biological definition. As soon as there's grass on the field, you can play ball.

Scrap uses only the biological defenition. So, I interpreted that as boobs, pubes and menses.

Maybe he meant more, maybe he did also mean mentally through puberty. He does not say that.



But, lets assume he does also mean that the girl must have mentally gone through puberty. How is he going to make sure that they did? Think it is an impossible thing to do. Kids in puberty want to be seen as mature and grown up.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

For the record, no one appears to be saying Pappy is a paedophile. Apart from Zegh, who isn't even here. So we are not using that accusation.

What a few of us are saying is that Pappy said some *very* clear things about when he thinks a girl is ready for sex and, while he may have meant something completely different from what he clearly said, until he backs away from those statements.... this statements can be seen as being indicative of his position on the subject. It's very simple and a series of thousand word essays on the subject doesn't change that.

[Al Swearegen]

All that I ever did was articulate the position that as soon as a girl goes through puberty, then she's physically fair game.

It depends what definition you are using. By the legal definition in Australia, for example, it is age based rather than physical maturity based. So if you come to Oz and shag underage girls you are a paedophile.

I was talking about the biological definition. As soon as there's grass on the field, you can play ball.

Scrap uses only the biological defenition. So, I interpreted that as boobs, pubes and menses.

Maybe he meant more, maybe he did also mean mentally through puberty. He does not say that.



But, lets assume he does also mean that the girl must have mentally gone through puberty. How is he going to make sure that they did? Think it is an impossible thing to do. Kids in puberty want to be seen as mature and grown up.

I am thinking that his statement is he does not like women who shave I may be wrong. I see his photos of naked chicks and very few of them are shaved. Big boobs and unshaven vaginas seems a preference, hardly underdeveloped females (but perhaps your reading is different)

Girls DO start GOING through Puberty at very young ages but do not finish until their late teens which coincides with the ages around sexual consent. Now Hyke you can try to dismiss his statement like he did not make it. You could try to transform his gone through to mean in the process of or just starting. You could even try to suddenly pretend a situation where he has to now do spot checks on girl identification to make sure they absolutely have and ALL of that is silly.

I hope you do not.

Who says he has to do any of that. If he was just saying something off colour then he was being gross and does not need to know or check or do anything more. It also has NOTHING to do with what kids want to be seen or so on.

The facts we have is he has a history of saying stupid provocative things and he has said thing that run counter to this. So based on this we need clarity from him.

He may say, "I was fucking around because I wanted a whole heap of you to react. lol" or he may say "Yes, I really meant I think fucking kids is good".

The truth is that I find the whole subject pretty fucking revolting. I find it revolting that Scrap makes off-colour remarks like this and not even that I think he puts any store in them but that he thinks it is funny like that idiot at work thought making off-colour jokes about my daughter's sex life was funny), I find it revolting that Zegh is not given the Bint treatment for doubling down and calling a member on this board a paedophile, I find it revolting that the default is NOT hey let's clarify Scrap means because he is saying some pretty gross stuff which runs counter to other stuff he says, I think it is more revolting that I feel compelled (as someone unfairly called a paedophile on here once) to clarify before making such assumptions.

The truth is too, as I said, I find the old guy young woman/late teens girl pretty distasteful even if it is legal. So even the gone through puberty thing is pretty ugh!.

But again what is your basis thinking I have changed my stances and on what?

[Al Swearegen]

For the record, no one appears to be saying Pappy is a paedophile. Apart from Zegh, who isn't even here. So we are not using that accusation.

What a few of us are saying is that Pappy said some *very* clear things about when he thinks a girl is ready for sex and, while he may have meant something completely different from what he clearly said, until he backs away from those statements.... this statements can be seen as being indicative of his position on the subject. It's very simple and a series of thousand word essays on the subject doesn't change that.

Try a word count. I have not written a thousand word essay yet.

I get what you mean, because you have said it over and over. I also disagree with you and whilst you can keep reiterating it over and over I am not likely to agree any more for saying it. You can of course keep saying it but it is not likely to make me take your point of view.

['andersom']

But again what is your basis thinking I have changed my stances and on what?

Told you. You seem more friendly and open to a possible "more decent" explanation from Scrap than you were in 2013.

That's the only change in stance I refer to.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

There's a support group for people addicted to excessive and pointless verbosity. It's called "on and on and on and on anon".

['andersom']

All that I ever did was articulate the position that as soon as a girl goes through puberty, then she's physically fair game.

It depends what definition you are using. By the legal definition in Australia, for example, it is age based rather than physical maturity based. So if you come to Oz and shag underage girls you are a paedophile.

I was talking about the biological definition. As soon as there's grass on the field, you can play ball.

Scrap uses only the biological defenition. So, I interpreted that as boobs, pubes and menses.

Maybe he meant more, maybe he did also mean mentally through puberty. He does not say that.



But, lets assume he does also mean that the girl must have mentally gone through puberty. How is he going to make sure that they did? Think it is an impossible thing to do. Kids in puberty want to be seen as mature and grown up.

I am thinking that his statement is he does not like women who shave I may be wrong. I see his photos of naked chicks and very few of them are shaved. Big boobs and unshaven vaginas seems a preference, hardly underdeveloped females (but perhaps your reading is different)

But his statement here is an explanation about his definition about having gone through puberty. Not about his preferences.
When only reading what is in this exchange between Minister of silly walks and Scrap. It seems pretty clear.

[Al Swearegen]

All that I ever did was articulate the position that as soon as a girl goes through puberty, then she's physically fair game.

It depends what definition you are using. By the legal definition in Australia, for example, it is age based rather than physical maturity based. So if you come to Oz and shag underage girls you are a paedophile.

I was talking about the biological definition. As soon as there's grass on the field, you can play ball.

Scrap uses only the biological defenition. So, I interpreted that as boobs, pubes and menses.

Maybe he meant more, maybe he did also mean mentally through puberty. He does not say that.



But, lets assume he does also mean that the girl must have mentally gone through puberty. How is he going to make sure that they did? Think it is an impossible thing to do. Kids in puberty want to be seen as mature and grown up.

I am thinking that his statement is he does not like women who shave I may be wrong. I see his photos of naked chicks and very few of them are shaved. Big boobs and unshaven vaginas seems a preference, hardly underdeveloped females (but perhaps your reading is different)

But his statement here is an explanation about his definition about having gone through puberty. Not about his preferences.
When only reading what is in this exchange between Minister of silly walks and Scrap. It seems pretty clear.

"When only" is the defining statement here, isn't it? As in if we can exclude anything that does not fit the narrative then it is open and shut. If we can do away with contrary claims then we have complete clarity. I agree completely.

That is why I like things to be clear with NOTHING excluded.

As for being more friendly and open to decent explanation. Not at all. I think Scrap is being revolting regardless of explanation and as I keep bringing up the point of that guy at work, I do not think he was amusing or mischievous. The question is what IS his real position?

['andersom']

The Minister of silly walks asks Scrap for a definition. Scrap answers with a definition.



The answer in consistent with what he answered in 2013.

He did mention the age of 13 there too.





IIRC Scrap deleted his account not long after or even during that thread in 2013. But my memory may be wrong.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

The Minister of silly walks asks Scrap for a definition. Scrap answers with a definition.

The answer in consistent with what he answered in 2013.

Obviously when asked to clarify which definition of paedophile Scrap was using, he decided to express his preference for women who don't shave their pubic hair. Because that was obviously as good a time as any to change the subject.

Unfortunately while expressing his preference for unshaven pubic hair Scrap accidentally misused an analogy which everyone else on the planet understands to mean that a girl who has developed pubic hair is old enough for sex.

The sheer volume of words pushing this version of reality has generated its own gravitational field and its dragging me in. Everything is clear to me now.

[Gopher Gary]

Gopher-there was no 'fault' in existence. It isn't technically true that I was helpless to stop her. I COULD have done so. If I'd have seen her coming (she didn't hang about, just shot over to me like a bullet from a gun, and there being someone in the way, paused briefly to drop him to the floor because he'd stopped to try to talk to her, and she was set on coming for me, firmly implanting her steel toe-capped boots in his groin and leaving the poor sod (don't know him, looked about 25-30 or so give or take) groaning and gasping for air on the ground, writhing in pain and clutching at his freshly lady C-ed ball bag.

Funny as shit. But next thing I know, it was 'WHACK!' and my skull was rebounding off a tree.

Girl doesn't fuck about. Really, she isn't one to do things by half measures one tiny bit.

But no, she didn't rape me, I COULD have stopped her approach, but only if I had decided to unleash actual bodily harm magnitude physical violence against a young girl, I didn't know how old she was, she looked rather young actually, for 14.

She just slammed me into a tree and started shoving her tongue down my throat. But she didn't rape me, and she didn't do anything against my will either. If I had decided to, sure I could have pressed charges and won. But instead, we had locked eyes on each other as she raced towards me like a cheetah on steroids, and there felt like there was something passing between us, in an instant, it was just....I can't explain it. really young looking for 14, 14yo girls that don't even look that, aren't my 'type', but this particular 14yo classic autie girl, she has some sort of 'field' about her, like a fucking superconducting cyclotron magnet, and me a little samarium-cobalt high field permanent magnet pellet.

Effect was instantaneous and impossible to stand against. She just had me from the picosecond I saw her. We were engaged, within perhaps a week, just after the second  time we met, maybe the third, the 3rd being the second time seeing her after she did her whole battle-tank-sexkitten-steamroller part on me.

I could have stopped her. Technically. But only by acting in the worst sort of manner, that a man should never display towards a woman, unless in self defense against a thug. And Lady C is not a thug. She certainly does not fuck about when she decides something like 'I'm going big game hunting today and I'ma bag me a Lestat Rett and make him my trophy'

Only by literally turning on her before she got to me, and assaulting her physically, smashing her with the butt of my gun, headbutting her or something, and that I just could not and would not do. One look, and I was in love, before anything else, just saw her eyes and bang. I knew that we were two halves of one soul.

And while I could have easily pressed charges, why would I do that? you don't bring a court case against the love of your life, someone you've never felt the like about before or since, someone who even now, I am determined to track down, and do my utmost to get it on again between each other. Because, as I said, I just knew something was different about the girl, I don't mean her being spesh, I mean, eerie, spooky different, uncanny different. Two halves of one soul, I knew it then and I know and feel it now.

She is the one who I should spend my last breath beside. There exists another, who if she were to assent and to know, that I could marry, love. But otherwise, Lady C had an effect on me, that I became so utterly devoted to her, that even now, I essentially, belong to her in spirit and heart. And I don't get into relationships purely for the body. It either is worth everything, or nothing in my book. And she HAS my everything. I can't date again, bar perhaps one other, a certain Lady K, if she knew and went for it.

Otherwise, I'm stuck in a no man's land, where no other may walk, for the only one who could walk with me is far from my side. It is a dark, and lonely place, without my fire to warm the way and keep the shivers at bay, and without the light to show the path to walk. So there is none, nowhere to go, and nobody to go with. It is a dark, dark place indeed. Over a decade later, it is no less agonizing a place to be. Rape me....rape me indeed. Lol. She is welcome to do so any time she pleases. I am her property, and belong to her utterly, I will until the day I die.

But, let me make myself perfectly clear. I will only say this the once. Do not EVER speak ill of her like that again. Just don't do it. I bear you no ill will, and nor do I wish to have such forced upon me. She is not a rapist, and please, take back such vile accusations against her character. That has already come up in this thread. Accusations like that carry weight. And against the innocent they still stick and do damage. I won't have her reputation accursed like that. She did nothing wrong, she just  came on somewhat strong, is all.  Rapists are evil incarnate, and there isn't an evil, or wrong bone in her beautiful (even if probably fairly recently at that, 14) body. Grass on the field? no, not physically, but play? absofuckinglutely. And I wouldn't come pelting down a busy high street towards somebody who had raped me, with each of us screaming the name of the other, to crash into each other and embrace in a death-grip of relief at being back at one another's side. Nor would I gently take the arm of a rapist, and allow her to lead me to her home and introduce me to her mother (now that was a bit of a heart in mouth moment, not knowing if her mom was going to find out I'd asked the girl to marry me, she'd said  'yes' and that I'd already got a ring, that she was bringing her fiancee home, nearly 20, her just about 14, probably.

Can't even explain myself, or why I felt what I felt and feel. Not when it was a 14 year old special ed girl I fell for. But fall for her, never mind her rather violent and certainly about as forward as I've ever had anybody be, or heard of, bar a rape, but it was just one of those things, those rare, special, wonderful things that IMO any good person deserves to feel, if even for a moment once in a lifetime, but few, very few, ever will. Society's mores went right out the window,  and I found myself wrapped around said young lady, as contented as a kitten in her arms, purring by a warm fire.

All it took is one touch, and she could exert this weird ass physical control over me, she could turn my mood from raging fire, to as calm and content as a newborn kitten, my eyes drooping, resting in her arms, to passionate, to putting me to sleep, just a touch, and it was weird, whatever she wanted, it'd happen. Couldn't help myself, she could just as easily have sent me to a restful sleep, as if she had wanted to, kindle a nuclear holocaust of fury; if Lady C had wanted bad things done, then I would have become a very, very bad person. Its thanks to her that I'm not. Because that isn't who she wished me to be. Although of course if ever I had had to defend her, I would have had no limits as to what I would have done, up to and including giving my own life, or taking those of many others without hesitation.

Truly, a special woman. So don't ever call her a fucking rapist.

These tracks from Swallow the Sun sum it up perfectly, this cold, dark place without her.

Cathedral Walls:



These Lowlands:

My attention span couldn't handle reading more than half of that, and you still sound like you're putting all the accountability on her, but hey man, spin it any way you want to. I met my first screwing boyfriend on my fifteenth birthday and he was 20, and back then nobody thought anything of it. That's not very different from your scenario, so I get it, it happened and you're not sorry about it, things were different back then, whatever. However now I read you're writing things in this thread saying if you met the perfect 13 year old today, you would do it again.