Zone1 Calling/accusing other members "groomer"

[Natural Citizen]

Easy like Sunday moooorning.....

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Gender Queer, the book causing the most dispute, recommended ages 12-18.
Without having actually read it, going by what is on the internet it is extremely graphically illustrated (comic book style) and with a lot of explicit language.

There's enough to be found on the net, to know what we're dealing with here.

The book in question contains explicit images of young boys engaging in oral sex with each other, and with grown men, in a context that is intended to normalize this behavior.

One doesn't need to know anything more to see that by any reasonable standard, this constitutes child pornography.

Further, the obvious intent is to normalize such behavior, for the obvious purpose of influencing boys to more readily be convinced to engage in sexual behavior with adults.

It's a rather hard stretch to argue that this is appropriate content even for adults.

It absolutely is not appropriate or acceptable content for minors, which are its intended audience.

These are things that SHOULD be discussed but CAN’T be discussed attempting to do so leads to accusations of pedo and grooming that derail or inhibit any conversation.

How else are we to appropriately describe any subhuman shit that wants to expose minors to the content described above.

Any such piece of shit absolutely is a groomer, and very likely a pedophile; and no legitimate purpose is served by forbidding us from calling then out as such.

Well, that is, unless you are on the side of pedophiles and groomers, and wish to protect them from legitimate criticism and exposure.

But there isn't anyone here who is on that side, right?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Btw, for the record nobody in their right mind would call me a pedophile because I don't display any pedophile behavior at all.

Nope.

You don't make excuses for those engaging in it
You don't support actions taken to make children more receptive to it.
You don't indulge in specious twaddle dancing all over the edge of it
You are open and direct in your opposition to it




and most importantly you do not constantly attack those who are opposed to it!


The last one's the kicker because many posters do just that. They call you taliban or bigoted or homophobic or any of a number of other slurs.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

There's enough to be found on the net, to know what we're dealing with here.

The book in question contains explicit images of young boys engaging in oral sex with each other, and with grown men, in a context that is intended to normalize this behavior.

One doesn't need to know anything more to see that by any reasonable standard, this constitutes child pornography.

Further, the obvious intent is to normalize such behavior, for the obvious purpose of influencing boys to more readily be convinced to engage in sexual behavior with adults.

It's a rather hard stretch to argue that this is appropriate content even for adults.

It absolutely is not appropriate or acceptable content for minors, which are its intended audience.




How else are we to appropriately describe any subhuman shit that wants to expose minors to the content described above.

Any such piece of shit absolutely is a groomer, and very likely a pedophile; and no legitimate purpose is served by forbidding us from calling then out as such.

Well, that is, unless you are on the side of pedophiles and groomers, and wish to protect them from legitimate criticism and exposure.

But there isn't anyone here who is on that side, right?

View attachment 754317

Hmmmm -- what could possibly be wrong with showing 12 year olds drawings of two 12 year old boys engaged in sex?


This forum's position is that it is those who REJECT this who are the problem here and who must be eliminated.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Gotta wonder why grooming upsets leftists

It doesn't. They're the ones who are doing it, or at least defending and advocating it

What upsets them is when sane people point our what they are doing.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What pedos are being protected?

Let's start with the one who recently started a thread openly advocating that child pornography, specifically crafted to normalize pedophilia, should be made available to minors.

You and I both know damn well what that makes him, but if I say it, you'll abuse your power to punish me. You'll censor me to protect him.

I could also mention another individual, that I think almost everyone here knows (or at least very strongly suspects) is a pedophile, who frequently speaks of children as young as two or three in disgustingly sexual terms. I've been suspended several times for calling that piece of shit out for what he very obviously is.

 

[mak2]

Let's start with the one who recently started a thread openly advocating that child pornography, specifically crafted to normalize pedophilia, should be made available to minors.

You and I both know damn well what that makes him, but if I say it, you'll abuse your power to punish me. You'll censor me to protect him.

I could also mention another individual, that I think almost everyone here knows (or at least very strongly suspects) is a pedophile, who frequently speaks of children as young as two or three in disgustingly sexual terms. I've been suspended several times for calling that piece of shit out for what he very obviously is.

have you reported them to the authorities? It is your duty to report known pedophiles

 

[progressive hunter]

Convicted pedophile, who raped and tortured children, found dead in prison cell awaiting sentencing | Blaze Media

A convicted pedophile who allegedly raped and tortured children was found dead in a U.K. prison cell while he was awaiting sentencing for his sex crimes. Andrew Hadwin, 39, was found guilty of three counts of rape, seven counts of neglect, and one count of perverting the course of justice in...

www.theblaze.com

 

[Coyote]

Let's start with the one who recently started a thread openly advocating that child pornography, specifically crafted to normalize pedophilia, should be made available to minors.

You and I both know damn well what that makes him, but if I say it, you'll abuse your power to punish me. You'll censor me to protect him.

I could also mention another individual, that I think almost everyone here knows (or at least very strongly suspects) is a pedophile, who frequently speaks of children as young as two or three in disgustingly sexual terms. I've been suspended several times for calling that piece of shit out for what he very obviously is.

No links ever provided of course. Report it to a Sr Mod: Aye, Flac, or Taz.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Convicted pedophile, who raped and tortured children, found dead in prison cell awaiting sentencing | Blaze Media

A convicted pedophile who allegedly raped and tortured children was found dead in a U.K. prison cell while he was awaiting sentencing for his sex crimes. Andrew Hadwin, 39, was found guilty of three counts of rape, seven counts of neglect, and one count of perverting the course of justice in...

www.theblaze.com

He would have enjoyed the comforts of a place like USMB.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Let's start with the one who recently started a thread openly advocating that child pornography, specifically crafted to normalize pedophilia, should be made available to minors.

You and I both know damn well what that makes him, but if I say it, you'll abuse your power to punish me. You'll censor me to protect him.

I could also mention another individual, that I think almost everyone here knows (or at least very strongly suspects) is a pedophile, who frequently speaks of children as young as two or three in disgustingly sexual terms. I've been suspended several times for calling that piece of shit out for what he very obviously is.

We want such posters to be free to post, though. Let them be very open about what they are advocating, so the rest of us are under no misapprehension about what modern progressivism actually means.

It is clear what they are advocating, and it is what we know it is, whether we use the exact word or not. Let's don't stop saying what he is doing, because they damn sure are not going to stop doing it, if we don't call them on it.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

We really need to have our OWN political forum where this censorship isn't tolerated. I only stay because I've made friends and I love exposing the left and warning others every chance I get since I love my country.

I don't think I'd really like that since Echo chambers are boring.
I'd rather see the hiring of competent professional moderators who have been selected carefully for their professionalism and neutrality and who do not actually post themselves.
Leaving the moderation to some of the worst hacks in the forum always turns into these petty little dictatorships.

I wonder what it would take to set up a new forum like this one.

The various petty issues with the current administration notwithstanding, I like this forum specifically because of the light degree of censorship over all.

The now-explicit policy of protecting and covering for those who defend, support, and even engage in the sexual abuse of children, is a huge black mark against this forum, but other than that, it's generally a good forum.

I'm with you on not wanting an “echo chamber”. I don't come here to discuss, among like-minded people, how right we are, and how wrong those are who disagree with us.

I like a forum where people are arguing from a wide range of different opinions, beliefs and perspective, and where censorship is very light. I like being able to express what I believe, no matter how disagreeable others may find it, and I like being able to tell others what I think of their positions, and I like not being required to be polite about any of it.

 

[Lastamender]

Here we go. Here's where the term is really being used.

Being a Russian operative is not illegal that I know of.

Joe biden does not belong to this forum.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Nice dodge.

No, this is a nice Dodge. Well, actually, it's some sort of Alfa Romeo/Mercedes Benz/Hyundai/FIAT/Chrysler mongrel, but it's branded as a Dodge.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I wonder what it would take to set up a new forum like this one.

The various petty issues with the current administration notwithstanding, I like this forum specifically because of the light degree of censorship over all.

The now-explicit policy of protecting and covering for those who defend, support, and even engage in the sexual abuse of children, is a huge black mark against this forum, but other than that, it's generally a good forum.

I'm with you on not wanting an “echo chamber”. I don't come here to discuss, among like-minded people, how right we are, and how wrong those are who disagree with us.

I like a forum where people are arguing from a wide range of different opinions, beliefs and perspective, and where censorship is very light. I like being able to express what I believe, no matter how disagreeable others may find it, and I like being able to tell others what I think of their positions, and I like not being required to be polite about any of it.

I think much could be accomplished by just pruning out the black heart at the center of USMB but there is absolutely no indication that this will ever happen. The management structure of USMB as presented to us and the actual management structure seems to be two different things.

Ever since I have been here, all power seems to be invested in the same individual.

 

[mak2]

I wonder what it would take to set up a new forum like this one.

The various petty issues with the current administration notwithstanding, I like this forum specifically because of the light degree of censorship over all.

The now-explicit policy of protecting and covering for those who defend, support, and even engage in the sexual abuse of children, is a huge black mark against this forum, but other than that, it's generally a good forum.

I'm with you on not wanting an “echo chamber”. I don't come here to discuss, among like-minded people, how right we are, and how wrong those are who disagree with us.

I like a forum where people are arguing from a wide range of different opinions, beliefs and perspective, and where censorship is very light. I like being able to express what I believe, no matter how disagreeable others may find it, and I like being able to tell others what I think of their positions, and I like not being required to be polite about any of it.

I mod other sites. I have never set one up on the tech side, but I have been recruited to get it off the ground. Step 1: Do not allow mod decisions to be discussed on the open forum. Step 2 Report felonies: No one, not anyone I have contact with defend,s supports or engages in sexual abuse of children, or I would report it to everyone and every singe outlet I could find. I notice you are not. Says a lot for your convictions. Hopefully there are few like minded people for you to discuss with.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Orthodoxy.

Children are only useful tools to be used in the woke culture wars. It doesn't matter if the kids get really fucked up by the mental abuse as long as the agenda is served.

Keep in mind that the piece of shit moderator at this time actively participating also defends and supports the savage murder of thousands of innocent children every day, in the form of abortion. Of course she's not going to give a shit about children who don't die that way, but go on to be fucked-up for life by sexual abuse.

That is what evil looks like, in its purest form.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I know the difference between personal grooming, grooming a person for a particular role or assignment, dog grooming, and the groomers being discussed in this thread. And you know that I know that too.

Anybody who has read my comments on this thread or anywhere else know that I think the most horrendous depths of hell may be reserved for those who would deliberately use, exploit, harm children in that way.

My argument is that morally and ethically NONE of us can ethically infer, accuse, or label another member of committing that horrendous crime or any other crime punishable by law unless we have hard proof. If you have hard proof that someone is grooming or sexually harming a child, it is your duty to notify the proper law enforcement authorities to deal with it. In some states you are required to do that by law.

But it should be a rule here that on an open public forum, member cannot accuse other members of crimes punishable by law.

None of us can know what any others of us do out in The Real World, but when someone on this forum openly advocates, defends, supports behavior that undeniably constitutes the sexual abuse of children, I certainly know what to think of that person's character. When someone speaks of very young children in disgustingly-sexualized terms, I know what to think of that person's character. When someone openly defends or advocates providing child pornography to minors, I know what to think of that person's character.

I think any reasonable person is completely justified in suggesting that such a person is very likely a pedophile, a groomer, or a willing ally thereof.

Now I cannot know, admittedly, that any such person has directly engaged in an act of sexual abuse against a child, but I certainly know what side that person is on.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Anybody who has read my comments on this thread or anywhere else know that I think the most horrendous depths of hell may be reserved for those who would deliberately use, exploit, harm children in that way.

That is where my father-in-law is right now, has been since long before I met his daughter. Plenty of others on this very forum, including several of the moderators and staff of this forum, in time, will be there too, keeping him company.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Do not allow mod decisions to be discussed on the open forum.

only if you wish to create a Kangaroo court where moderators have absolutely no accountability, anyway.

The results of systems where power is invested in a small oligarchy that is never held responsible for the decisions they make are always fascistic in nature.


Perhaps that is why the notion is so attractive to you.