Rules regarding accusations of paedophilia

[Tommy Tainant]

You have applied yourself in absolutely obsessive ways to defending Pakistani men grooming and raping British children. You celebrate triumphantly when people opposing it are jailed. You call people names if they are outraged by it or point out the inherent nature of Pakistanis selecting British children almost exclusively. You do everything in your power to prop up a status quo of abuse such as exists in the U.K. where the very opposition to these practices is nigh on impossible.

Your stance on the subject of this grooming and sexual abuse is quite clear, and any intelligent and honest poster should be able to see the absolute zealous intensity with which you approach this subject and come to the same conclusion as I.

That does not mean you ARE a pedophile, but you certainly are a steadfast defender of this child predation.

It shouldnt be difficult for you to find an example then should it ?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The rule specifically says no calling members pedophiles, when the subject is brought up most people associate grooming with pedophilia. Based on the fact that most people are simple minded fools who don't see or understand nuance gives the perception that accusing someone of supporting grooming can be seen as ostensibly the same thing hence a violation.
Remember, K.I.S.S........ Especially where Tommy is concerned...........

I thought it was obvious that there is a difference between pointing out quite correctly what a person is supporting and accusing them of actually doing what they support.

Pointing out that somebody is using the phrases much favored by pedophiles is not the same as accusing them of pedophilia. Pointing out that somebody is supporting the sexualization of children is not the same as calling them a pedophile. Pointing out that somebody is employing sophistry to defend pedophilia is not the same thing as calling them a pedophile.

 

[Rambunctious]

They sure hate that spot on word...Groooooooomer.......
must have hit a nerve.....

 

[Rambunctious]

Could a Mod please clarify how this rule is being enforced on the site ?
My observation is that it isnt being enforced at all.

........

 

[miketx]

I find that to be a ridiculous argument. All groomers are paedos. That is why they are grooming. And that is why the word grooming is being used by these idiots..

All you are doing is giving people a get out from their accusations. You show yourself to be hopelessly ou of touch Will.

Perhaps you could explain where I rank on your LGBT scale when I am being accused of grooming. I am a married man and a father of 3.
I am not trans or any other variation. So when I am called a groomer the obvious assumption is that I am being accused of being a paedo.
There is no other interpretation.

Touch a nerve didn't i sicko? Groomers and disneys are people who support teaching young children about homosexuality and transgenderism, also encouraging them towards this evil life destroying sickness. Why do you want to abuse children? Pedophiles are those who try to and do have sex with them. All should be removed. Children should be allowed to grow up normally and wait until they are adults to decide if they want to ruin their lives like that.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I find that to be a ridiculous argument. All groomers are paedos. That is why they are grooming. And that is why the word grooming is being used by these idiots..

All you are doing is giving people a get out from their accusations. You show yourself to be hopelessly ou of touch Will.

Perhaps you could explain where I rank on your LGBT scale when I am being accused of grooming. I am a married man and a father of 3.
I am not trans or any other variation. So when I am called a groomer the obvious assumption is that I am being accused of being a paedo.
There is no other interpretation.

If you are in favor of sex education for minors that are below the freshman level of High School that result in talks to a kid that is five years old about sexual explicit content then let me very clear you are in the wrong!

I will not use Groomer or Pedo to describe people but I will use pervert and sick in the head!

As for the usage of Groomer, well I also find it offensive and know it is being used to disguise the accusation of pedo but let be clear those like you have used the word pedo to describe Trump, Gaetz and so on when they have never been convicted of molesting a child under the age of twelve or thirteen!

I said those like you which mean the far left, so if you want full enforcement then reign in your side with their false accusations before demanding the other side be brought under control and this is a Liberal telling you to slow it down on accusations!

 

[miketx]

Basically if we think you are using it to imply a member is pedo, we will act on it. I strongly recommend you do NOT call a member a groomer in the context of children or you risk an infraction.

That doesn’t mean you can’t talk about grooming and groomers, just don’t call a member that. If we think you are using Disney for that purpose, you take the same risk.

It’s like porn…we can’t always define it, but we know when we see it.

Apparently you have decided on your own definition. I never refered to any of these evil sick freaks you protect as a pedo, only child abusers, and groomers want to push kids toward a sick and dangerous life of homosexuality is and transgenderism. And that is child abuse! That is what a groomer and a disney is. Don't like it? Stop doing it

 

[Ringel05]

I thought it was obvious that there is a difference between pointing out quite correctly what a person is supporting and accusing them of actually doing what they support.

Pointing out that somebody is using the phrases much favored by pedophiles is not the same as accusing them of pedophilia. Pointing out that somebody is supporting the sexualization of children is not the same as calling them a pedophile. Pointing out that somebody is employing sophistry to defend pedophilia is not the same thing as calling them a pedophile.

I agree but again you're talking nuance, a concept far too many don't get. They're too busy emoting to think.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Touch a nerve didn't i sicko? Groomers and disneys are people who support teaching young children about homosexuality and transgenderism, also encouraging them towards this evil life destroying sickness. Why do you want to abuse children? Pedophiles are those who try to and do have sex with them. All should be removed. Children should be allowed to grow up normally and wait until they are adults to decide if they want to ruin their lives like that.

Any sexual conversation about sex and so on should be left to the parent decision if they want their kid to attend a class or not but I am fully against teaching any kid under freshman year in High School about any sexual orientation at all in a public or private school setting!

These things are the parents job and even when it come to High School level the parent should still have the right to remove their child from that class because of religious beliefs and boys, girls and them let me tell you I ain’t a Christian, Jew or Muslim, so for me to even weigh in on this mean this is a parent job and not the school or society job!

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Go into the Flame Zone and read the rules down there and if it ain’t allowed down there then you damn well bet it ain’t allowed up here!

 

[Rambunctious]

 

[Devils_Advocate]

View attachment 630982

You win!

 

[miketx]

The beginning of the great groomer cover up has begun. Let the meteor come!

 

[miketx]

View attachment 630982

Reported!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I agree but again you're talking nuance, a concept far too many don't get. They're too busy emoting to think.

Yes, but should this forum be moderated according to the very lowest common denominator or by agenda-driven mods who are either incapable of understanding nuance or unwilling to understand it when convenient?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Any sexual conversation about sex and so on should be left to the parent decision if they want their kid to attend a class or not but I am fully against teaching any kid under freshman year in High School about any sexual orientation at all in a public or private school setting!

These things are the parents job and even when it come to High School level the parent should still have the right to remove their child from that class because of religious beliefs and boys, girls and them let me tell you I ain’t a Christian, Jew or Muslim, so for me to even weigh in on this mean this is a parent job and not the school or society job!

Its all about indoctrination and those who support the sexualization of children don't give a rat's ass about how it screws up the kids involved.

All they care about is their agenda.

 

[Ringel05]

Yes, but should this forum be moderated according to the very lowest common denominator or by agenda-driven mods who ate either incapable of understanding nuance or unwilling to understand it when convenient?

Good luck with that.......... People are people and there's no fixing that, not on this plane of existence........

 

[Auld Phart]

Im sorry Coyote. I know that you have been accused of this yourself when attempting to discuss the subject.
All grooming accusations I have seen are linked to the grooming of youngsters.
The posts should be deleted as per the rules and bans need to be handed out.
This doesnt seem to be the understanding of all the moderators and the culprits get away with it.
They are getting away with it on this very thread.

The site rules are the rules we all sign up to. They should be enforced or dropped.

All grooming accusations I have seen are linked to the grooming of youngsters.

Did they have content that stated it was for sexual purposes?

as stated before: Trans 'groom' youngsters to their lifestyle, homosexuals 'groom' youngsters to their lifestyle.

if it's not sexual in nature, involving underage children, we don't consider it pedophilia.

 

[Auld Phart]

There is no rule about the word "grooming" that I am aware of.
Pedophilia and grooming is not the same thing, obviously.
I read willhafetowait's response... and am perplexed. He is seeming to want to create a new sudo rule where you can't call someone out for supporting sexual grooming.
That would be asinine.
So, like I said... that needs to be clarified. I don't think that is what he meant, but that is how the post reads.

He is seeming to want to create a new sudo rule where you can't call someone out for supporting sexual grooming.

Trying to figure out that take on what I said.

IF it is sexual in nature, involving underage children, action is taken.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

All groomers are not pedos.

At best, they are willfully complicit.