Original Usenet thread from alt.ascii-art, started 3 Jan 2005.
ASCII Art Fart for Sun, 2005 Jan 2
alt.ascii-art
· 73 messages · 3 Jan 2005 - 14 Jan 2005
Faux_Tran wrote: > #2019 #%&^ FINALLY > annie ascii,newsgroup > > _____ > ((( `\ > MAYBE IF SOMEONE JUST UP _ _`\ ) > AND @#$#$ ME I'D FINALLY (^ ) ) > SHUT MY FUCKING BON-BON ~-( ) > GUZZLING WORD HOLE _'((,,,))) > ,-' \_/ `\ > HEHE !!!! ( , | > `-.-'`-.-'/|_| > \ / | | > =()=: / ,' aa > > Taken from <url:http://www.asciiartfarts.com/> So Iconoclast is Tran... ??? ;V Or Tran is Iconoclast? """""""""""""""""""""" e * _ * e / \ |___| -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
On 2005-01-03 Faux_Tran said: > #2019 RAPE FINALLY > annie ascii,newsgroup > > _____ > ((( `\ > MAYBE IF SOMEONE JUST UP _ _`\ ) > AND RAPED ME I'D FINALLY (^ ) ) > SHUT MY FUCKING BON-BON ~-( ) > GUZZLING WORD HOLE _'((,,,))) > ,-' \_/ `\ > HEHE !!!! ( , | > `-.-'`-.-'/|_| > \ / | | > =()=: / ,' aa > > Taken from <url:http://www.asciiartfarts.com/> _____ ((( `\ _ _`\ ) (^ ) ) ~-( ) _'((,,,))) ,-' \_/ `\ Haw-haw! Tran make velly funny ( , | rape joke...yes? `-.-'`-.-'/|_| \ \ / | | =[]=: / ,' / `\ ' ,```_ : \/ ) c - | / ; ./|-` | / / /` \ |/ / /_| \) ( < | .__| \ \ | | | \ \ | | | \ \ |___\ |___\___\ b'ger === `--'_/ _) aa `--' _____ No. Ever heard of Lorena Bobbit, Paco? ((( `\ \ , ,`\ ) (^ ) ) ~-( ) /: _'((,,,))) : : ,-' \_/ `\ :_; ( , | |(\____/ `-.-'`-.-'/|_| ` ' 8.|_____,' \ / | | ` ' |_| =[]=: / ,' \\\\ / `\ ' ,```o : \/ ) c - | / ; ./|-' | / / /` \ |/ / /_| \) ( < | .__| \ \ | | | \ \ | \ | \ \ \____\ |___\___\ === `--'_/ _) aa `--' _____ I WARNED you about stealing my ASCII ((( `\ art...you stinking, filthy slant-eyed _,_`\ ) little yellow Gook faggot. \ (^ ) ) ~-( ) /: _'((,,,))) : : ,-' \_/ `\ Awwwwwwk! :_; ( / / \ |(\____/ `-.-'`-/__/' 8.|_____,'__\./' / |_| /~~~______,': <<<</ / `\ O'''. : \/ ) -_ ?' | / ; _)|\. | / / `.'`~\ |/ / | /\\ ( < `. | || \ \ c=| )(w| \ \ __ / /' | \ \ .-'"._~-. _/'/' |___\___\ `.__` __.-' `--' `--'_/ _) aa ~~ `--' \ * * * | * * * / _____ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ * |_ _| | |_| | | | | | / _ \ | |/ / | | * | | | _ | | `/\' | | '_` | | < `=' * |_| |_| |_| `\_/\_/' |_| |_| |_|\_\ |_| * / * * * | * * * \ _____ Now we'll just put the ((( `\ garbage out on the curb. , ,`\ ) \ \ (^ ) ) \ ~-( ) \ _'((,,,))) \ ,-' \_/ `\ \ ( , | \ `-.-'`-.-'/|_| \ _ \ / | | \ | | =[]=: / ,' \ \ \__________________/ `\ ' \ |__| / ) \ , '------------------/ ; . ` ' . / / -- P U N T -- / / ` , , ' ( < ' \ \ \ \ \ \ __ \___\ .-'"._~-. _/ _) aa `.__` __.-' c=8 `--' ~~ _____ Looks like there'll be ((( `\ one less Gook laborer _ _`\ ) in the bok choy fields (^ ) ) tomorrow. \ ~-( ) Oh, well...no problem. _'((,,,))) There'll be plenty more. ,-' \_/ `\ Those rice-burners breed ( , | almost as fast as Spics `-.-'`-.-'/|_| and niggers. \ / | | / =[]=: / ,' / `\ ' \ : \/ ) Let's see...where'd I | / ; put those bon-bons? | / / Hehehe! |/ / ( < \ \ | \ \ | \ \ __ |___\___\ .-'"._~-. `--'_/ _) aa `.__` __.-' c=`--' ~~
Faux_Tran wrote: > #2019 RAPE FINALLY > annie ascii,newsgroup > > _____ > ((( `\ > MAYBE IF SOMEONE JUST UP _ _`\ ) > AND RAPED ME I'D FINALLY (^ ) ) > SHUT MY FUCKING BON-BON ~-( ) > GUZZLING WORD HOLE _'((,,,))) > ,-' \_/ `\ > HEHE !!!! ( , | > `-.-'`-.-'/|_| > \ / | | > =()=: / ,' aa > > Taken from <url:http://www.asciiartfarts.com/> Ha ha ha ha ha Tran is awesome -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
ABCGi wrote: > Faux_Tran wrote: > >> #2019 #%&^ FINALLY >> annie ascii,newsgroup >> >> _____ >> ((( `\ >> MAYBE IF SOMEONE JUST UP _ _`\ ) >> AND @#$#$ ME I'D FINALLY (^ ) ) >> SHUT MY FUCKING BON-BON ~-( ) >> GUZZLING WORD HOLE _'((,,,))) >> ,-' \_/ `\ >> HEHE !!!! ( , | >> `-.-'`-.-'/|_| >> \ / | | >> =()=: / ,' aa >> >> Taken from <url:http://www.asciiartfarts.com/> > > So Iconoclast is Tran... ??? ;V > > Or Tran is Iconoclast? > > """""""""""""""""""""" > e * _ * e > / \ > |___| Nope. I only make fat and lopsided tit jokes about Annie. Rape jokes aren't my style. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Annie wrote:
_____
Dildo? Check. 8 year old boy? Check. ((( `\ It's gonna be a
\ , ,`\ ) looong night for
(^ ) ) / you, little dude
~-( )
/: _'((,,,)))
: : ,-' \_/ `\
:_; ( FORMER , |
|(\____/ `-.-'`-.-'/|_|
` ' 8.|_____,' \ MAN / | |
` ' |_| =[]=: / ,'
\\\\ / `\ '
,```o : \/ )
c - | / ;
./|-' | / /
/` \ |/ /
/_| \) ( <
| .__| \ \
| | | \ \
| \ | \ \
\____\ |___\___\
=== `--'_/ _) aa
`--'
Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke.
--
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the
time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast
wrote:
>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke.
Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why
would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the
"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape
itself?
[Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and
the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii]
ObAscii: A wax worm in the making.
_.-..
./ `.
/ \
/ \
/ O \
| |
|###############|
._ `.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.`
`-. `. ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'
.. `-._ `.~ ~ ~,'
`-._ `.. '.,,'
`-. `-._ //
`-._ `._/'
`-._ `-.
`.. `-._
`-._ `..
`-. `-.
`-._
'
--
Sharky
Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >wrote: > >>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. > >Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >itself? Child molesting includes consensual sex acts.
_.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ > [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and > the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] predictable hypocrisy of false analysis of your obascii? hypocrisy: we already coverd previously how it wasn't "hypocrisy". My rebroadcasting art+comments_in_regard_to_the_art is not even close to slaping down some previously posted material as obascii that you didn't create. They aren't even the same and everyone here but you seems to know that. predictable: I made one comment that you should post your own stuff for obascii. You were the one that decided to extend it into a major issue. Predictable would be if I had pounced on the first example of you not posting your a) own b) new obascii and pointed it out. I waited until I had a reason to reply to one of your posts. I haven't brought it up again without you bringing my comments into it. Just as now. So that isn't predictable. It is reactionary. false analysis: I stated that you should post your own obascii and not grab someone elses for the task. You stated that /some/ of it was your own. Good for you. But it doesn't render my comment about your posting non-Sharky art false. Dealing With Whiners Love The Managment OA: A tissue for peopel who want to cry: --...__ |_ |_|_| |_ | | | | -._| --..__| :F_P: -- .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
"Faux_Pseudo" <Fau...@yahoo.comERCIAL> wrote in message news:n9WCd.17052$sf5.15226@lakeread05... > _.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ > > [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and > > the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] > > predictable hypocrisy of false analysis of your obascii? -=< SNIP >=- > > Dealing With Whiners > Love The Managment > Are diddles OK fer ObASCII? What about straight JavE conversions? MOST of my work is diddled from someone else, I also tend to not do all that much of it any more so getting NEW things is rather difficult at times. I do like the idea of Obligatory Art posted as it does cause most OFF-topic posts be a (at least a bit) on-topic. I often try to use my older work when I remember to add an ObASCII to a post if I've nothing new to share. The last few I've used were some of my oldest work just re-arranged a bit...If I've nothing new to share I figure it's better to re-post some older work rather then share nothing at all, but if it's better to not have ASCII in a post then re-post I'll stop. *shrug* Zot ObASCII: All my ducks in a row (side view) ('> />)
Sharky wrote: > In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast > wrote: > >>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. > > Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why > would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the > "less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape > itself? > > [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and > the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] > Oh lighten up. If you can't take sick humor what are you doing reading a thread started by an ASCII art fart? -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Iconoclast wrote: > ABCGi wrote: > > >>Faux_Tran wrote: >> >> >>> #2019 #%&^ FINALLY >>>annie ascii,newsgroup >>> >>> _____ >>> ((( `\ >>>MAYBE IF SOMEONE JUST UP _ _`\ ) >>>AND @#$#$ ME I'D FINALLY (^ ) ) >>>SHUT MY FUCKING BON-BON ~-( ) >>>GUZZLING WORD HOLE _'((,,,))) >>> ,-' \_/ `\ >>>HEHE !!!! ( , | >>> `-.-'`-.-'/|_| >>> \ / | | >>> =()=: / ,' aa >>> >>>Taken from <url:http://www.asciiartfarts.com/> >> >>So Iconoclast is Tran... ??? ;V >> >>Or Tran is Iconoclast? >> >> """""""""""""""""""""" >> e * _ * e >> / \ >> |___| > > > Nope. I only make fat and lopsided tit jokes about Annie. Rape jokes aren't > my style. Just that this Tranism came up just as you and Annie were having a tit-war in another thread :) ,^ / _ oa: (_9988866 ) / ^ -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Sharky wrote: > In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast > wrote: > > >>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. > > > Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why > would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the > "less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape > itself? > > [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and > the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] Chill dude - that was just a phase/experiment :) - signed ABCwhatever! > ObAscii: A wax worm in the making. > > > _.-.. > ./ `. > / \ > / \ > / O \ > | | > |###############| > ._ `.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.` > `-. `. ~ ~ ~ ~ ,' > .. `-._ `.~ ~ ~,' > `-._ `.. '.,,' > `-. `-._ // > `-._ `._/' > `-._ `-. > `.. `-._ > `-._ `.. > `-. `-. > `-._ > ' > > -- > Sharky Looks like a bong! oa: PPPPPPPPPPPP QQQQQQQQQQQ SSSSSSSSSS RRRRRRRRR UUUUUUUU NNNNNNN UUUUUU DDDDD EEEE AAA GG \ what E <------------------------------->ver RR / LLL YYYY -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
why? BoD
In <n9WCd.17052$sf5.15226@lakeread05>, Faux_Pseudo wrote: >_.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ >> [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and >> the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] > >predictable hypocrisy of false analysis of your obascii? > >hypocrisy: >we already coverd previously how it wasn't "hypocrisy". My >rebroadcasting art+comments_in_regard_to_the_art is not even close to >slaping down some previously posted material as obascii that you >didn't create. They aren't even the same and everyone here but you >seems to know that. You have simply assumed that I have an untenable position on the subject of obAscii. Your original complaint was tagged onto a completely new ascii-art compilation, and if you had bothered to miss that, then you obviously have no idea what was created by me in the first place. The hypocrisy you exhibit is the demand for only original ascii art in 'any' post made to this group. ObAscii is not yours to dictate, sir. >predictable: >I made one comment that you should post your own stuff for obascii. >You were the one that decided to extend it into a major issue. >Predictable would be if I had pounced on the first example of you not >posting your a) own b) new obascii and pointed it out. I waited until >I had a reason to reply to one of your posts. I haven't brought it up >again without you bringing my comments into it. Just as now. >So that isn't predictable. It is reactionary. You predictably rose to the bait. >false analysis: >I stated that you should post your own obascii and not grab someone >elses for the task. You stated that /some/ of it was your own. Good >for you. But it doesn't render my comment about your posting >non-Sharky art false. Maybe you should read the FAQ and tell me where it says that I have to post only original ascii-art in this group, or in even in my ObAscii? I'm not really big on people making rules about what I post, and usually have little use for group FAQ's in that regard, but anyone who reads CJ's posts will find it well worth the read. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.ascii-art/msg/2213a4bef1eee707?dmode=source
In <qe_Cd.10302$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast wrote: >Sharky wrote: > >> In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >> wrote: >> >>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >> >> Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >> would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >> "less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >> itself? >> >> [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and >> the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] >> > >Oh lighten up. If you can't take sick humor what are you doing reading a >thread started by an ASCII art fart? And you obviously failed in irony-101
In <41dccf28$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, ABCGi wrote: >> Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >> would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >> "less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >> itself? >> >> [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and >> the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] > >Chill dude - that was just a phase/experiment :) > >- signed ABCwhatever! Ohhh, so now women's rights aren't worth a tinkers-damn to you? Rotten bastard! Cheers anyway, d00d. ;-)
In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>wrote: >> >>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >> >>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>itself? > >Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. That is just sick.
In <343...@individual.net>, Zotiel R. Bell wrote: >Are diddles OK fer ObASCII? >What about straight JavE conversions? Yes and Yes. >MOST of my work is diddled from someone else, I also tend to not do all that >much of it any more so getting NEW things is rather difficult at times. I do >like the idea of Obligatory Art posted as it does cause most OFF-topic posts be >a (at least a bit) on-topic. I often try to use my older work when I remember to >add an ObASCII to a post if I've nothing new to share. The last few I've used >were some of my oldest work just re-arranged a bit...If I've nothing new to >share I figure it's better to re-post some older work rather then share nothing >at all, but if it's better to not have ASCII in a post then re-post I'll stop. Please continue to post all the ascii-art you can. Your view on ObAscii and 'diddles' is entirely in sink with the traditions and spirit of this group. Creative ascii-art should not be so limited that it excludes recompilation of peoples work, most especially when the original artist is credited for their contribution. If people feel they should only post completely original art, then good for them, there are no such limitations for the rest of us.
Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: > >>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>wrote: >>> >>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>> >>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>itself? >> >>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. > >That is just sick. It's factual.
I love the tshirt :)) BoD
_.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ > You have simply assumed that I have an untenable position on the > subject of obAscii. Your original complaint was tagged onto a > completely new ascii-art compilation, and if you had bothered to miss > that, then you obviously have no idea what was created by me in the > first place. It may have been in response to an original ascii art but it was in response to a trend of you posting non-original works. You know that. So don't be stupid. > The hypocrisy you exhibit is the demand for only > original ascii art in 'any' post made to this group. I have never stated that all posts in this group be original. I stated that /if/ you are going to post OA then it should be original because that is one of the main reasons that OA exists. If you find any place where I say that all art here should be original then I will gladly eat my words. I don't belive I have ever stated such. My comments were in regards to OA only. > ObAscii is not yours to dictate, sir. There are traditons on what OA is and should be. And I have numerated them previously. I didn't lay down the rules. I just infered them from the traditons. You are free to post what you like. Personaly I would prefer you post no OA if you arn't going to post something original. Even if you were to post an existing art and put a new comment (al a tran) as your OA it would be better then just recycling. > You predictably rose to the bait. You acted like a child in placing the bait on what should be a done and over issue. > Maybe you should read the FAQ and tell me where it says that I have to > post only original ascii-art in this group, or in even in my ObAscii? Show me where I have said that all work in this group has to be original. Go ahead. I am waiting. You will find all my posts at deja.com. > I'm not really big on people making rules about what I post, and > usually have little use for group FAQ's in that regard, but anyone who > reads CJ's posts will find it well worth the read. > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.ascii-art/msg/2213a4bef1eee707?dmode=source I know the FAQ doesn't cover if OA should be original or not. Maybe it should. But until you took offense to my critisizim it wasn't a Frequently Asked Question. OA: abstract, was a failed attempt to make a small musical tool that can mimic human crying. __..----------..__ (______)----'~`----' -- .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
Sharky wrote: > In <qe_Cd.10302$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast > wrote: > >>Sharky wrote: >> >>> In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>> wrote: >>> >>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>> >>> Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>> would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>> "less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>> itself? >>> >>> [Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and >>> the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] >>> >> >>Oh lighten up. If you can't take sick humor what are you doing reading a >>thread started by an ASCII art fart? > > And you obviously failed in irony-101 Nope, I got rather high marks. That's why I didn't notice such a lame amateurish attempt :) -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Sharky wrote: > In <343...@individual.net>, Zotiel R. Bell wrote: > >>Are diddles OK fer ObASCII? >>What about straight JavE conversions? > > Yes and Yes. > >>MOST of my work is diddled from someone else, I also tend to not do all that >>much of it any more so getting NEW things is rather difficult at times. I do >>like the idea of Obligatory Art posted as it does cause most OFF-topic posts be >>a (at least a bit) on-topic. I often try to use my older work when I remember to >>add an ObASCII to a post if I've nothing new to share. The last few I've used >>were some of my oldest work just re-arranged a bit...If I've nothing new to >>share I figure it's better to re-post some older work rather then share nothing >>at all, but if it's better to not have ASCII in a post then re-post I'll stop. > > Please continue to post all the ascii-art you can. Your view on > ObAscii and 'diddles' is entirely in sink with the traditions and > spirit of this group. Creative ascii-art should not be so limited > that it excludes recompilation of peoples work, most especially when > the original artist is credited for their contribution. If people > feel they should only post completely original art, then good for > them, there are no such limitations for the rest of us. "rest of us" - are you speaking on mine and others behalf? Or bequarter? (0000000000000000) _ (00000000000000000000) / \ ^^^ -------===========-------- ` "Show us to leader yours please now no thankyou!" -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Sharky wrote: > In <41dccf28$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, ABCGi wrote: > > >>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>itself? >>> >>>[Cue ABCwhatever with some sort of nonsense about womens' rights, and >>>the predictable hypocrisy of FP with a false analysis of my obascii] >> >>Chill dude - that was just a phase/experiment :) >> >>- signed ABCwhatever! > > Ohhh, so now women's rights aren't worth a tinkers-damn to you? I'm into /Philisim/ now - everything is nothing and so everything (being nothing) matters. > Rotten bastard! A good filme > Cheers anyway, d00d. ;-) oa: Cheers "Hey wanna go get beer?" , YYY WWW HURRAH AAA HHHHHH HURRAH <- left right out YYY OOOO HURRAH AA -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >> >>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>> >>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>itself? >>> >>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >> >>That is just sick. > >It's factual. Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior - most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied to child molestation.
In <VbBDd.20770$sf5.20115@lakeread05>, Faux_Pseudo wrote: >_.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ >> You have simply assumed that I have an untenable position on the >> subject of obAscii. Your original complaint was tagged onto a >> completely new ascii-art compilation, and if you had bothered to miss >> that, then you obviously have no idea what was created by me in the >> first place. > >It may have been in response to an original ascii art but it was in >response to a trend of you posting non-original works. You know that. >So don't be stupid. Au contraire, FP. It is you who are not paying attention to the content of my posts. >> The hypocrisy you exhibit is the demand for only >> original ascii art in 'any' post made to this group. > >I have never stated that all posts in this group be original. I >stated that /if/ you are going to post OA then it should be original >because that is one of the main reasons that OA exists. >If you find any place where I say that all art here should be original >then I will gladly eat my words. I don't belive I have ever stated >such. My comments were in regards to OA only. You criticized me for posting diddled art in my ObAscii, claiming that all ObAscii must be original, and now you're backpeddling on the whole issue when I point out your original objection would apply to any posting to the group. You can demand that all posts be original, that's your issue, but don't presume to tell me I can't post ascii-art to this group, regardless of whether you're too dense to recognize new work or not. >> ObAscii is not yours to dictate, sir. > >There are traditons on what OA is and should be. And I have numerated >them previously. I didn't lay down the rules. I just infered them >from the traditons. > >You are free to post what you like. Personaly I would prefer you post >no OA if you arn't going to post something original. Even if you were >to post an existing art and put a new comment (al a tran) as your OA >it would be better then just recycling. If you only knew how ironic that statement is, maybe then you'd apologize for accusing me of breaking your new found rules. >> You predictably rose to the bait. > >You acted like a child in placing the bait on what should be a done >and over issue. I made a statement of fact. >> Maybe you should read the FAQ and tell me where it says that I have to >> post only original ascii-art in this group, or in even in my ObAscii? > >Show me where I have said that all work in this group has to be >original. Go ahead. I am waiting. You will find all my posts at >deja.com. Do you see that part about ObAscii? That is what you were bleating about. >> I'm not really big on people making rules about what I post, and >> usually have little use for group FAQ's in that regard, but anyone who >> reads CJ's posts will find it well worth the read. >> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.ascii-art/msg/2213a4bef1eee707?dmode=source > >I know the FAQ doesn't cover if OA should be original or not. Maybe >it should. But until you took offense to my critisizim it wasn't a >Frequently Asked Question. I just think that you are sloppy in your attention to detail, and I was hoping that you would see how stupidly your assumptions were made, that's all.
In <5XDDd.11368$by5...@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast wrote: >>>Oh lighten up. If you can't take sick humor what are you doing reading a >>>thread started by an ASCII art fart? >> >> And you obviously failed in irony-101 > >Nope, I got rather high marks. That's why I didn't notice such a lame >amateurish attempt :) Touche!
In <41df2809$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, ABCGi wrote:
>"rest of us" - are you speaking on mine and others behalf?
Just shut your trap and fall in line.
oOA
~~~
\ 0
'|' o;-V o;-V
|\ o;-V o;-V
o;-V o;-V
Sharky wrote: > In <41df2809$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, ABCGi wrote: > > >>"rest of us" - are you speaking on mine and others behalf? > > > Just shut your trap and fall in line. > > > oOA > ~~~ > \ 0 > '|' o;-V o;-V > |\ o;-V o;-V > o;-V o;-V > > u forgot to say "biatch" ;|~| -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
_.-In alt.ascii-art, Sharky wrote the following -._ > You criticized me for posting diddled art in my ObAscii, claiming that > all ObAscii must be original, I don't think I have every said diddles aren't valid ObAscii. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo > and now you're backpeddling on the whole > issue when I point out your original objection would apply to any > posting to the group. You are painting with a wide brush and making a mess. I have never said anything about /any/ post to the group must be original. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo > You can demand that all posts be original, Which I don't, haven't and won't. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo > that's your issue, but don't presume to tell me I can't post ascii-art > to this group, regardless of whether you're too dense to recognize new > work or not. Again, you were posting non-original works as ObAscii. Regardless of if you posted one, a few or many original works as ObAscii wasn't the issue. I was spacifically referancing the times when I saw you had posted non-original, non-diddled works as ObAscii. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >>You are free to post what you like. Personaly I would prefer you post >>no OA if you arn't going to post something original. Even if you were >>to post an existing art and put a new comment (al a tran) as your OA >>it would be better then just recycling. > > If you only knew how ironic that statement is, maybe then you'd > apologize for accusing me of breaking your new found rules. They aren't rules, they are guidelines based on years of ObAscii tradtioin. I never said you couldn't post non-original ObAscii. I said it wasn't a good idea and new stuff was preferable. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >>Show me where I have said that all work in this group has to be >>original. Go ahead. I am waiting. You will find all my posts at >>deja.com. > > Do you see that part about ObAscii? That is what you were bleating > about. Do you have reading comprehension problems? Show me where I said you /must/ post or not post anything. Everything I said was /should/. Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo > I just think that you are sloppy in your attention to detail, and I > was hoping that you would see how stupidly your assumptions were made, > that's all. I see things when the facts back them up. Search for my posts. This thread is over until you show me where I have stated you /must/ post new work. I would plonk you but a) this is alt.ascii-art and I have never plonked anyone here b) I await your reply proving your point by making me eat my words c) in alt.ascii-art even idiots may contribute good stuff. -- .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
In <41df375d$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, ABCGi wrote:
|
| I'm Rick James, Biotch!
| /
| 0
| '|' o;-V o;-V
| ^ o;-V o;-V
| o;-V o;-V
|
>u forgot to say "biatch" ;|~|
Ta, fer that.
In <jUHDd.21467$sf5.3563@lakeread05>, Faux_Pseudo wrote: >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo >Prove me wrong. deja.com author:faux_pseudo blah blah blah blah blah Why don't you do a Google(TIND) on my ObAscii and show me where any of it has ever appeared in this group, at any time, in the form I posted. Hell! if your really feeling froggy, show me where any of my ObAscii has ever been presented that way anywhere on the internet. Take all the time you need, or killfile me, I don't really give a flying fuck what you do.
Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: > >>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>> >>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>>> >>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>>itself? >>>> >>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >>> >>>That is just sick. >> >>It's factual. > >Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with >children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding >when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior >- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of >such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied >to child molestation. Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal.
Bateau wrote: > Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: > >>In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >> >> >>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>> >>>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>>>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>>>> >>>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>>>itself? >>>>> >>>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >>>> >>>>That is just sick. >>> >>>It's factual. >> >>Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with >>children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding >>when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior >>- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of >>such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied >>to child molestation. > > Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be > given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal. Says who? If this is a reference from some law or other please state the reference. If it's just what you believe to be self-evident then IMO would be appropriate (IMO). And IMO it is not at all akin to your latter sentence. -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: > >> Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >> >>>In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>> >>>>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>>>>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>>>>itself? >>>>>> >>>>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >>>>> >>>>>That is just sick. >>>> >>>>It's factual. >>> >>>Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with >>>children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding >>>when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior >>>- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of >>>such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied >>>to child molestation. >> >> Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be >> given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal. > >Says who? Most western criminal codes. The concept isn't even unique to sex. It's also used in laws about assault, physician conduct, hazing etc. >If this is a reference from some law or other please state the >reference. Massachusetts supreme court: "Consent is not a defense to charge of statutory rape." Commonwealth v. Elder, 389 Mass. 743 (1983). North Carolina general statutes: � 14-27.7. Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims; consent no defense. If a defendant who has assumed the position of a parent in the home of a minor victim engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with a victim who is a minor residing in the home, or if a person having custody of a victim of any age or a person who is an agent or employee of any person, or institution, whether such institution is private, charitable, or governmental, having custody of a victim of any age engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with such victim, the defendant is guilty of a Class E felony. Consent is not a defense to a charge under this section. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 9; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1132; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).) Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: Article 134 - (Indecent acts or liberties with a child) (1) Consent. Lack of consent by the child to the act or conduct is not essential to this offense; consent is not a defense. Florida statutes: Title XLVII Chapter 944 (State Correctional System) 3. The consent of the inmate or offender supervised by the department in the community to any act of sexual misconduct may not be raised as a defense to a prosecution under this paragraph. The law says that consent is possible but it's illegal anyway. Just like how it used to be with gay sex. >If it's just what you believe to be self-evident then IMO >would be appropriate (IMO). And IMO it is not at all akin to your latter >sentence.
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>Bateau wrote: >> >>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>> >>>>In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>> >>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>>>>>wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>>>>>itself? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >>>>>> >>>>>>That is just sick. >>>>> >>>>>It's factual. There is a difference between fact and law. >>>>Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with >>>>children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding >>>>when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior >>>>- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of >>>>such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied >>>>to child molestation. >>> >>>Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be >>>given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal. >> >>Says who? > > Most western criminal codes. The concept isn't even unique to sex. It's > also used in laws about assault, physician conduct, hazing etc. > >>If this is a reference from some law or other please state the >>reference. > > Massachusetts supreme court: > "Consent is not a defense to charge of statutory rape." Commonwealth v. > Elder, 389 Mass. 743 (1983). > > North Carolina general statutes: > � 14-27.7. Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims; > consent no defense. > If a defendant who has assumed the position of a parent in the home of a > minor victim engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with a > victim who is a minor residing in the home, or if a person having > custody of a victim of any age or a person who is an agent or employee > of any person, or institution, whether such institution is private, > charitable, or governmental, having custody of a victim of any age > engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with such victim, the > defendant is guilty of a Class E felony. Consent is not a defense to a > charge under this section. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. > 1316, s. 9; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1132; 1994, Ex. > Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).) > > Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: > Article 134 - (Indecent acts or liberties with a child) > (1) Consent. Lack of consent by the child to the act or conduct is not > essential to this offense; consent is not a defense. > > Florida statutes: > Title XLVII Chapter 944 (State Correctional System) > 3. The consent of the inmate or offender supervised by the department > in the community to any act of sexual misconduct may not be raised as a > defense to a prosecution under this paragraph. > > The law says that consent is possible but it's illegal anyway. Just like > how it used to be with gay sex. Pretty good, I see your point. Although it doesn't state above whether reasonable consent is possible or not - it says it cannot be used as a defence - from which you can not infer the former, esp. under black letter law. IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent less difference than perhaps it should. >>If it's just what you believe to be self-evident then IMO >>would be appropriate (IMO). And IMO it is not at all akin to your latter >>sentence. I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) that a child cannot give reasonable consent? -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two > consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your > quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent > less difference than perhaps it should. anarchism of the law? @ @@@ @@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@ @@ @@@@@@ @@@@@ @@ @ @@@ @@@@ @ @ @@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@ @@@@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@ @@ @ @@ @@@@ @ @@ @@ @@@@@@ @@ @ @@@ @@ @@@ @@@@@@ @@ @@@@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ @@@@@ @@ @ @@ @@ @@ @ -- ._____. |[LD8]! SIMON WILLIAMS :: LUDDITE ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED | (O) | 68K MACINTOSH SERVER http://luddite.no-ip.com !__!__! FAILURE RECORDS http://failurerecords.no-ip.com
Simon Williams wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two >>consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your >>quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent >>less difference than perhaps it should. > > > anarchism of the law? > > @ > @@@ > @@@@@@ > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > @@@@@ @@ @@@@@@ > @@@@@ @@ @ @@@ > @@@@ @ @ @@@ > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@ > @@@@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > @@@@@ @@ @ @@ > @@@@ @ @@ @@ > @@@@@@ @@ @ > @@@ @@ @@@ > @@@@@@ @@ @@@@@ > @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > @ @@@@@ @@ > @ @@ > @@ @@ > @ > Good point - you really picked the eye out of that one. I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) over 1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder I'm not watching what I'm doing ;) "move it move it, 1 2 3! 1..." OA: the 1231 post... , o o q '}- `}, ,]- /| /| |\ Or in terms of Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooogle the 10, 20, 30... posts! http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=author%3Aabcgi&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== CLICK 10 then 20 etc=-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: >> ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>Bateau wrote: >>> >>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>> >>>>>In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast >>>>>>>>>wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape? And why >>>>>>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the >>>>>>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape >>>>>>>>>itself? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>That is just sick. >>>>>> >>>>>>It's factual. > >There is a difference between fact and law. > >>>>>Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with >>>>>children. There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding >>>>>when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior >>>>>- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of >>>>>such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied >>>>>to child molestation. >>>> >>>>Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be >>>>given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal. >>> >>>Says who? >> >> Most western criminal codes. The concept isn't even unique to sex. It's >> also used in laws about assault, physician conduct, hazing etc. >> >>>If this is a reference from some law or other please state the >>>reference. >> >> Massachusetts supreme court: >> "Consent is not a defense to charge of statutory rape." Commonwealth v. >> Elder, 389 Mass. 743 (1983). >> >> North Carolina general statutes: >> � 14-27.7. Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims; >> consent no defense. >> If a defendant who has assumed the position of a parent in the home of a >> minor victim engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with a >> victim who is a minor residing in the home, or if a person having >> custody of a victim of any age or a person who is an agent or employee >> of any person, or institution, whether such institution is private, >> charitable, or governmental, having custody of a victim of any age >> engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with such victim, the >> defendant is guilty of a Class E felony. Consent is not a defense to a >> charge under this section. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. >> 1316, s. 9; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1132; 1994, Ex. >> Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).) >> >> Punitive Articles of the UCMJ: >> Article 134 - (Indecent acts or liberties with a child) >> (1) Consent. Lack of consent by the child to the act or conduct is not >> essential to this offense; consent is not a defense. >> >> Florida statutes: >> Title XLVII Chapter 944 (State Correctional System) >> 3. The consent of the inmate or offender supervised by the department >> in the community to any act of sexual misconduct may not be raised as a >> defense to a prosecution under this paragraph. >> >> The law says that consent is possible but it's illegal anyway. Just like >> how it used to be with gay sex. > >Pretty good, I see your point. Although it doesn't state above whether >reasonable consent is possible or not - it says it cannot be used as a >defence - from which you can not infer the former, esp. under black >letter law. Well every judge seems to know that minors can consent to sex because they say so in court. I'm not going to bother looking up specific cases though. Denying it would be unreasonably sceptical. >IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two >consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your >quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent >less difference than perhaps it should. I was never comparing the fairness of it to sodomy laws. It's just a similar kind of crime in that the victim is often the least offended or harmed. >>>If it's just what you believe to be self-evident then IMO >>>would be appropriate (IMO). And IMO it is not at all akin to your latter >>>sentence. > >I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) >that a child cannot give reasonable consent? Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"? Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude towards sex than adults.
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Simon Williams wrote: > >> ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >>>IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two >>>consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your >>>quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent >>>less difference than perhaps it should. >> >> >> anarchism of the law? >> >> @ >> @@@ >> @@@@@@ >> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >> @@@@@ @@ @@@@@@ >> @@@@@ @@ @ @@@ >> @@@@ @ @ @@@ >> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@ >> @@@@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >> @@@@@ @@ @ @@ >> @@@@ @ @@ @@ >> @@@@@@ @@ @ >> @@@ @@ @@@ >> @@@@@@ @@ @@@@@ >> @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >> @ @@@@@ @@ >> @ @@ >> @@ @@ >> @ >> > >Good point - you really picked the eye out of that one. > >I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) over >1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder I'm not >watching what I'm doing ;) > "move it move it, 1 2 3! 1..." >OA: the 1231 post... , > o o q > '}- `}, ,]- > /| /| |\ > >Or in terms of Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooogle the 10, 20, 30... posts! > >http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=author%3Aabcgi&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker.
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) >>that a child cannot give reasonable consent? > > Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"? > Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude > towards sex than adults. For example can a child who has not reached puberty give reasonable consent? -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>Simon Williams wrote: >> >> >>>ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two >>>>consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your >>>>quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent >>>>less difference than perhaps it should. >>> >>> >>>anarchism of the law? >>> >>> @ >>> @@@ >>> @@@@@@ >>> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >>> @@@@@ @@ @@@@@@ >>> @@@@@ @@ @ @@@ >>> @@@@ @ @ @@@ >>>@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@ >>> @@@@@ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >>> @@@@@ @@ @ @@ >>> @@@@ @ @@ @@ >>> @@@@@@ @@ @ >>> @@@ @@ @@@ >>> @@@@@@ @@ @@@@@ >>> @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >>> @ @@@@@ @@ >>> @ @@ >>> @@ @@ >>> @ >>> >> >>Good point - you really picked the eye out of that one. >> >>I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) over >>1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder I'm not >>watching what I'm doing ;) >> "move it move it, 1 2 3! 1..." >>OA: the 1231 post... , >> o o q >> '}- `}, ,]- >> /| /| |\ >> >>Or in terms of Gooooooooooooooooooooooooooogle the 10, 20, 30... posts! >> >>http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=author%3Aabcgi&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search > > > I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. Crickey! (That's one more for me) -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Bateau wrote: >>I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) over >>1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder I'm not >>watching what I'm doing ;) > I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. deja (aka google groups) says I've got 107, 'though at least two of them are from a german guy who happens to be using my nym[1]. I've been using (f|g)roups for less than a year, though, so it's not too suprising. [1] Interestingly, I've had fairly little trouble with this. The only other times I've had somebody else use it is with AIM and livejournal. Everywhere else, it's all mine. I don't really care, either, since my *real nym (heh) is st�l�st, but most services won't accept my inverted exclamation points. Yeah, feel free to google me with that one, and I'm the only one you'll find... just use quotes. :)
Nothing, sorry :) I understood what you meant when I read previous posts. BoD
stilist wrote: > Bateau wrote: > >>> I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) >>> over 1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder >>> I'm not watching what I'm doing ;) >> >> I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. > > deja (aka google groups) says I've got 107, 'though at least two of them > are from a german guy who happens to be using my nym[1]. I've been using > (f|g)roups for less than a year, though, so it's not too suprising. > > [1] Interestingly, I've had fairly little trouble with this. The only > other times I've had somebody else use it is with AIM and livejournal. > Everywhere else, it's all mine. I don't really care, either, since my > *real nym (heh) is st�l�st, but most services won't accept my inverted > exclamation points. Yeah, feel free to google me with that one, and I'm > the only one you'll find... just use quotes. :) This is the main reason I picked ABCGi as my nic so it would be unique in the whole world (handy for usenet searches, ICQ, email signups etc)... I think this means I'm pretty weird... welcome to the club! *ouch* /stop/ _clubbing_me_! -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
_.-In alt.ascii-art, ABCGi wrote the following -._ > This is the main reason I picked ABCGi as my nic so it would be unique > in the whole world (handy for usenet searches, ICQ, email signups > etc)... I think this means I'm pretty weird... welcome to the club! .-----------. That is why I picked Faux_Pseudo. I figured | ADMIT | that a double negative in a foreign language ) ONE ( /should/ make it really easy to find myself | :F_P: | or create accounts without the name being )---------( taken. The only problem I have run into is | ADMIT | places that don't allow underscores in ) ONE ( usernames. | :F_P: | `-----------' Just now did a google search and it appears that the vast majority of results are either from my website or usenet archivers. -- .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
_.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ > Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude > towards sex than adults. /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting / \ to reality. I think they can help you. / /\ \ ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you /__________\ based on their personal experances involing :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. Elfin Thrown I only know two of them who would be thought of as mature and normal now. All of the rest of them serious issues because minors do not and can not be more mature and understanding than adults. no matter how much one might like to think otherwise. -- .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
Faux_Pseudo wrote: > _.-In alt.ascii-art, ABCGi wrote the following -._ > >>This is the main reason I picked ABCGi as my nic so it would be unique >>in the whole world (handy for usenet searches, ICQ, email signups >>etc)... I think this means I'm pretty weird... welcome to the club! > > > .-----------. That is why I picked Faux_Pseudo. I figured > | ADMIT | that a double negative in a foreign language > ) ONE ( /should/ make it really easy to find myself > | :F_P: | or create accounts without the name being > )---------( taken. The only problem I have run into is > | ADMIT | places that don't allow underscores in > ) ONE ( usernames. > | :F_P: | > `-----------' Just now did a google search and it appears > that the vast majority of results are either > from my website or usenet archivers. > > -- > .-')) asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that > ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to > ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word. > ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson Yeah it's good that... and u are in the exclusive "underscores allowed" club... -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
BoD wrote: > Nothing, sorry :) I understood what you meant when I read previous posts. > > BoD ;o) -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Faux_Pseudo wrote: > _.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ >> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >> towards sex than adults. > > /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in > / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting > / \ to reality. I think they can help you. > / /\ \ > ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people > _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you > /__________\ based on their personal experances involing > :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. > > Elfin Thrown I only know two of them who would be thought of > as mature and normal now. All of the rest of > them serious issues because minors do not and can > not be more mature and understanding than adults. > no matter how much one might like to think > otherwise. Of all of my friends, not one was over 16 when he or she first had sex. Quite a few of them were under 12. They are now all perfectly well adjusted and normal people, some of them are even married with children. While getting abused certainly increases someone's chances of growing up to be fucked up, simply having sex does not. I think the idea that someone is going to be permanantly damaged just because they started fucking a little early in life is idiotic, Just my $.02. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
stilist <nob...@website.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: >>>I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) over >>>1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder I'm not >>>watching what I'm doing ;) >> I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. > >deja (aka google groups) says I've got 107, 'though at least two of them >are from a german guy who happens to be using my nym[1]. I've been using >(f|g)roups for less than a year, though, so it's not too suprising. > >[1] Interestingly, I've had fairly little trouble with this. The only >other times I've had somebody else use it is with AIM and livejournal. >Everywhere else, it's all mine. I don't really care, either, since my >*real nym (heh) is st�l�st, but most services won't accept my inverted >exclamation points. Yeah, feel free to google me with that one, and I'm >the only one you'll find... just use quotes. :) Before me there was some transformers fan who went by Bateau. I even think he posted a request in here once. My others are Gamera and RastaJew which are also pretty uncommon.
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: > >> ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) >>>that a child cannot give reasonable consent? >> >> Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"? >> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >> towards sex than adults. > >For example can a child who has not reached puberty give reasonable consent? Possibly. It has nothing to do with the physical body.
Faux_Pseudo <Fau...@yahoo.comERCIAL> wrote: >_.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ >> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >> towards sex than adults. > > /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in > / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting > / \ to reality. I think they can help you. > / /\ \ > ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people > _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you > /__________\ based on their personal experances involing > :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. > > Elfin Thrown So because you know people who were naive at that age everyone else that age must be as naive? And you think *I* have trouble accepting reality? LOL. > I only know two of them who would be thought of > as mature and normal now. All of the rest of > them serious issues because minors do not and can > not be more mature and understanding than adults. > no matter how much one might like to think > otherwise. Do they have serious issues now because of their experiences, or would they always have had serious issues which might be why they were not capable of giving consent at an age that many are capable of giving consent?
Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >Faux_Pseudo wrote: > >> _.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ >>> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >>> towards sex than adults. >> >> /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in >> / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting >> / \ to reality. I think they can help you. >> / /\ \ >> ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people >> _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you >> /__________\ based on their personal experances involing >> :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. >> >> Elfin Thrown I only know two of them who would be thought of >> as mature and normal now. All of the rest of >> them serious issues because minors do not and can >> not be more mature and understanding than adults. >> no matter how much one might like to think >> otherwise. > >Of all of my friends, not one was over 16 when he or she first had sex. >Quite a few of them were under 12. They are now all perfectly well adjusted >and normal people, some of them are even married with children. While >getting abused certainly increases someone's chances of growing up to be >fucked up, simply having sex does not. I think the idea that someone is >going to be permanantly damaged just because they started fucking a little >early in life is idiotic, Just my $.02. Over here it's legal to fuck 12-15 year olds as long as you are within 2 years of their age. Isn't someone their own age just as or even more likely to manipulate or abuse them as an adult?
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >stilist wrote: > >> Bateau wrote: >> >>>> I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) >>>> over 1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder >>>> I'm not watching what I'm doing ;) >>> >>> I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. >> >> deja (aka google groups) says I've got 107, 'though at least two of them >> are from a german guy who happens to be using my nym[1]. I've been using >> (f|g)roups for less than a year, though, so it's not too suprising. >> >> [1] Interestingly, I've had fairly little trouble with this. The only >> other times I've had somebody else use it is with AIM and livejournal. >> Everywhere else, it's all mine. I don't really care, either, since my >> *real nym (heh) is st�l�st, but most services won't accept my inverted >> exclamation points. Yeah, feel free to google me with that one, and I'm >> the only one you'll find... just use quotes. :) > >This is the main reason I picked ABCGi as my nic so it would be unique >in the whole world (handy for usenet searches, ICQ, email signups >etc)... I think this means I'm pretty weird... welcome to the club! > >*ouch* > >/stop/ _clubbing_me_! IMO it is only useful to change the subject line (and creating a new thread) when are you the first person to change the topic. Otherwise people will still respond to the first topic changer's post in the old thread and the discussion will be split in half.
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>stilist wrote: >> >>>Bateau wrote: >>> >>>>>I checked deja.com for author:abcgi the other day (thanks to F:P) >>>>>over 1230 posts starting in 1998 (not including this one)! No wonder >>>>>I'm not watching what I'm doing ;) >>>> >>>>I have about 4300 since 1998. Slacker. >>> >>>deja (aka google groups) says I've got 107, 'though at least two of them >>>are from a german guy who happens to be using my nym[1]. I've been using >>>(f|g)roups for less than a year, though, so it's not too suprising. >>> >>>[1] Interestingly, I've had fairly little trouble with this. The only >>>other times I've had somebody else use it is with AIM and livejournal. >>>Everywhere else, it's all mine. I don't really care, either, since my >>>*real nym (heh) is st�l�st, but most services won't accept my inverted >>>exclamation points. Yeah, feel free to google me with that one, and I'm >>>the only one you'll find... just use quotes. :) >> >>This is the main reason I picked ABCGi as my nic so it would be unique >>in the whole world (handy for usenet searches, ICQ, email signups >>etc)... I think this means I'm pretty weird... welcome to the club! >> >>*ouch* >> >>/stop/ _clubbing_me_! > > IMO it is only useful to change the subject line (and creating a new > thread) when are you the first person to change the topic. Otherwise > people will still respond to the first topic changer's post in the old > thread and the discussion will be split in half. That seems a bit fastidious for you Bateau - having a slow day on usenet? ;) But funny and a point (esp x4 2y^2 - a ref to my earlier crazee math?). On my newsreader (Thunderbird) it doesn't really start a new thread, but does let people see that this branch of the thread has changed in subject. This I find particularly useful if I have snipped the majority of the post and focused on one thing, thus destroying the readable flow anyway. Not the case here but interesting chatting nonetheless! I think XNews was like that too when I was using it. A new way to solveMthese issues though - whoever has the most posts, 4000+ you win! So u S T B --------------------------------------> right. -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>Bateau wrote: >> >>>ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>>I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) >>>>that a child cannot give reasonable consent? >>> >>>Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"? >>>Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >>>towards sex than adults. >> >>For example can a child who has not reached puberty give reasonable consent? > > Possibly. It has nothing to do with the physical body. But not with an adult surely? -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Bateau wrote: > Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >>Faux_Pseudo wrote: >> >>> _.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ >>>> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >>>> towards sex than adults. >>> >>> /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in >>> / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting >>> / \ to reality. I think they can help you. >>> / /\ \ >>> ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people >>> _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you >>> /__________\ based on their personal experances involing >>> :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. >>> >>> Elfin Thrown I only know two of them who would be thought of >>> as mature and normal now. All of the rest of >>> them serious issues because minors do not and can >>> not be more mature and understanding than adults. >>> no matter how much one might like to think >>> otherwise. >> >>Of all of my friends, not one was over 16 when he or she first had sex. >>Quite a few of them were under 12. They are now all perfectly well >>adjusted and normal people, some of them are even married with children. >>While getting abused certainly increases someone's chances of growing up >>to be fucked up, simply having sex does not. I think the idea that someone >>is going to be permanantly damaged just because they started fucking a >>little early in life is idiotic, Just my $.02. > > Over here it's legal to fuck 12-15 year olds as long as you are within 2 > years of their age. Isn't someone their own age just as or even more > likely to manipulate or abuse them as an adult? Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't get laid all that often. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Iconoclast wrote: > Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way things > are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having their > minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The guy who's > not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't get laid all > that often. I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel guilty. IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all conjecture. ,. A-------------' ' `------------------------------------------------B -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi wrote: > Iconoclast wrote: >> Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >> things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >> their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >> guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >> get laid all that often. > > I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a > lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel > guilty. Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) > IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some > men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all > conjecture. > My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 times out of 10 are the scumbags. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Iconoclast wrote: > ABCGi wrote: > >>Iconoclast wrote: >> >>>Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>get laid all that often. >> >>I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>guilty. > > Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) haha - I'll have to remember that one! >>IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>conjecture. > > My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are > different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around > here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 > times out of 10 are the scumbags. Do you really want the women that go for these guys? -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi wrote: > Iconoclast wrote: >> ABCGi wrote: >> >>>Iconoclast wrote: >>> >>>>Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>>things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>>their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>>guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>>get laid all that often. >>> >>>I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>>lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>>guilty. >> >> Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) > > haha - I'll have to remember that one! > >>>IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>>men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>>conjecture. >> >> My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >> different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around >> here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >> times out of 10 are the scumbags. > > Do you really want the women that go for these guys? > It's pretty much all of them dude. If I didn't want those women I'd be gay. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Iconoclast wrote: > ABCGi wrote: >>Iconoclast wrote: >>>ABCGi wrote: >>>>Iconoclast wrote: >>>> >>>>>Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>>>things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>>>their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>>>guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>>>get laid all that often. >>>> >>>>I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>>>lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>>>guilty. >>> >>>Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) >> >>haha - I'll have to remember that one! >> >>>>IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>>>men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>>>conjecture. >>> >>>My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >>>different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around >>>here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >>>times out of 10 are the scumbags. >> >>Do you really want the women that go for these guys? > > It's pretty much all of them dude. If I didn't want those women I'd be gay. Sounds like where you're looking and who you're looking, but who am I to circumvent the great teacher, experience. It'll be the woman that breaks your rule that you'll fall for, but will she fall for you??? -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: > >> ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>Bateau wrote: >>> >>>>ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) >>>>>that a child cannot give reasonable consent? >>>> >>>>Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"? >>>>Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >>>>towards sex than adults. >>> >>>For example can a child who has not reached puberty give reasonable consent? >> >> Possibly. It has nothing to do with the physical body. > >But not with an adult surely? Why is that not possible?
Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: > >> Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >>>Faux_Pseudo wrote: >>> >>>> _.-In alt.ascii-art, Bateau wrote the following -._ >>>>> Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude >>>>> towards sex than adults. >>>> >>>> /\ You many want to consult a person experienced in >>>> / \ dealing with people who have problems adjusting >>>> / \ to reality. I think they can help you. >>>> / /\ \ >>>> ) .)(. ( I could also introduce you to a number of people >>>> _\_|__|_/_ that I have met that would dissagree with you >>>> /__________\ based on their personal experances involing >>>> :F_P:______| being molested, exploited and sexually abused. >>>> >>>> Elfin Thrown I only know two of them who would be thought of >>>> as mature and normal now. All of the rest of >>>> them serious issues because minors do not and can >>>> not be more mature and understanding than adults. >>>> no matter how much one might like to think >>>> otherwise. >>> >>>Of all of my friends, not one was over 16 when he or she first had sex. >>>Quite a few of them were under 12. They are now all perfectly well >>>adjusted and normal people, some of them are even married with children. >>>While getting abused certainly increases someone's chances of growing up >>>to be fucked up, simply having sex does not. I think the idea that someone >>>is going to be permanantly damaged just because they started fucking a >>>little early in life is idiotic, Just my $.02. >> >> Over here it's legal to fuck 12-15 year olds as long as you are within 2 >> years of their age. Isn't someone their own age just as or even more >> likely to manipulate or abuse them as an adult? > >Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way things >are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having their >minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The guy who's >not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't get laid all >that often. Women manipulate men using sex. Not me though. Bitches can shove it! Haha that's a great motto. I refuse to compromise my appearance, beliefs or personality just to score with some chick. That's why I never get any.
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Iconoclast wrote: >> Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way things >> are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having their >> minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The guy who's >> not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't get laid all >> that often. > >I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >guilty. > >IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >conjecture. > > ,. >A-------------' ' > `------------------------------------------------B See you've done it again :P Women think they are under pressure to look good but not as much as men. We have to shave half our head before women even talk to us.
Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >ABCGi wrote: > >> Iconoclast wrote: >>> Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>> things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>> their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>> guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>> get laid all that often. >> >> I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >> lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >> guilty. > >Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) > >> IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >> men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >> conjecture. >> > >My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >different where you're from, Well I'm not from a pub so I guess that's why I see things differently O_o >and if so I'd like to move there, but around >here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >times out of 10 are the scumbags. Aggressive guys get bar women. Who the hell wants that?
ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >Iconoclast wrote: > >> ABCGi wrote: >>>Iconoclast wrote: >>>>ABCGi wrote: >>>>>Iconoclast wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>>>>things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>>>>their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>>>>guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>>>>get laid all that often. >>>>> >>>>>I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>>>>lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>>>>guilty. >>>> >>>>Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) >>> >>>haha - I'll have to remember that one! >>> >>>>>IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>>>>men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>>>>conjecture. >>>> >>>>My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >>>>different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around >>>>here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >>>>times out of 10 are the scumbags. >>> >>>Do you really want the women that go for these guys? >> >> It's pretty much all of them dude. If I didn't want those women I'd be gay. > >Sounds like where you're looking and who you're looking, but who am I to >circumvent the great teacher, experience. It'll be the woman that breaks >your rule that you'll fall for, but will she fall for you??? I found a secret source of ULTRA HOT CHICKS - anime conventions. They are really geeky too.
Bateau wrote: > ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>Iconoclast wrote: >>>ABCGi wrote: >>>>Iconoclast wrote: >>>>>ABCGi wrote: >>>>>>Iconoclast wrote: >>>>>>>Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>>>>>things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>>>>>their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>>>>>guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>>>>>get laid all that often. >>>>>> >>>>>>I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>>>>>lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>>>>>guilty. >>>>> >>>>>Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) >>>> >>>>haha - I'll have to remember that one! >>>> >>>>>>IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>>>>>men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>>>>>conjecture. >>>>> >>>>>My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >>>>>different where you're from, and if so I'd like to move there, but around >>>>>here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >>>>>times out of 10 are the scumbags. >>>> >>>>Do you really want the women that go for these guys? >>> >>>It's pretty much all of them dude. If I didn't want those women I'd be gay. >> >>Sounds like where you're looking and who you're looking, but who am I to >>circumvent the great teacher, experience. It'll be the woman that breaks >>your rule that you'll fall for, but will she fall for you??? > > I found a secret source of ULTRA HOT CHICKS - anime conventions. They > are really geeky too. I'll be sure to check it out... ....... OA ................ Tastes like steak ........................ .. ........ ...... ..... .. . ...... ...... ..... . .. . . .. ... .. .. .. . .. . . .. ... ..... .. . . . .... ... . .... . ... .. ...... . . . .... ... ......... ... . . .. ..... ... .... ... ... . .. . . ... ..... . .. ..... .... . . .. ..... . . .... .. .. ..... .. ... .. . .. ... . ... .. . | / "How do you read /___/ it like that?" \ -- ABCGi - Atomic ______________________ <===> Bacterial Genetic |---------------------|| Chemical Infantrymen <=========== http://abcgi.fly.to =-+-=> |---------------------|'
Bateau wrote: > Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >>ABCGi wrote: >> >>> Iconoclast wrote: >>>> Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>> things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>> their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>> guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>> get laid all that often. >>> >>> I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>> lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>> guilty. >> >>Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) >> >>> IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>> men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>> conjecture. >>> >> >>My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >>different where you're from, > > Well I'm not from a pub so I guess that's why I see things differently > O_o > >>and if so I'd like to move there, but around >>here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >>times out of 10 are the scumbags. > > Aggressive guys get bar women. Who the hell wants that? ME. Where else am I gonna meet girls, the mall? Too 14-years-old. Work? Too much hassle. The internet? Too pathetic. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >Bateau wrote: >> Iconoclast <non...@bogusemailaddress.com> wrote: >>>ABCGi wrote: >>>> Iconoclast wrote: >>>>> Regardless of age, men manipulate women for sex, period. It's the way >>>>> things are and always have been (and I think women secretly like having >>>>> their minds fucked with, look how often they do it to each other). The >>>>> guy who's not willing to be a liar and a scumbag is the guy who doesn't >>>>> get laid all that often. >>>> >>>> I get laid plenty and I don't have to be an asshole to do it, it feels a >>>> lot better that way when you have a conscience so you don't have to feel >>>> guilty. >>> >>>Crawling up a hen's ass and waiting doesn't count :) >>> >>>> IMO Your statement would be more accurate if you used the term "some >>>> men" and "some women". But only slightly as it is pretty much all >>>> conjecture. >>>> >>> >>>My statement is based on my last 300 visits to the pub. Maybe things are >>>different where you're from, >> >> Well I'm not from a pub so I guess that's why I see things differently >> O_o >> >>>and if so I'd like to move there, but around >>>here it's the agressive guys who get the women, and the agressive guys 9 >>>times out of 10 are the scumbags. >> >> Aggressive guys get bar women. Who the hell wants that? > >ME. Where else am I gonna meet girls, the mall? Too 14-years-old. Work? Too >much hassle. The internet? Too pathetic. I always thought this was the lamest advice ever until I tried it: join a club. Archery club, book club, walking club, sci fi club. My brother's girlfriend is in a medieval arms and armour society and he's in a tree climber's guild and rowing club. Go look up the recreational services manager of your local council and ask them.
Bateau wrote: > I always thought this was the lamest advice ever until I tried it: join > a club. Archery club, book club, walking club, sci fi club. My brother's > girlfriend is in a medieval arms and armour society and he's in a tree > climber's guild and rowing club. Go look up the recreational services > manager of your local council and ask them. Hmmm, good idea, I have been thinking about getting active in the ACLU... -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
Homer.Simpson wrote: > Iconoclast said > >> Bateau wrote: >> >> Hmmm, good idea, I have been thinking about getting active in the >> ACLU... > > Ya got a thing for unattractive lesbians in combat boots? ;-) Nah, the ACLU, not NOW or the republican party :P. I've been to an ACLU meeting before, quite a few hippy chicks. I certainly dig hippy chicks. -- "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." --Mark Twain
About this thread.
These messages were posted publicly to the newsgroup
alt.ascii-art
in 2005 and are mirrored here unchanged as part of the Historic Archives – only email addresses are masked.
The artwork and text belong to their original authors: if you copy a piece, keep the artist's initials or signature intact and credit them where you can.
Are you one of the authors? Contact us to get your posts attributed, connected to your artist profile, or removed.