Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For your information, I have yet to see one reasonable white male EVER support those groups you mentioned. Perhaps you could point to some examples ...otherwise we'll have to assume this is yet another deliberate diversion. But for anyone who would ... it would certainly depict those specific white males who would choose to defend or make excuses for those groups. By the same token, homosexuals who defend and give cover to these rapists of little boys can be considered advocates. Or are you unable to compute how defending something is advocating it?
Clearly, you seem incapable of either rationality or honesty ... I don't no which best describes you ... you could just as easily be a kool-aid salesman as one selling snake oil. In any event, the use of such an irrelevant and inappropriate analogy suggests that you think I'm as dumb as a box of rocks, or that you are.
I can assure you I'm not .. but I can't help you with the other possibility.
And I have yet to see one reasonable homosexual male EVER support NAMBLA (a now defunct group of a couple hundred pedophiles), yet you seem to think NAMBLA members are representative of gay men in general. Who's incapable of rationality or honesty?
Really? So if someone has a problem with a group like "NAMBLA" ... an organized group of homosexual pedophiles who openly advocate the sexual assault of little boys .... it's them who has the problem, and not the NAMBLA perverts? Is that what you really believe? Because that is what you just stated! I'm just wondering if that is actually what you meant to say?
I'm starting to think you are one of those people who think rap victims should marry their rapist and that if they get pregnant by their rapist they should have the child and raise them.
Quote:
Secondly, no, it's balderdash to insinuate that this ONE account from ONE person is the only account ... when it most certainly isn't. It's just the ONE we are discussing now, and based on responses, the "logical left" apparently prefers biased study data to that of the actual testimony of victim experiences.
Can you provide other stories to back up this claim? I mean if it is true then every child that has been raised in a same sex household or a single parent household will have similar stories of abuse.
Quote:
The allegedly official "study data" from the vaulted peer-reviewed journals that have been posted and promoted here is both anti-intuitive as well as incongruent with less biased, independent research that is available to those who seek the truth, rather than grasp for evidence that supports their own biased views.
Please by all means present these studies to teach us. I mean you do want the truth to be heard don't you?
Quote:
Here is an informative read ( Sexual Abuse of Males: Statistics, Possible Lasting Effects, and Resources ) about the sexual abuse of boys that contains great insight into the methods used by statisticians and studies, and how those studies can be structured to achieve pretty much any result desired. Of course, anyone familiar with how "studies and statistics" are routinely conducted and collected irrespective of the subject of study, know how flawed the results can be, and often is. This fact gives credence to the old adage "there are lies, damned lies, and then statistics". So it is very often that studies do offer dubious results that many times draw the exact opposite conclusion from what is actually the truth. That's why empirical data must be given much greater weight, and when study data is not congruent with empirical data, you can assume the study data to be at least flawed, if not deliberately deceptive.
That report if for sexual abuse of males by female perpetrators. Is says nothing about homosexuals.
Quote:
With regard to the percentage of male children being sexually abused, the figures range from 4.8%, all the way to 28% percent of the male population having been abused prior to the age of 16. That itself points to serious problems in the studies and data collection methods. But guess which figure will be used by those wanting to downplay the incidence rates of abuse of male children? If you guessed 4.8% you'd be correct, but would simply be exercising basic common sense that earns no great applause. If however your goal was simply to find the truth ... then you'd have to start by analyzing methods and biases of those conducting these studies that are producing these wildly differing results, and compare that to empirical data.
You really have no idea what you are talking about.
Quote:
With that said, has it ever occurred to any of you people to take note of the many accounts of the most notable and high profile cases of child sexual molestation making the headlines for the better part of two decades now, noting that they are predominantly assaults on young boys? Go back, look, and tell me this is not true. Couple that reality with the claims of some experts who contend that the incidences of sexual assault on males is drastically under reported in comparison to female victims, and even that high 28% figure might not reflect the full extent of the problem.
They many accounts of boys being victims of sexual molestation has been done by women, especially in most recent times.
Quote:
Most of the so-called "peer-reviewed" mainstream journals are indeed dominated by leftist propaganda which focuses on pointing out how many more female child victims there are compared to male child victims (a transparent effort to downplay the problem of homosexual pedophilia, while indirectly indicting the heterosexual male community as the primary culprits of this dastardly behavior), promoting the claims that range from 3 to 1, all the way to 5 to 1 ratios of Female/Male child victims. However, if the 28% male victim figure is more accurate, and indeed under reported as some researchers suggest ... that ratio narrows considerably, given the 33+ % figure of female child victims across the general population. Do the math 33% to 28% is much closer to a 1 to 1 (1.17 to .83) ratio than even a 2 to 1 ratio .... so the 3-1, 4-1 and 5-1 figures are absolutely and totally out the window.
Your willful ignorance is showing...
I can't even finish pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. It actually makes my head hurt to think someone can be this willfully ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
How about you getting a clue, or stop insulting our collective intelligence with this deliberate deception of yours evidenced by promoting this VILE TRIPE from the psychiatric community who wants to label every human behavior as some sort of mental disorder ... while at the same time, pushing to remove pedophilia from that list?
Collective intelligence? Bahahahaha. You really are lacking knowledge aren't you. I am tempted to diagnose you right now...
Quote:
This is the primary source of your defunct, fraudulent study data CRAP and it's false conclusions .... which comes from a community of sociopaths and psychopaths who want to re-brand child molestation as a new "sexual orientation" ... but consider anyone who objects to children being raped as the ones suffering some phobia
The rules of city data restrict me from answering this the way I would like to.... So..
Quote:
Now, you tell me .... do you support this? Do you? Answer the damned question directly, and cease with all of this shucking and jiving and deliberate deception for five seconds!
Do I support psychologists who have gone to school up to 10 years for a degree to understand the human mind? yes...yes I do. At least they have the decency to cite their sources.
Quote:
Let's see how low you can go here ... shall we? Tell us how this lovely group of professional experts should be trusted when they go to such disgusting lengths, not just excusing sexual molestation of children, but legitimizing it as a new "sexual orientation" ?
OK, I'll risk it. YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I'll answer your stupid little demonstration of idiocy ...
A society that cannot or refuses to protect it's own children from harm affects EVERYONE negatively, in many more ways than you accounted for in your 1-4 space.
Source: Me and common damned sense.
Capice?
HOW DOES HOMOSEXUALITY DIRECTLY HARM YOU? THE KEY WORD HERE IS YOU. HOW DOES IT HARM YOU PERSONALLY?
It doesn't that is why non of you willfully ignorant homophobes can answer the question directly. Actually, none of you have answered any question on here directly.
Continuing to argue with people that obviously have such a low IQ makes no logical sense other then for personal entertainment or for further study into how the mind of a hatemonger works.
I hope fractured_kidult is writing this all down and then shares his report with us.
You're not "thinking" at all. If you think what you are doing is thinking ... you haven't thought hard enough yet
They say, thinking is hard work, and that's why so few actually do it. Don't be afraid to roll up your sleeves .. it won't kill you .. I promise.
The ability to think is something anyone can do. It's just a part of our evolution. Most animals think as well. The difference is that we became aware of our existence.
Here is a great video that explains it a bit. Please try to pay attention. We got scared - YouTube
For your information, I have yet to see one reasonable white male EVER support those groups you mentioned.
Methinks you missed the point. We've never seen one reasonable homosexual support NAMBLA either, but that doesn't stop you from tying the two together. But you continue to say that homosexuals are pedophiles or necessarily affiliated with NAMBLA. So might I ask you why you're a racist supporting the KKK? They're anti-homosexuality, same as you. I'm tying two things together, see? Only this time you're in the hotseat for something you (presumably) are not a part of.
Kinda offends you, doesn't it? Now think how the homosexuals must feel, being accused of pedophilia without a shred of evidence.
Two obstacles on your hands, GNT. Remember the last one:
You say that homosexuals shouldn't be parents because gay men are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexual men. Yet, men in general are more likely to be pedophiles than women. So according to your logic, the only people who should be parents are single women and lesbians (And don't give me "It takes both a man and a woman to raise a kid properly"; it's been disproven a hundred times already).
Methinks you missed the point. We've never seen one reasonable homosexual support NAMBLA either, but that doesn't stop you from tying the two together. But you continue to say that homosexuals are pedophiles or necessarily affiliated with NAMBLA. So might I ask you why you're a racist supporting the KKK? They're anti-homosexuality, same as you. I'm tying two things together, see? Only this time you're in the hotseat for something you (presumably) are not a part of.
Kinda offends you, doesn't it? Now think how the homosexuals must feel, being accused of pedophilia without a shred of evidence.
Two obstacles on your hands, GNT. Remember the last one:
You say that homosexuals shouldn't be parents because gay men are more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexual men. Yet, men in general are more likely to be pedophiles than women. So according to your logic, the only people who should be parents are lesbians (And don't give me "It takes both a man and a woman to raise a kid properly"; it's been disproven a hundred times already).
I am pretty sure he is in the KKK or some other white superiority group. People who think this way usually feel they are superior to anyone else, especially minorities.
For your information, I have yet to see one reasonable white male EVER support those groups you mentioned. Perhaps you could point to some examples ... otherwise we'll have to assume this is yet another deliberate diversion. But for anyone who would ... it would certainly depict those specific white males who would choose to defend or make excuses for those groups. By the same token, homosexuals who defend and give cover to these rapists of little boys can be considered advocates. Or are you unable to compute how defending something is advocating it?
Clearly, you seem incapable of either rationality or honesty ... I don't no which best describes you ... you could just as easily be a kool-aid salesman as one selling snake oil. In any event, the use of such an irrelevant and inappropriate analogy suggests that you think I'm as dumb as a box of rocks, or that you are.
I can assure you I'm not .. but I can't help you with the other possibility.
Those groups(whose relative percentage is MUCH greater) do not depict all white males but a few hundred pedophiles depict ALL homosexuals?
To ensure the protection of children, we must end the secrecy and lack of knowledge surrounding the attraction to children and adolescents. B4U-ACT's goals are to make accurate information about it widely available, and to make research-based mental health services available to people with such feelings of attraction. The mental health of minor-attracted people ensures the well-being of children. B4U-ACT works toward these goals by holding workshops for clinicians, speaking to university classes, providing peer support, disseminating information through email, and facilitating other means of discussion and collaboration among researchers, clinicians, and minor-attracted people.
B4U-ACT's name refers to the fact that it is crucially important for minor-attracted people, therapists, researchers, and citizens to think before they act in ways that could harm children, society, or minor-attracted people. Obviously, minor-attracted people should abide by the law because of the potential risk to children and themselves of doing otherwise. In addition, all people should recognize that no one chooses to be attracted to children, that these feelings typically begin in adolescence, that many, perhaps most, do not act on these feelings, and that minor-attracted people can and do live law-abiding lives and contribute positively to their communities. Therefore, vilifying them for their feelings is unjust and harmful; it forces them into lives of secrecy and prevents them from getting help when needed, ultimately putting children at risk.
B4U-ACT's position on the DSM is completely in line with the APA's own position: that the DSM be based on high quality research (using representative samples rather than misleading prison samples), that it meet the needs of patients, and that it be revised with input from a variety of research disciplines and from minor-attracted people. Ascribing any position beyond this to B4U-ACT is inaccurate.
Wow this is really sinister stuff here and must be squashed immediately if not sooner. How dare anyone want to educate the public and mental healthcare professionals. Just who do these people think they are? Clearly another example of why education must be stamped out.
You must have OCD, take your meds and try to restrain yourself from this compulsion,
Oh are you here to answer this, too?
Gays and their desire to marry and raise children, affect me directly by:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Provide sources to back up your reasons.
Get to it, pup.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
