• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

Especially in situations where identity is usually hidden (prostitution). Beneficial for society, but I don't see a cash cow because the effect would be to block things that shouldn't happen.
I'm sorry: I wasn't very clear. I believe that I responded or intended to respond to the post that asked why such hand held devices weren't widely used. My remark specifically addressed what you stated: It would create the expectation that everyone knew everyone else's age and remove any plausible deniability: I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
It doesn't establish age, just 18+ or 21+. And you seem to be acting like I would have a problem with that.
And as disgusting as it is, selling young girls too young to willingly participate in such work is indeed a cash cow. Making their age explicitly known would damage a revenue stream....for some. Of course, for some, the underage part is exactly the turn on.
But it's an improper cash cow being removed, not a cash cow being created. And it's not just the perverts, a good age gate is not beneficial to any age gated business. And in the other direction the focus is on prohibiting rather than on age gating. Thus there are no strong interests in favor of a good age gate.
Of course it’s an improper cash cow! That was actually my point: there are too many people willing to exploit girls —and boys! —below the age of consent.

I certainly did not mean to imply that you are in any way ok with underage persons performing sex work.
 
I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
Or 19, or 20, given your desire to raise the age of adulthood.
We already gave varying ages for consent/ privilege.

What I believe is that society owes it to every single child to ensure that they have every opportunity possible to grow into adulthood as unscarred as possible, as healthy as possible. Which means, in part, protecting them from exploitation by adults.
 
So Maxwell has been getting death threats at the pillow prison she was sent to against the rules. They have brought in more security to protect her.
 
Which has been my whole point throughout the thread. It's apologia and defense of child rape and we shouldn't allow it as an argument.
It is pretty disgusting that you view disagreement about definition of "child" as rape apologia. Despite my nuanced post on this issue from earlier in the thread, you are still hanging on this baseless attack in lieu of making actual arguments.
It is not baseless. No matter how many “nuances” you post, if one believes anyone under the current age of consent is a child, then arguments to lower the aoc are child rape apologia.
Derec said:
And there is something very totalitarian to say that disagreeing with you should not be allowed.
Extrapolating a statement in a specific context ( not allowing defense of child rape as an argument) to a general statement (disagreement not allowed) is extremely disingenuous.
 
Which has been my whole point throughout the thread. It's apologia and defense of child rape and we shouldn't allow it as an argument.
It is pretty disgusting that you view disagreement about definition of "child" as rape apologia. Despite my nuanced post on this issue from earlier in the thread, you are still hanging on this baseless attack in lieu of making actual arguments.
It is not baseless. No matter how many “nuances” you post, if one believes anyone under the current age of consent is a child, then arguments to lower the aoc are child rape apologia.
Derec said:
And there is something very totalitarian to say that disagreeing with you should not be allowed.
Extrapolating a statement in a specific context ( not allowing defense of child rape as an argument) to a general statement (disagreement not allowed) is extremely disingenuous.
Well, I defined child in a particular way. I was extremely clear about my definition.

My definition of "child" specific about the necessary time and experience for building the capability to consent relative to the adult being used in reference to the use of the word.

I just don't see how there's any room to then claim that it is in any way ethical for an "adult" relative to some "child" to have sex with them; it specifically hinges on whatever requirement makes someone capable of it, given a tacit assumption that time is a necessary component to the ability to consent.

I have been very clear about all of this, as I said.

My point then was that 16 year olds lack the necessary time to be capable of consenting to sex with 20 year olds, for example.

In fact, I would almost say the ability to understand develops at what seems like some kind of geometric way... But geometric growth can seem rather insignificant at first.

These kinds of arguments do not in any way rise to admit an adult violating that.

It's pedophilia to pursue sex outside these bounds.

Seriously, if you want to have sex and think about... Whatever body you want to... There are adults who want you to fuck them and think about them that way.

To know that, to have that available to you, and you very much have that available to you and then go after children anyway is fucking disgusting.

If you want to call it totalitarian, absolutist, to say that adults absolutely shouldn't be fucking people that lack the time and experience to consent to that sex, then yeah, I'll be a totalitarian absolutist.

Then, I reject that morality is "subjective". For me it's as solid 2+2=4.
 
Derec said:
there is something very totalitarian to say that disagreeing with you should not be allowed.
How hypocritical. From he who thinks that his own opinion should be enforced.
 
Especially in situations where identity is usually hidden (prostitution). Beneficial for society, but I don't see a cash cow because the effect would be to block things that shouldn't happen.
I'm sorry: I wasn't very clear. I believe that I responded or intended to respond to the post that asked why such hand held devices weren't widely used. My remark specifically addressed what you stated: It would create the expectation that everyone knew everyone else's age and remove any plausible deniability: I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
It doesn't establish age, just 18+ or 21+. And you seem to be acting like I would have a problem with that.
And as disgusting as it is, selling young girls too young to willingly participate in such work is indeed a cash cow. Making their age explicitly known would damage a revenue stream....for some. Of course, for some, the underage part is exactly the turn on.
But it's an improper cash cow being removed, not a cash cow being created. And it's not just the perverts, a good age gate is not beneficial to any age gated business. And in the other direction the focus is on prohibiting rather than on age gating. Thus there are no strong interests in favor of a good age gate.
Of course it’s an improper cash cow! That was actually my point: there are too many people willing to exploit girls —and boys! —below the age of consent.

I certainly did not mean to imply that you are in any way ok with underage persons performing sex work.
It stems from here:


Sure looks like the original is stated in the positive.
 
Especially in situations where identity is usually hidden (prostitution). Beneficial for society, but I don't see a cash cow because the effect would be to block things that shouldn't happen.
I'm sorry: I wasn't very clear. I believe that I responded or intended to respond to the post that asked why such hand held devices weren't widely used. My remark specifically addressed what you stated: It would create the expectation that everyone knew everyone else's age and remove any plausible deniability: I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
It doesn't establish age, just 18+ or 21+. And you seem to be acting like I would have a problem with that.
And as disgusting as it is, selling young girls too young to willingly participate in such work is indeed a cash cow. Making their age explicitly known would damage a revenue stream....for some. Of course, for some, the underage part is exactly the turn on.
But it's an improper cash cow being removed, not a cash cow being created. And it's not just the perverts, a good age gate is not beneficial to any age gated business. And in the other direction the focus is on prohibiting rather than on age gating. Thus there are no strong interests in favor of a good age gate.
Of course it’s an improper cash cow! That was actually my point: there are too many people willing to exploit girls —and boys! —below the age of consent.

I certainly did not mean to imply that you are in any way ok with underage persons performing sex work.
It stems from here:


Sure looks like the original is stated in the positive.
I apologize for any offense I have given. It was entirely unintentional.
 
I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
Or 19, or 20, given your desire to raise the age of adulthood.
We already gave varying ages for consent/ privilege.

What I believe is that society owes it to every single child to ensure that they have every opportunity possible to grow into adulthood as unscarred as possible, as healthy as possible. Which means, in part, protecting them from exploitation by adults.
We must protect out teenaged women from the transgender scourge...

...but can we at least still be allowed to fuck them?
 
I didn't know she was only 15, 14, 13, 11......
Or 19, or 20, given your desire to raise the age of adulthood.
We already gave varying ages for consent/ privilege.

What I believe is that society owes it to every single child to ensure that they have every opportunity possible to grow into adulthood as unscarred as possible, as healthy as possible. Which means, in part, protecting them from exploitation by adults.
We must protect out teenaged women from the transgender scourge...

...but can we at least still be allowed to fuck them?
That’s how we protect them!
 
Oh, and every time I open this thread the old “Trippin in Court” bit by Cheech and Chong pops into my head.
 
Of course it’s an improper cash cow! That was actually my point: there are too many people willing to exploit girls —and boys! —below the age of consent.

I certainly did not mean to imply that you are in any way ok with underage persons performing sex work.
It stems from here:


Sure looks like the original is stated in the positive.
I apologize for any offense I have given. It was entirely unintentional.
I figured it was a misunderstanding.
 
Clicking aimlessly as usual -- I have one comment and one question.

Comment. I saw a list of Epstein's lawyers for his first trial. Alan Dershowitz was there of course (but presumably recusing as he was one of Virginia's alleged molesters); but another name rang a bell. Ken Starr. Yes, that's right. The same Ken Starr who led one of the most expensive criminal investigations ever on the planet Earth and ended up proclaiming victory because he found a dress with a consensual semen stain. Yes, that very same Ken Starr was one of the defense attorneys for the world's most notorious sex traffickers. Small world, I guess, when it comes to scummiest-of-the-scum scumbag lawyers.

Question. Virginia Giuffre, the most famous of all of Epstein's accusers, the girl who was trafficked to billionaires, a Royal Prince of England, and scumbag lawyers, allegedly committed suicide 4 months ago. Suicide despite that she was very comfortable financially, and proud of her career fighting the sort of crimes she was herself a victim of. I do NOT want to start a conspiracy theory; and I accept that she probably did kill herself. But did she slash her wrists, tie a noose, overdose on some drug, or what? Several articles turn up but all I get is
"died by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... We can’t connect to the server at www.dailymail.co.uk ... by suicide ... by suicide."​
"By suicide" doesn't seem overly specific. www.dailymail.co.uk might know something but
www.dailymail.co.uk is blocked in Thailand. The blocking is reportedly due to the website publishing articles deemed unfavorable to the Thai royal family, particularly content related to the then-Crown Prince's private life.

The private life of the then-Crown Prince while he lived in Germany was rather newsworthy but I'll say no more lest I get blocked.
 
Her family and her longtime representative would not discuss details of Giuffre's death at age 41 with PEOPLE. “We are still processing everything,” her sister-in-law, Amanda Roberts, told PEOPLE in an exclusive interview on April 26.

Giuffre was grappling with a host of issues when she was found dead on the farm where she lived outside of Perth, Australia, on Thursday, April 24. One that weighed on her the most was a restraining order her husband had taken out against her in February that prevented her from seeing her children ages 19, 16 and 15, until June. He claimed she violated the order, which she denied.

Before she died, Giuffre had been allegedly physically abused by her husband of 22 years, Robert Giuffre, the father of her three children, from whom she separated in 2023, Sky and Amanda said.
The article includes a photo of her badly bruised face.
 
Clicking aimlessly as usual -- I have one comment and one question.

Comment. I saw a list of Epstein's lawyers for his first trial. Alan Dershowitz was there of course (but presumably recusing as he was one of Virginia's alleged molesters); but another name rang a bell. Ken Starr. Yes, that's right. The same Ken Starr who led one of the most expensive criminal investigations ever on the planet Earth and ended up proclaiming victory because he found a dress with a consensual semen stain. Yes, that very same Ken Starr was one of the defense attorneys for the world's most notorious sex traffickers. Small world, I guess, when it comes to scummiest-of-the-scum scumbag lawyers.

Question. Virginia Giuffre, the most famous of all of Epstein's accusers, the girl who was trafficked to billionaires, a Royal Prince of England, and scumbag lawyers, allegedly committed suicide 4 months ago. Suicide despite that she was very comfortable financially, and proud of her career fighting the sort of crimes she was herself a victim of. I do NOT want to start a conspiracy theory; and I accept that she probably did kill herself. But did she slash her wrists, tie a noose, overdose on some drug, or what? Several articles turn up but all I get is
"died by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... by suicide ... We can’t connect to the server at www.dailymail.co.uk ... by suicide ... by suicide."​
"By suicide" doesn't seem overly specific. www.dailymail.co.uk might know something but
www.dailymail.co.uk is blocked in Thailand. The blocking is reportedly due to the website publishing articles deemed unfavorable to the Thai royal family, particularly content related to the then-Crown Prince's private life.

The private life of the then-Crown Prince while he lived in Germany was rather newsworthy but I'll say no more lest I get blocked.
B - Rhetorical question: How many round pegs have to fit in round holes before one gets to strip away the "conspiracy" part?
 
DoJ to start sharing some Epstein files this Friday.
article said:
The chairman of a key House committee said Monday that the Justice Department told him it would begin sharing records related to the investigation of deceased sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein by the end of the week.

Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky) said in a statement that the department “will begin to provide Epstein-related records” that a House Oversight subcommittee subpoenaed on Friday.
I'm assuming only Comer will be looking at the files.

Meanwhile, is it just me or has the AG aged 20 years in the last six months? Usually the President ages quite a bit over the four year term, but AG Bondi looks like the job is sucking the life out of her.
 
DoJ to start sharing some Epstein files this Friday.
article said:
The chairman of a key House committee said Monday that the Justice Department told him it would begin sharing records related to the investigation of deceased sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein by the end of the week.

Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky) said in a statement that the department “will begin to provide Epstein-related records” that a House Oversight subcommittee subpoenaed on Friday.
I'm assuming only Comer will be looking at the files.

Meanwhile, is it just me or has the AG aged 20 years in the last six months? Usually the President ages quite a bit over the four year term, but AG Bondi looks like the job is sucking the life out of her.
One can only hope.....
 
Back
Top Bottom