• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Rape victim ordered to pay her abuser child support

Status
Not open for further replies.
dumb-baby.gif
 
Most 20-21 year old females are not looking for random pick ups and most think, however unconsciously, a guy who wants to have sex with th her must really really really like her. She’s more vulnerable. That’s part of it. But young adults are also eager to prove how adult they are and are more likely to feel some pressure to try to be more mature and sophisticated than they are—more cool. All the 30 year old has to do is to imply that she’s being a baby of just a kid and. There’s a really good chance she’ll ignore her own judgement and engage in behavior she’s not necessarily ready to engage in, to prove herself as ‘mature’ as he is. A 30 year old is more likely to just be interested in non-serious, casual relationships or one offs. Not that she’s likely to be ready to settle down but it’s more likely that to her sex means something different, implies some level of commitment. For a 30 year old man dating a 20-21 year old, she’s perfect: not really ready to settle down, not quite up to his level enough to seriously challenge him on his shit. He can feel in control and if things go wrong, it’s because she’s immature. Which is not necessarily the case—she’s usually less cynical and more idealistic which has its own appeal. He is on the cusp of maybe thinking he might be almost getting to be middle aged—but there he is, dating a hot young thing! He’s still got it!
So 20-21 year old females are children incapable of taking care of themselves?
That straw man must have really hurt when you pulled it out.
 
Right, Tom is saying presence in a bar ==> legal age.
I would very much appreciate it if people on this thread stopped misrepresenting me to this degree.

I said no such thing. I don't believe any such thing. You're full of shit.
You have consistently claimed that she convinced the bartender she was 21 without a shred of evidence to support your assertion. You have consistently claimed that it was not unreasonable for her rapist to think she was 21 because she was in a bar where the legal age for drinking was 21 even though you have no clue what her rapist thought.

Don's succinct restatement is a reasonable facsimile of your position even if it is not a perfect one. If anyone is full of shit here, it most certainly is not Don.
 
Most 20-21 year old females are not looking for random pick ups and most think, however unconsciously, a guy who wants to have sex with th her must really really really like her. She’s more vulnerable. That’s part of it. But young adults are also eager to prove how adult they are and are more likely to feel some pressure to try to be more mature and sophisticated than they are—more cool. All the 30 year old has to do is to imply that she’s being a baby of just a kid and. There’s a really good chance she’ll ignore her own judgement and engage in behavior she’s not necessarily ready to engage in, to prove herself as ‘mature’ as he is. A 30 year old is more likely to just be interested in non-serious, casual relationships or one offs. Not that she’s likely to be ready to settle down but it’s more likely that to her sex means something different, implies some level of commitment. For a 30 year old man dating a 20-21 year old, she’s perfect: not really ready to settle down, not quite up to his level enough to seriously challenge him on his shit. He can feel in control and if things go wrong, it’s because she’s immature. Which is not necessarily the case—she’s usually less cynical and more idealistic which has its own appeal. He is on the cusp of maybe thinking he might be almost getting to be middle aged—but there he is, dating a hot young thing! He’s still got it!
So 20-21 year old females are children incapable of taking care of themselves?
That straw man must have really hurt when you pulled it out.
Yup, the straw tends to splinter into the anal tissue.
 
You have consistently claimed that she convinced the bartender she was 21
Where did I ever claim that?

I'd use the L word, but I won't just yet. I'll ask. Where did I claim anything about what happened?
Tom
 
You have consistently claimed that it was not unreasonable for her rapist to think she was 21 because she was in a bar where the legal age for drinking was 21 even though you have no clue what her rapist thought.
I have never said anything like that.

I have never even suggested that holding a drink in a public establishment is proof that she's 21.

21 isn't even the issue here. She could be years younger than that and be legally of age to bang a guy in a bar.
Tom
 
You have consistently claimed that she convinced the bartender she was 21
Where did I ever claim that?

I'd use the L word, but I won't just yet. I'll ask. Where did I claim anything about what happened?
Tom
Seriously. You don't remember anything you post?

TomC said:
Another is that Abelseth managed to convince a bartender that she was 21. Old enough to buy.
But it was so kind of you to only passive aggressively say laughing dog was lying.
 
You have consistently claimed that it was not unreasonable for her rapist to think she was 21 because she was in a bar where the legal age for drinking was 21 even though you have no clue what her rapist thought.
I have never said anything like that.

I have never even suggested that holding a drink in a public establishment is proof that she's 21.

21 isn't even the issue here. She could be years younger than that and be legally of age to bang a guy in a bar.
Tom
I believe that banging guys in bars is illegal.
 
Seriously. You don't remember anything you post?
No.
In a thread where people consistently lie about me I don't remember the exact words of everything I said.

So.
How did Abelseth get her drinks without lying?

Nevermind. I already understand that this whole thread is about demonstrating that women are weak willed vessels and men are sexual predators.

What actually happened in a pub, 16 years ago, isn't important. What matters is that feminists get their way.

I understand that. It's why I'm not a feminist.
 
You have consistently claimed that it was not unreasonable for her rapist to think she was 21 because she was in a bar where the legal age for drinking was 21 even though you have no clue what her rapist thought.
I have never said anything like that.

I have never even suggested that holding a drink in a public establishment is proof that she's 21.

21 isn't even the issue here. She could be years younger than that and be legally of age to bang a guy in a bar.
Tom
I believe that banging guys in bars is illegal.
You don't know much about Louisiana.

No stinkin' rules there.

Serve alcohol to people 5 years underage.
No problem.
Bang someone 2 years underage.
No problem.

Tom
 
You have consistently claimed that she convinced the bartender she was 21
Where did I ever claim that?

I'd use the L word, but I won't just yet. I'll ask. Where did I claim anything about what happened?
Tom
Post 266 - JH linked to it.

This is a persistent issue with you - denial of the very words you have posted. I get that your words may not express your thoughts, but it is unreasonable for you to expect others to interpret your thoughts when you apparently are unable to clearly express them.
 
TomC said:
No.
In a thread where people consistently lie about me I don't remember the exact words of everything I said.
That is a blatant mischaracterization and a misuse of the term "lie".
TomC said:
So.
How did Abelseth get her drinks without lying?
She was served. Duh. That does not mean that the bartender necessarily thought she was 21. Duh.
TomC said:
Nevermind. I already understand that this whole thread is about demonstrating that women are weak willed vessels and men are sexual predators.
If a straw man is full of shit, is it still a straw man?
TomC said:
What actually happened in a pub, 16 years ago, isn't important. What matters is that feminists get their way.
Statutory rape and sexual abuse of a minor existed long before feminism.
TomC said:
I understand that. It's why I'm not a feminist.
If you don't want to be misinterpreted as a misogynist, you should stop imitating one.
 
is a persistent issue with you - denial of the very words you have posted.
Here's the persistent issue that I see.

I try to make posts about nuanced opinions. I can't post long complex treatises from my phone.

People mischaracterize me on a regular basis. They take a vague sentence, change it into something I didn't say, and attack me for something I didn't say or mean.
Tom
 
TomC said:
No.
In a thread where people consistently lie about me I don't remember the exact words of everything I said.
That is a blatant mischaracterization and a misuse of the term "lie".
TomC said:
So.
How did Abelseth get her drinks without lying?
She was served. Duh. That does not mean that the bartender necessarily thought she was 21. Duh.
TomC said:
Nevermind. I already understand that this whole thread is about demonstrating that women are weak willed vessels and men are sexual predators.
If a straw man is full of shit, is it still a straw man?
TomC said:
What actually happened in a pub, 16 years ago, isn't important. What matters is that feminists get their way.
Statutory rape and sexual abuse of a minor existed long before feminism.
TomC said:
I understand that. It's why I'm not a feminist.
If you don't want to be misinterpreted as a misogynist, you should stop imitating one.

This is a really good example of what I wad talking about in my last post.
Tom
 
is a persistent issue with you - denial of the very words you have posted.
Here's the persistent issue that I see.

I try to make posts about nuanced opinions. I can't post long complex treatises from my phone.
Whether you like it or not, your words are the only thing other posters access. It is not their fault if you are unable to articulate your nuanced opinions.
People mischaracterize me on a regular basis. They take a vague sentence, change it into something I didn't say, and attack me for something I didn't say or mean.
Tom
Think about what you just wrote. If your sentence is "vague" (your term, not mine), how can one reasonably accuse them of taking your words at face value?

While I can understand your frustration, flinging outlandish accusations of lying or offensive "you are full of shit" when people accurately interpret your actual words does not help matters - it makes you look childish and/or stupid.
 
Seriously. You don't remember anything you post?
No.
In a thread where people consistently lie about me I don't remember the exact words of everything I said.
Well, if that is the case that you can't remember what you've said, you probably shouldn't presume what someone took from your posts is wrong... or passively aggressively calling them liars.
So.
How did Abelseth get her drinks without lying?
Oh... so are you doubling down on what you denied in saying and were passively aggressively accusing someone of lying about you saying? Pretty ballsy move there. Regardless...

Guy: Can I get you a drink?
Abelseth: I'd love one.

Okay, now that is settled.
Nevermind. I already understand that this whole thread is about demonstrating that women are weak willed vessels and men are sexual predators.
Oh boy...
What actually happened in a pub, 16 years ago, isn't important. What matters is that feminists get their way.
Which one is the feminist again? The woman, her daughter, the guy that fucked the girl nearly half his age, judge?
I understand that. It's why I'm not a feminist.
Or staying on-topic.
 
is a persistent issue with you - denial of the very words you have posted.
Here's the persistent issue that I see.

I try to make posts about nuanced opinions. I can't post long complex treatises from my phone.

People mischaracterize me on a regular basis. They take a vague sentence, change it into something I didn't say, and attack me for something I didn't say or mean.
Tom
Misunderstandings happen when you post almost exclusively in vague sentences. The only time you don't post vague sentences is when you start arguing people misunderstood (are lying) about what you said in your vague sentences.
 
is a persistent issue with you - denial of the very words you have posted.
Here's the persistent issue that I see.

I try to make posts about nuanced opinions. I can't post long complex treatises from my phone.

People mischaracterize me on a regular basis. They take a vague sentence, change it into something I didn't say, and attack me for something I didn't say or mean.
Tom
Misunderstandings happen when you post almost exclusively in vague sentences. The only time you don't post vague sentences is when you start arguing people misunderstood (are lying) about what you said in your vague sentences.

Thanks for sharing.

You've done a brilliant job of convincing me.
I've learned a lot from your posts.
Tom
 
Dear All. In context I was writing to Loren Pechtel who represented his view as one shared with TomC. I responded with information particular to Louisiana that factors into inferences and describing how such inferences would be made. I find those points to be worthwhile of consideration under the hypotheticals, accepting certain starting information and would appreciate posting on such substance further or not at all. The other direction into the personal world of unnecessary drama is a waste of time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom