"Dani" <d.b737@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lo8pp3t3gdocdfe48uc23nif2sgb8gns5s@4ax.com...

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 21:50:31 -0800, "psychogaray"
<psychovideo@comcast.net> wrote:

"Dani" <d.b737@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1qqmp3d275qkf7oocf40061bnm98g1bmpj@4ax.com...

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 07:31:59 -0800, "psychogaray"
<psychovideo@comcast.net> wrote:

"Dani" <d.b737@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lsdkp3lrcoftgv8ehdtakngjiamsbkqig3@4ax.com...

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:14:24 -0800, "psychogaray"
<psychovideo@comcast.net> wrote:

"Dani" <d.b737@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ae1kp39rlbk672sntm8j1qmiql6k5l49vs@4ax.com...

On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:17:52 -0800, "psychogaray"
<psychovideo@comcast.net> wrote:

"Dani" <d.b737@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:66rjp3tcf4fbi4vr53b4c3s05dpdajqbmf@4ax.com...

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:11:06 -0800 (PST), Werewolfy
<Werewolfy1@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

On 24 Jan, 18:01, Dani <d.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Wow, I'm genuinely horrified! ?I thought *everyone* knew
this...that
it was a given - common knowledge. ?Guess not."

Well, there you are Dani. Horrified you have to be.

I'm horrified that you believe this way...but *very* thankful
that
the
law does not agree with you.

I stand by my
views, as you by yours.

Yup, and parents world-wide are also standing by me if they're
reading
this I'm sure! LOL!

I am discussing those occasions when a teen-aged girl makes
concerted
advances, plots and plans to lure her chosen 'victim' into a
private
place, and there to seduce him in a way that most men would find
great
difficulty in opposing.
It happens a lot. Were it not for the girl's promiscuous
behaviour,
then there would have been no contact.

Yeah, and if it wasn't for all that *tempting* delicious looking
food
so many wouldn't be fat! And if that wife would just have shut
her
mouth, she wouldn't have gotten beaten by her husband! And if
that
damned 7 year old kid would've just picked up his toys, he
wouldn't
have gotten hit with the whip! And if that little 2 year old
baby
would've just kept her diaper on - she wouldn't have been such a
temptation to that child-molester! And if those drugs weren't so
readily available and cheap on the street - well by God he
wouldn't
be
a drug-addict today, now would he! Oh, and take that alcohol
outta
the liquor store! Too much of a temptation...we'll all be
alcoholics!

Christ, Ricky - there is *temptation* in so many forms out there.
And
everyone has there own "demons" and everyone is tempted by
something
or other that isn't good for us...but we can't blame the
temptation;
we have to blame our lack of self-control, rather.

Those circumstances call for punishing the child as much, if not
more
than the man.

This is getting ridiculous. We're talking about a 14 year old
here!

It's easy to say, 'rebuff her'...in practice, the girls
are very skilled, very artful and very difficult to dislodge.

Well, it's a sad day when a 14 year old can out-smart a fully
grown,
adult man. And it's an even sadder day when that man then blames
the
kid because she was just too "smart" and she was just too much of
a
temptation!

This conversation is getting revolting.

Temptation is strong on matters such as these. That temptation
had
nothing to do with the man, and everything to do with the girl.

Oh *****! "nothing to do with the man" - that is not only
pompous
and arrogant of you to say...it's suggesting that a 14 year old
is
somehow far more intelligent, far more mature, far more advanced,
and
far more educated in the world of mind games than a grown adult
is!
Now, we're talking about a 14 year old girl - someone who more
than
likely, just two years prior was playing with BARBIE DOLLS and
sleeping with stuffed animals!

A child is deemed capable of 'aiding, abetting, counseling and
procuring' any offence.

Right, right...and the adult is the victim! Sure.

However, in practice, and in order to convict
the man, this law is not applied in these cases.

...thank the LORD!

It should be.

No, it absolutely should not be. Next you'll have 14 year olds
able
to drive, drink, vote - hell, why not run for president! Why
not?
They're unbelievably clever and all.

Pffffffffft!

Dani

Well, it's true, Dani dear, that 14 year olds aren't as
"experienced"
at
manipulating adults as adults are with manipulating kids or even
other
adults. We're all into some manipulation to get what we think we
really
want
at that opportune moment.
But, it's also true that 14 year olds, 15, 16, 17...know when an
adult
wants
something really bad, and they have something to "trade" to get
what
they
want from the adult.
Kids want a lot of things. Like adults. Their want list is quite
long,
forever changing. Like adults. They lie, steal, cheat, manipulate,
act
out...just like adults do. Some are more clever than others, of
course,
and
the more clever kids can get a nice lil' business 'deal' with an
adult --
exchanging sex for money, drugs, material things, or sex itself --
and
they
do it all the time. Everywhere. In the neighborhoods, the schools,
the
internet, you name it.
We're talking about two manipulative human beings in bad need of
wanting
something -- and the consensual deal that is made to satisfy both.
We're
NOT
talking about rape, molestation, or even perversion -- what is
perverted
about wanting young bodies and young bodies wanting something or
another
from old bodies?
It's all wanting...and it never ceases in humanity, Dani. Now, you
say
that
might be true, but we have will power to oppose it. Why oppose what
we
think
we want so badly when it's offered? Sure, people go off to prison.
The
punishment is there. It's real, alright. But, the wanting is more
powerful
often than the fear of punishment because we're talkin'
about...>>SEX!!
It's
not a perversion for consenting people. It's not a violent sport.
Not
warfare. Nor corporate exploitation and greed. Not environmental
pollution.
Not forced sex or rape. Not stealing. Not racism, or religious
hypocrisy,
political tyranny, economic snobbery....
No, it's just two horny fucking people getting it on with each
other
and
satisfying their immediate carnal wantonness. And what the *****,
Dani,
is
so
horrible about that?
That you want some lawmakers to determine what ages we're supposed
to
link
up and *****? It's a dream. People don't care if they want
something
badly
enough, they're take the chances...as you can see, everyday, the
news
is
replete with these stories.
So many terrible things humans do to each other, by force,
coercion,
lying,
domination...hatred and racism and religious bigotry every fucking
day...and
we're supposed to get our underwear in a twist over a 50 year old
man
screwing a consenting teen-ager?
My, my...civilization must be coming down on our lil' heads for
such
acts
against God, against Man, against all that is *good and decent* --
as
leaders go free after tens of thousands of innocents are laid away
in
early
graves over a threat that was non-existent? Those prematurely dead
folks
won't have to *worry* about the immorality or amorality of sexual
liaisons,
Dani...they won't have to think how 'awful' it is to *****...they're
fucking
days were cut short by greed, fanaticism, idiocy, et al.
Yes, this conversation is getting sickening...you're right on that
account.

Sorry, Doc - but I'm right on all accounts. Child-molesters also
*want* children - rapists *want* to rape - murderers *want* to
murder,
fat people *want* food - drug-addicts *want* drugs - abusers *want*
to
abuse etc.. etc..

In our country we have the term *Statutory rapist* apllied to the
man
or woman who WANTS to have sex with underage kids!

Don't like the law? Move.

Well, not to Boston, that's for sure.

Good! My daughters won't have to worry about you then. Oh, wait a
second - my sons won't have to worry about you either .. ;)

Yes, please don't move to Boston, Doc!

Dani

The only real worry your sons and daughters have is to be as prejudiced
against a sexual minority as you apparently are.

More damage is done to the human mind from the myriad of malicious
bigotries
than the consensual sex shared by two carnally-obsessed human beings.

The sex is over rather quickly. But the prejudice goes on and takes
many
hurtful forms for a very long time.

No, I would not move to Boston, or to Brazil, or to Bosnia, because I
need
not go elsewhere to meet bigots.

What? Now I'm a bigot? I couldn't care less what two *consenting
adults* do in their bedroom together...that is not my concern or my
problem. But it is my problem (society's problem) when grown adults
not only think it's a-okay to have sex with 14 year olds, they then
add insult to injury by suggesting that it's *more* the child's fault
that the sex ever happened in the first place because she/he was just
"too smart" and "too tempting" and the adult fell prey. THAT is what
is intolerable here.

What is nearly intolerable is your unwillingness to accept the well
established fact that some teenagers plot against and persecute adults,
injure, and kill them every day, and they escape punishment while the
adult
is punished.

I'm well aware that kids (yes, kids - I'm not calling them "adults"),
can be devious and also very, very troubled. But it is our duty as
adults to try and *help* them...certainly not make them worse. If a
kid is plotting, planning, manipulating etc.. an adult and trying to
seduce her/him the kid has REAL issues going on (maybe no father
figure, maybe molestation, maybe deep, deep insecurity, maybe the kid
is the overweight, unpopular "fat kid in class" that's always
picked-on, ridiculed, and feels the adult is the only one that
"understands" her or him) etc.. etc.. the possibilities can go on and
on. But the bottom line is the kid is troubled in one way or another
and the adult in essence is not only taking advantage of that serious
problem the kid is enduring in her/his personal life, but ADDING years
and years of very real psychological problems to that kid's life.

Please don't think that a 14 year old is ready for a sexual
relationship with a grown adult. You referred to it as "just fucking"
but I assure you - it is far more complicated than that.

And, likewise, the "kids" (as you like to refer to them, or
"children"),

I'm not calling 14 year olds adults. Sorry.

make destructive, self-centered designs on adults to get sex,
drugs, alcohol, money, and material things.

As I explained above - if they're doing that, they have real
deep-seated emotional problems. Problems that adults should *pick up
on* and be the responsible party they're supposed to be and HELP them;
don't make those problems multiply, duplicate and sky-rocket.

In the process, the adult is
lured into a sexual relationship

Keep suggesting the adults are the victims, Doc. You'll only
infuriate me more.

that has nothing to do with a kid being
'innocent' or playing with cute stuffed animals only a few years earlier,
as
you characterized young teen girls.

I said sleeping with stuffed animals. I slept with stuffed animals at
12. I played with Barbie dolls at 12 too. And I sure as ***** wasn't
anywhere near being close to being emotionally developed enough, just
24 months later to engage in a sexual relationship with a grown man.

How about you? Think back to being a 14 year old boy...remember that
kid you once were - do you think he would've been ready?

It has everything to do with a young
manipulative mind determined to get what it wants at any cost to its
victim,
or, in many cases, to itself as well. Your mischaracterization of youth
as
children who've just stopped playing with stuffed cutesy animal toys is
an
attempt all too often seen by those who ridiculously defend the criminal
intentions of underaged youth.

It's our duty to protect them...never to make their problems escalate.
Period.

It is a crime to devise a plan to use a
powerful attractant such as sex is with nearly everyone, entrapping its
victim in wantonness, and then manipulating them to get whatever that
youth
desires at the moment.

They can be very clever, yes - I'll agree with that. But we must be
far MORE clever. It's our duty. You'll never convince me otherwise.

It is a crime against another's rights to have such
devious manipulation perpetrated to self-satisfy.

You say it's a crime. But thank God the law says otherwise.

(I'm honestly feeling like I'm explaining the abc's and 123's right
now...you should KNOW all this, Doc!)

Maybe sex is something
that doesn't overpower your emotions and force you into poor
decison-making.

I don't look at the underage as potential sexual partners. What I do
with men aged 18 and above is MY business. It's not society's
business. What an adult does with kids below age 18 *is* society's
business.

Maybe you're the exception to the rule. Maybe you can remain cool and
calm
and think clearly at all times in your life -- every day of your entire
life --

LOL! (sorry, had to laugh...*me* remain calm and cool? .. ;)

and push away some sexy teen guy who looks and acts like Brad Pitt
(for example), when he makes advances unwanted, and catches you at that
certain key time of the month in your menstrual cycle. Eh??

My menstrual cycle? You think women actually want to have sex on
their period?? Another LOL!

But seriously - absolutely not. Brad Pitt, Kid Rock, *even* Prince
Charles - nope. I told you, I don't view underage kids as potential
sex partners. They're completely off limits. I don't see them that
way. I don't care what they look like, how charming they may be, how
clever, devious, manipulative - it just would not happen.

And would you like to go to prison for years for that, Dani?

That's one of the reasons I wouldn't do it. It's not my biggest
reason for not doing it but it's one of them.

Nobody wants to go to jail, Doc. But I would be far more afraid of
the potential long-lasting psychological damage I would inflict on a
young impressionable mind than I would be of spending years locked
behind bars. The guilt would kill me before jail would. No orgasm is
worth that - sorry.

Do you think
you should be charged with a major crime,

If I did it - yup.

scorned by society,

Absolutely.

punished by
the law,

Sure.

incarcerated for years,

Throw away the key.

and then have to rebuild your entire life
after release (on parole),

Why not.

simply because you gave into incredibly intense
sexual seduction, and it was a *****-poor time of the month for resistance
to
such sexual pressure?

Yes I do.

I don't think you'd believe it was fair to be
punished, you'd be mad as hell, and ranting that it was just a
hormonally-driven poor decision under the seductive pressure of an overly
amorous underaged "kid."

You're wrong. I wouldn't be "mad as hell" that I was being punished.
I'd deserve the punishment.

Yes, we want lots of things in life, Dani.

That we do. And right about now I'm wishing you'd write shorter
posts! LOL!

And we want some of them so badly
we victimize others to get them, whether you're an adult or not. We
manipulate and plot.

Yes, we do. And yes we're animals whether we want to accept that or
not. We're sexual beings, I'm well aware of that desire and need. But
what sets us ABOVE the other animals in nature is our BRAIN! Our
advanced minds. We would be cast with the rest of the animals in
nature without it. We have to use that incredible gift we were given,
Doc. If we need to have sex...there's plenty of people aged 18 and
above to do that with.

And what was your intention in this group numerous
times when you made reference to your body as being quite attractive and
trim, your tan quite nice to look at in your bikini?

I've talked about many different things in here. I've also talked
about the fact that I suffer from depression in here - that isn't very
sexy, is it? No, that's actually a huge turn-off. If I was doing
what you're suggesting I was doing...I think I'd keep that bit to
myself. Nope, not a very attractive thing at all.

Was it your intention
to put yourself into a position to be sexually adored, hoping for some
'racy' replies -- which, usually, you received??

Nah.

Sex is empowerment.

I like minds better than bodies. I'm serious. The male mind is
absolutely the most attractive thing to me.

It is
the kind of empowering that money, social position, and celebrity
commonly
gives to people determined to have these things. And we've all used it at
some time or another to get what we want -- whether a nice ego-flattering
remark, or a man, women, boy, or girl we desired at that moment.

How long did it take you to write this post? .. lol.

Your mischaracterization that having consensual sex with teens is a
wantonness equal to those people who force young people to have sex is
typical of the warped comparison I see all too often coming from those
who
have a prudish attitude toward sexuality, a conservative concept of the
framework of sexual desire and intent.

Well, I'm neither a conservative, nor am I a prude. I told you, have
orgies with multiple 18 year olds for all I care. That's none of my
business. But do it with 14 year olds and it then becomes
*everyone's* business. And rightfully so.

The popular male fantasy of young
girls as sexual objects permeates the porno industry, and often shows up
in
mainstream movies, novels, tv programs, etc, as well.

18 IS a "young girl" ..

It is, in fact, quite
common for men to fantasize about *defiling* so-called *innocent youth*
in
consensual agreements. When you have a man who thinks like that, and a
young
girl is well aware of it (how could she not be??), then you have the
basis
for an effective manipulation of the adult.
And, after all, what is the act of consensual sex have to do with the
criminal aspects you mentioned? Was it forced, coerced onto the youth by
a
molestor, a rapist, a sado-masochistic torturer, a sex killer? No. It was
a
rather quiet banging of bodies in secrecy, usually to the satisfaction of
both parties.

You can wrap this up as pretty as you like, you can say it's merely
"fucking" or above "quiet banging" but you will never-ever convince me
that it's acceptable for an adult to "quietly bang" a 14 year old kid.
And hopefully you'll never convince law-makers of it either.

Tell ya what - YOU pay for the 14 year olds' years of therapy in the
aftermath of that "quiet-banging" ..

If you think some lawmakers decades ago made all the right decisions in
devising laws against certain kinds of sexual activity, then you're a
damned
fool, Dani.

They made the right decision with THAT law.

And arguing that it is the LAW, isn't the same as arguing that
God cares about what we do in our sexual lives, as along as it respects
the
rights of the people involved. The Bible doesn't say anything
specifically
about age limitations for sexual contact, and neither does it mention
that
masturbation is wrong, although many christians thought it was for a long
time.

As I mentioned earlier in this (long, long) post, what sets us apart
from all the other animals is our advanced minds. Yes, many may
fantasize about having sex with or "defiling" (yer word) young teens
but we have the gift of knowledge that gives that desire a big smack
in the face - a reality check that tells us that the short immediate
gratification of an orgasm could never be worth the repercussions; the
aftermath of that sexual encounter simply isn't worth it.

Laws are flawed, obviously, as flawed as the human minds that put them
on the books. In this case, it is wrong to punish an adult, man or woman,
for engaging in consensual sex with a youth determined by a flawed law to
be
a subject of criminal victimization -- and therefore, tossing the adult
into
incarceration for it.

No, the law is not wrong. Of course laws are flawed - they got this
one right, though.

It is patently wrong to do this to adults.

Nope. It's patently wrong for the adult to take advantage of a young
impressionable mind. Period.

And when you know that the youths
walk away from the incident unscathed, unpunished, and even regarded as
poor
innocent victims, it is doubly wrong. Neither should be punished, but if
one
party is, and the other is not, then that's wrong.

LOL! Thank God the law doesn't agree with you, Doc. Thank God. As I
keep saying - they got this law right on the money. Good job.

Oh, and if you're referring to what I wrote about my daughters and
sons not having to worry about you as a jibe at your bisexuality, and
now you think I'm a bigot because of that...well, I'll have to say
that you're a bigot, too - you don't like Bostonians!

No, it's only on Bostonian that I'm not agreeing with. I don't know the
rest, but if the rest are like you, then I'd prefer to stay in liberal
western Washington -- a blue area of the US.

I'm liberal, too. I think it's very funny that you insinuate that I'm
now conservative because I fully agree with law-makers on this
decision.

My joke about Boston does rival
your jab at my sexual preference.

I was being a wise-*****. I'm sorry...really, it was off the cuff and I
truly didn't mean to hurt you.

Up to that moment, I'd make no sexual
mis-reference to you. You introduced the personalized sexual jab into
this
conversation. And that, Dani, was wrong for you to do.

I know it was wrong - won't happen again. Many times I am a true,
bonafied wise-*****. I wish I could take that back...I am sorry.

I'm still amazed at
how you can be a psychological counselor and have such a closed
judgemental
attitude.

I have both bisexual and gay friends in my everyday life. I really
couldn't care less what consenting adults do together in their
bedroom. As I said - I was being a wise-*****...if you look back at
that post you'll see that I left a winky smile-face after I said that.

Maybe, as you once said, you don't let your real feelings out
while counseling. So, are we to suppose you reside with your sexual
bigotry
in the closet most of the time, except here?

I have no "sexual bigotry" - what consenting adults do in their
bedroom isn't my business.

LOL! And you

especially don't like South Boston! Yup, you mustn't like the Red
Sox, either! Or the Celtics! And for that matter...I'm inclined to
think you don't like Irish people at all! LOL!

No, if you have a memory, I told you once my family backgroung partly
comes
from Ireland, Scotland, England, and Germany.

That's a whole-lotta nationalities!

See how ridiculous that sounds? When you said: "Well, not to Boston,
that's for sure." ..when I suggested you move if you don't like the
law, I could as easily take that as you being a bigot against Boston.

Being a "bigot"against those whe dwell in a city, doesn't equate with
taking
a nasty lil' swipe at my sexuality. Would you like me to take a swipe at
your sexuality? I don't think so.

I keep telling you that I was being a wise-*****. And if you look at
that post again, you'll see that I left ;) <--- that. A winky
smile-face. But truly, I am sorry. I'll never do that again.

When the actual FACT of the matter is you were just trying to
*personally* get at me; not all Bostonians.

As I said, I'm not the one who introduced a sexual swipe into this
conversation. You did. Might I not think that you're trying to get at me
personally? If you remember, I sent you an email apologizing for by
behaviour here -- actually twice, and the second one was ignored.

Please don't take that personally if I don't answer an email.

Is it your
personal policy to have someone apologize and then not acknowledge it?
Not
very nice, is it?

I got along with you in here after you apologized. That should be
enough for you to know that I accepted your apology. I apologized to
you as well if you recall. But why are we talking about private
emails? Really, nothing ever said in private email should be
discussed publicly, here. That should be confidential.

Kissing someone's hurt toes, and then having them walk
away without thanks is a *****-poor thing to experience. If you want to
re-open our animosity, I'm certainly willing. Because right now, I'm not
liking you much, no, not much at all.

I'm afraid I'm not liking you much right about now, either. But my
reason is the damn length of your post! LOL! (kidding).

You want to make fun of my
bisexuality, then I'll make fun of your fucking beloved lil' Boston city.

Make fun of Boston all you want. I really didn't mean to hurt your
feelings with that.

Just like when I made

that comment to you about you going after girls *and* boys, I was
trying to get only at YOU and not ALL bisexuals.

But, I'm not the one who said anything derogatory about your sexuality.
You
introduced it here, which only makes me think that you can't simply
discuss
the matter of underaged sex without digging at someone's sexuality that
opposes you. Not an attractive social trait, Dani. No.

Won't happen again.

Spin it all you like. But you and I both know what's going on here.

Oh, yes, I think I know what is going on here. Let's suppose that you
had
sex with adults when you were underaged, and now you're sore-assed about
it,
blaming the adults.

No, I never has sex with any adults when I was a teen-ager. Thank
God. That would've pushed me right over the edge I'd imagine.

Perhaps, that is what is "going on here"?

No, but you're very rude to ask.

Or, that
you've been blamed for underaged sexual manipulation, and you are getting
your revenge now? HUH?

Absolutely not.

I seem to remember you mentioning something about
being raped when you were younger...yes, it was rape, wasn't it?

Attempted. And what you're doing right now, this line of questioning
FAR surpasses the supposed hurt I inflicted on you with my wise-assed
bisexual remark. So you've gotten me back - and then some.

Oh, and go ***** yourself.

Dani

I've been trying to manipulate a ***** out of that horny lil' Pole, but so
far she's not replied.
I guess she's got what she wanted over there with a younger guy.
Oh well...we old farts always have our right hand and internet porn. Maybe
acidhead Alice will oblige me, instead. At least animated lovers don't
give ya the clap...or crabs...

LOL!!

garay ;))~