One thing I am not looking forward to is the return of bandwagon fans. It will happen this year, when we cruise through September just nuking the schedule.
Uhm. If this is legit, he should be prosecuted. These jokers are willfully and wantonly trying to bypass the Constitution (that they drape themselves in) in order to keep their guy in office (or more to the point, the OTHER guy out of office). We are looking at people that want to run a authoritarian government, all while hating government that tells people what to do. It is truly bizarre. EDIT: And I say "If this is legit" because I am becoming more and more wary of stuff after seeing a lot of the AI crap out there, and I have no clue who this guy is posting this. I hate to be this way, but these days, I am feeling more and more paranoid about news I see. Which is a damn shame.
I know almost all of your postings are nothing but butting into conversations in an attempt to spastically and angrily hurl "insults" at everyone because we just aren't as smart as your esteemed, learned self. But what exactly has you extra fired up and feisty this morning about myself and others who acknowledged the sheer existence of MAPs/pedos in a conversation riff that concluded nearly 4 days ago now? You seem extra passionate about this issue...
If people like you and Judgement didn't come along and stir things up, we'd be dead here until August. A little variation in perspective is needed on a forum.
Had this been the only message up until this point, I wouldn't have anything to disagree with, but you led off with: And those aren't jiving messages.
That you found that message full of "spastic attempts to angrily hurl insults" is quite hilarious considering you're the anti-snowflake party. I know you have a preconceived notion that everybody's yelling at you when they tell you something you don't agree with, but you should probably just read what was written instead of fabricating a false point so as to avoid the topic.
Understood. Allow me to amend: when coming as a self-identified person of that designation who is seeking protected status, it is them rebranding from the above mentioned disorders. I do not object to the term being applied in the interests of researching and understanding that disorder. Lord knows we would be much better off if there was a treatment for people so afflicted.
I mean fair enough, I certainly favor the mixed bag of perspectives that make up the usual participants here. Stepping out of the proverbial echo chamber to test out and challenge ideas with those who see the world politically from a differing perspective is what makes political discussion on this board worthwhile and enjoyable. Even despite the occasional times debates devolve into vitriol. But his posts this morning railing against others and my supposed “typical misrepresentations” bc of the contents within my MAP post last week doesn’t compute. I have no earthly idea where he’s going with that or what exactly he’s objecting to there in a political context. It’s not like anyone here made up how some utilize the phrase MAPs. That wasn't even debating last Friday. It was the passing along of information relevant to that particular point in the thread. Wasn't a score enough points to “win” a debate situation. Seemed innocuous overall, but I digress. I’m sure he’ll set me straight.
The angry spazz remark is what it is. What am I supposed to do? Affirm your take against that particular post bc you invoked nonsensical tangents about people who study the mind of serial killers being a thing, ect.? All in an effort to convey “my typical misrepresentation” bc last week I wrote a singular post communicating how a tiny smidgen of the population refers to pedos as MAPs and consider MAPs as somehow falling into a perfectly legitimate category of sexual orientation. Like what?! You might as well be typing in Mandarin on this particular one. Cause your post didn’t make a lick of sense as it relates to what I posted.
Ah, so to summarize: is responded to with: Ignoring the fact you're unequivocally wrong about the very terms' creation -- it has nothing to do with "defining one's sexual orientation" as you so confidently mischaracterized -- this is you throwing a fit over saying you mischaracterized intent. This immediately after proceeding to use the terms boldened above, and the italicized as being objectively false as explained in a prior message. So with that said, I'm going to call bullshit. You understand fine, but had the emotional reaction to the fact it was me making the correction and have now shut down.
I'm just going to repeat that even though the origin may be from a legitimate source, there are individuals who are attempting to use it to justify it being an orientation and normalized. That is likely where the confusion is coming from.
Again, I don’t speak Mandarin, English please. I honestly have no [uck fay]ing clue what you are even trying to convey/“prove” here. I composed a post in essence simply saying that a very tiny *FRINGE* of the population does in fact prefer to label pedos with the term called,,,wait for it…MAPs! Now I’m getting an unhinged semantical lecture surrounding some sort of alleged academic Genesis of the term. All because you think it’s bullshit that I described how *SOME* use that word now as a way to describe and view pedophilia as some sort of sexual orientation. As if I just made up the fact that MAP is used in that context by people out there! Lol what on Earth did you stuff into your smoke pipe this morning? Bonnaroo is coming fast and I might need a hookup. Typically I at least understand conceptually the gist of whatever you are attempting to communicate when you do your classic rhetorical drive by schtick despite almost always disagreeing with your interpretations and conclusions. Definitely not this particular time though.
I get that, which is why I labeled his definitions as mischaracterizations. The rest is him pretending to be dumb and acting like they aren't simple sentences being intentionally misunderstood because of the messenger. One word says they're attracted to kids. The other says they've molested kids. I guess the whole world speaks Mandarin if there's only one person who doesn't understand what's trying to be "proven" here.
Pretending that me stating *some* people do shit such as invoke the term MAP to describe a category of sexual orientation and/or use the term MAP as a new label for a pedophile as if I’m pretending these people are pretending is some elite projection-ing of you pretending like you know what you are even mad about here. Not that you realize it, but I’m pretty sure your angst is with those I’m describing within that original post of mine who are misrepresenting your impressive academia understanding on the subject of MAPs. Not me. Don’t shoot the messenger, kid! I will however cut you some slack and completely ignore the fact you also are here pretending that I invoked the word “molestation” in your accusatory post decreeing how I’m pretending. It would be mean and wouldn’t wanna pile too hard on ya since it’s one of those days where apparently your native language isn’t registering as well as it needs to be. How bout we let that one slide and pretend like you didn’t mistake someone else invoking the term “molestation” with my own words? Deal?
Unreal, religious fundamentalism really flexing in India lately. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41...=nature&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1685530008
