13 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFYou CLEARLY don't get it, do you? If I apologize--- based on your perception of the events--- that's not good enough. If I don't apologize--- based on the objective view of the events--- that's not good enough. There's no placating you. Period. Whatever.
Well then, any apology you might make rings hollow. Let's just leave it at that. Suffice to say, I am not a child rapist, FreakyKBH, despite your insinuations and despite what you might think of my avatar. Look, I don't need an insincere, carefully worded "apology". But I would appreciate if you would refrain from addressing me directly about my children or my family in future. As I say, let's just leave it at that.
I did not ONCE insinuate that you are a pedophile, in any shape or form. Go back and carefully re-read the thread and quit being such a freaking hypersensitive baby about the whole thing. My only contribution was the inquiry as it related to your obvious refusal to answer a simple question. That question wasn't mine, it was Seitse's and it was--- without question--- innocently asked in the context of the conversation.
Whatever happened before (and nothing in your responses in that thread, nor in your constant bleating since then indicate anything other than that thread as the point of origin for the whole ordeal) I was not privy to. I did not join the conversation until much later in the thread, but it was after reading the entire dialogue up to that point. I did not join in on any innuendo, nor did I insinuate anything... anything other than how queer it was of you to not answer the question!
And, jackass, the apology offered wasn't insincere: although I vociferously disagree with your assessment of the situation then and now--- and the facts back up my view of the same--- I apologized out of my respect for you, full stop, irrespective of my quite defensible position in the matter. My perspective is not so precious to me that it demands I hold it in higher esteem than knowing someone else--- whom I respect--- is offended by it. And THAT'S not good enough for you?
Tough feces.
Lastly, how am I supposed to address you about your family or your children: indirectly? Get over yourself, FMF. Let's just leave it at that.
13 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI think you did. Back in May:
I did not ONCE insinuate that you are a pedophile, in any shape or form.
To wit, FMF's currently living in a foreign country wherein the trade counts as a staple of their economy. He hails from a country which contributes heavily to the trade. People (nearly without exception, men) without children constitute the majority of aggressive consumers of this trade. In the minds of both those consumers as well as other childless non-consumers, there exists less resistance to the trade than exists in the minds of those with children--- even in the minds of the men who participate.
And...
Not to be overly argumentative, but now that you mention it--- as a father--- I would say that, no, you have not been emphatic enough [in your condemnation of the child sex trade] for me. In reading only your posts throughout this thread, you have yet to denounce the child sex trade. You've mentioned the universal disdain for it (although that's obviously not entirely an accurate description) and have even offered a few solutions for tackling the problem. However, you've not responded in a way that speaks of your personal rejection of the practice... which makes your avoidance of the question [about the children in your avatar] asked early on all the more troubling.
What did you find troubling, FreakyKBH?
13 Aug 11
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNo. It's not. It's just about the most insincere and most self-righteous faux "apology" I have ever seen on this web site. As I said, whatever floats your cyber boats, FreakyKBH. Please don't address me about my children or my family anymore. Thanks.
And, jackass, the apology offered wasn't insincere: although I vociferously disagree with your assessment of the situation then and now--- and the facts back up my view of the same--- I apologized out of my respect for you, full stop, irrespective of my quite defensible position in the matter. My perspective is not so precious to me that it demands I hold ...[text shortened]... wing someone else--- whom I respect--- is offended by it. And THAT'S not good enough for you?
14 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFNow you're on a whole 'nother level. Really. Take your meds, take a walk, take a moment and get a grip on yourself, or whatever is necessary, but do it post haste.
I think you did. Back in May:
[b]To wit, FMF's currently living in a foreign country wherein the trade counts as a staple of their economy. He hails from a country which contributes heavily to the trade. People (nearly without exception, men) without children constitute the majority of aggressive consumers of this trade. In the minds of both those consumers a atar] asked early on all the more troubling.
What did you find troubling, FreakyKBH?[/b]
Your first quote of me was preceded by the following words within the same post:
Hard to imagine such a situation, but I totally disagree with your characterization of Seitse's point-blank question of relation as sleazy. You would have to read into the inquiry while ignoring his very specific explanation for the original query in order to see the question as innuendo.
Changes things a bit, doesn't it.
Moreover, even within the quote you provided, there is not a wit of innuendo, hint, suggestion or anything remotely resembling an eyebrow raised in the direction of your intentions/actions.
What you do find, instead, is the justification for what was obviously an innocent, on-topic question. Nothing more, nothing less. You were able to get a few people on your side of the topic, in your over-acting, in your totally offended stated. I didn't bite. Still don't. The issue is as it was: you refused to answer a point-blank question about an insignificant object (you're going postal over an avatar depicting some nondescript guy with what appears to be some nondescript kids? Crap, he wasn't asking for your DNA or street address), and your refusal made you look stupid, complicit or both.
As far as your second quote, I was--- again--- pointing out the obvious. You spent considerable time talking about how society views the despicable acts, but skirted making the issue personal. EVENTUALLY, you did personally denounce the crime and I let the issue go.
Want some proof that you're just a big drama queen? Your post which called my very sincere, very principled apology "just about the most insincere and most self-righteous faux "apology" I have ever seen on this web site." Like you've seen a lot, but this one ranks? Again, FMF, get over yourself and your mistakes. I promise to let them go, if you do.
By the way, I couldn't give a rat's ass about your family, other than hoping they're all doing well, so stop PM'ing me with pics of them at the pool.
14 Aug 11
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat did you find "troubling" about the combination of me living in Indonesia and me not playing along with Seitse's trolling when he suggested that there was link between my avatar and "How to stop child sex tourism". What "troubled" you about me?
Now you're on a whole 'nother level. Really. Take your meds, take a walk, take a moment and get a grip on yourself, or whatever is necessary, but do it post haste.
Your first quote of me was preceded by the following words within the same post:
[quote]Hard to imagine such a situation, but I totally disagree with your characterization of Seitse's po ...[text shortened]... oping they're all doing well, so stop PM'ing me with pics of them at the pool.
14 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAnd yet on page 3 of THIS thread you are still contending that my refusal to play along with Seitse's sleazy innuendo, "...cast serious doubt/confusion in [my] direction". That's just a couple of days ago! What "serious doubt" did you - or do you - have? "Doubt" about what? The topic was child rape. What "serious doubts" about me did you feel were "troubling" to you? I think we may now be getting a little closer to what it is you might perhaps feel - on reflection - the need to apologize for; and sincerely this time hopefully.
Moreover, even within the quote you provided, there is not a wit of innuendo, hint, suggestion or anything remotely resembling an eyebrow raised in the direction of your intentions/actions.
14 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFGee, buddy, I'd like to help you out, because you are clearly struggling with something, but given your very evident challenges in understanding basic concepts, I don't know that anything said to you will help. You continue to pick and choose snippets from other conversations, misapply their meaning or intents, and then reach conclusions wholly unsupported by anything resembling reality.
And yet on page 3 of THIS thread you are still contending that my refusal to play along with Seitse's sleazy innuendo, "...cast serious doubt/confusion in [my] direction". That's just a couple of days ago! What "serious doubt" did you - or do you - have? "Doubt" about what? The topic was child rape. What "serious doubts" about me did you feel were "troubling" t ...[text shortened]... feel - on reflection - the need to apologize for; and sincerely this time hopefully.
I give up, but I don't know if you win.
14 Aug 11
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhy not just answer the question? The topic was child sex tourism and child rape. What did you find "troubling" about my refusal to play along with Seitse's personal vendetta? You say my refusal to give personal information about my children to a troll "casts serious doubt" on me, in the context of us discussing adults raping children, what did you mean? What "doubt"? What was "troubling"? What was your "intent" when you said these things?
Gee, buddy, I'd like to help you out, because you are clearly struggling with something, but given your very evident challenges in understanding basic concepts, I don't know that anything said to you will help. You continue to pick and choose snippets from other conversations, misapply their meaning or intents, and then reach conclusions wholly unsupported by anything resembling reality.
I give up, but I don't know if you win.
16 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFThe topic was not child sex tourism. The topic was: who are the children depicted in your avatar? Because the broader discussion was related to sex tourism, you were asked if your perspective of the practice was informed by a general aversion to it or if you had a personal stake in the matter, as a result of being a father/brother/uncle/relative to children.
Why not just answer the question? The topic was child sex tourism and child rape. What did you find "troubling" about my refusal to play along with Seitse's personal vendetta? You say my refusal to give personal information about my children to a troll "casts serious doubt" on me, in the context of us discussing adults raping children, what did you mean? What "doubt"? What was "troubling"? What was your "intent" when you said these things?
The question stopped being how are those children related to you and, as a result of your refusal to answer the simple question, became: why aren't you answering this painfully simple question? Moreover, you didn't offer any compelling reason why you shouldn't respond, instead the insipid suggestion that the question amounted to 'banter' and wouldn't be answered... only to later to invoke your moral outrage at the suggestion that you are a child rapist.
When someone doesn't answer a question, but instead goes to great and unreasonable lengths to avoid the same, they are paving the way for others to be confused regarding motivations and doubtful regarding intents. Had you given a reasonable response at the onset (I prefer not to discuss my personal relationships in a public manner, or some such) instead of how you did handle it, the whole thing would have passed without commentary by anyone. Instead, you invited the scrutiny with your responses.
Is that clear enough for you?
16 Aug 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe topic was "How to stop child sex tourism" an activity that any decent human being would also look upon as child rape.
The topic was not child sex tourism. The topic was: who are the children depicted in your avatar? Because the broader discussion was related to sex tourism, you were asked if your perspective of the practice was informed by a general aversion to it or if you had a personal stake in the matter, as a result of being a father/brother/uncle/relative to child Instead, you invited the scrutiny with your responses.
Is that clear enough for you?
What "doubt" did you have about me on that thread? ["Doubt" was your choice of word].
What was "troubling" to you about my refusal to play along with blatant trolling that most other decent posters on that thread had cottoned on to from the start? ["troubling" was your choice of word... what were you troubled by?]
In what way are you "confused regarding [my] motivations" towards children? And in what way are you "doubtful regarding [my] intents"? Nobody else was "confused" and "doubtful", only you. Why not explain what you meant?
What was your "intent" when you made these insinuations?
16 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFWhat "doubt" did you have about me on that thread? ["Doubt" was your choice of word].
The topic was "How to stop child sex tourism" an activity that any decent human being would also look upon as child rape.
What "doubt" did you have about me on that thread? ["Doubt" was your choice of word].
What was "troubling" to you about my refusal to play along with blatant trolling that most other decent posters on that thread had cottoned on to fr ...[text shortened]... were you troubled by?]
What was your "intent" when you made these insinuations?
Then, I had vague yet unspecific doubts about your motivations for not answering a simple and relevant question which any other reasonable, stable person would have no problem or hesitation in answering.
Now, I doubt your overall mental stability.
What was "troubling" to you about my refusal to play along with blatant trolling that most other decent posters on that thread had cottoned on to from the start? ["troubling" was your choice of word... what were you troubled by?]
What was troubling was that you refused to answer a simple and relevant question which any other reasonable, stable person would have no problem or hesitation in answering.
What is troubling now is that you didn't give any indication that you received his question as trolling until much, much later in the conversation, but you want to act as though that was your motivation all along. Why not say as such right from the very beginning and save yourself the trouble?
Even more troubling now is your obsession with what should be a dead topic.
What was your "intent" when you made these insinuations?
Whoa. The only insinuation was the one you were allowing. I certainly made no insinuation other than to ask the obvious question: why are you refusing to answer a simple and relevant question?
If any one asks me about my children, I gladly take center stage and go to town. But then again, I am a reasonable and stable person, so that is to be expected.
16 Aug 11
2 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou had "vague yet unspecific doubts about [my]motivations" about the topic of raping children because I wouldn't enter into irrelevant banter about avatars/creen names?
[b]What "doubt" did you have about me on that thread? ["Doubt" was your choice of word].
Then, I had vague yet unspecific doubts about your motivations for not answering a simple and relevant question which any other reasonable, stable person would have no problem or hesitation in answering.
Now, I doubt your overall mental stability.
What w own. But then again, I am a reasonable and stable person, so that is to be expected.[/b]
I was being trolled by someone with a record of posts and starting threads with sexual content and/or attacks - a record you were and are fully aware of. You found my refusal to give a sex-obsessed troll details about my children "troubling". You still haven't specified what 'troubled' you about me?
You say you are "confused regarding [my] motivations" towards children and "doubtful regarding [my] intents" towards them? Nobody else was, is or has been "confused" and "doubtful", only you. Rather than hide behind ad hominems and flannely suggestions that you have been misunderstood, why not just explain what you meant by "confused" and "doubtful"?
16 Aug 11
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBut I refused to play along right from the start, FreakyKBH, just as I refused to be drawn by any of the other threads before and after that thread with news links to expat Brits being prosecuted for raping children. I refused to be drawn by Seitse all along, consistently, from the get go. Even with the all the 'Garry Glitter' posts and threads going on, I wouldn't be drawn.
What is troubling now is that you didn't give any indication that you received his question as trolling ....
In the "serious" context of child-raping tourists, you found my refusal to be trolled "troubling"? I gave every indication that I received his questioning as trolling by not rising to the trolling, as did just about everyone else on those threads. Except you. And yet you still refuse to withdraw the innuendo and insinuations that you and Seitse made.
16 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFPoor FMF! The unsuspecting fella was being trolled by a known troll--- one that he and everyone else understood as a person who epitomized trolling. He was aware of the troll's history, just as you, the reader, was aware, just as I was clearly aware. Prior to the thread in question, this nefarious troll had established a reputation of posting sexual content or attempting to start threads with the same... as the record clearly shows.
You had "vague yet unspecific doubts about [my]motivations" about the topic of raping children because I wouldn't enter into irrelevant banter about avatars/creen names?
I was being trolled by someone with a record of posts and starting threads with sexual content and/or attacks - a record you were and are fully aware of. You found my refusal to give a sex-o ...[text shortened]... nderstood, why not just explain what you meant by "confused" and "doubtful"?
One can only scratch one's head in wonder--- in confused, speculative, innuendo-laced wonder--- why FMF would have been the first person in line to add to the original thread.
You're just a jackass, right?