Gr666mer Updates

[LeftyGunner]

You any better?

I am deeply flawed, all I can do is try.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I am deeply flawed, all I can do is try.

Stop trying. You're already there.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Limited time. I responded to what intrigued me first to reply to.

Fair enough.

I think it's reasonable to think that the group that advocates for pedo rights would tend to have more pedos.

I follow you so far.

Tell me. Does the LGBTQIA+ community accept minor attracted persons as part of their group or not?

I am not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, and I cannot speak for them as a group or as individuals…can you?

I can only offer my opinion.

I think pedophiles use the cover of LGBTQ tolerance to try to legitimize their abhorrence by proximity and association. I do not think pedophilia is more broadly practiced or accepted in the mainstream LGBTQ community than it is in any other demographic.

Have you had your head burried in the sand for long, or was it just recent?

I stuck it down here about two years ago so I could have a face-to-face conversation with MAGA.

I suppose there are pedos on the right,

Ya think?

Ill assume, then, you haven’t had the pleasure of interacting online with Andrew Tate‘s army of incels?

You never answered my questions about Lolicon Hentai and its consumers…I assume it’s because you recognize the affinity the online alt-right has shown for this material, and the implications for your argument.

but when they're found out, the consensus is, instead of "inclusion" it's this:

View attachment 364772

If only that were true.

It’s not, though…you know that, right?

Frankly, I'm just out of patience. But, no. It's not just accusations. I advocate for a fair trial before the wood chipper.

Okay. Fsir.

You seemed inclined to take the LGBT side without scrutiny.

I try not to take any position without scrutiny…how closely have you scrutinized your own position?

The evidence seems rather clear to me: pedophilia crosses all kinds of demographic lines…race, class, education level, political perspective, etc…those creeps pop up everywhere.

To me, the pedo panic on the right looks a lot more like an attempt to demonize political opponents than it is to address an actual threat.

A while back there was a report about LGBT group celebrating the removal of a "NO U-turn" sign. They claimed the sign was there because it's a known gay district and was put there to discriminate against them.

If that’s real it’s retarded.

 

[smokingman]

Silver Lake takes down a couple of No U-turn signs from 1990s

Street signs that officials said previously targeted LGBTQ community members were taken down from a Silver Lake neighborhood Monday.

www.nbclosangeles.com

They were put up to slow street prostitution.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I think pedophiles use the cover of LGBTQ tolerance to try to legitimize their abhorrence by proximity and association. I do not think pedophilia is more broadly practiced or accepted in the mainstream LGBTQ community than it is in any other demographic.

You always want proof, (which is good) so here is your proof. A research paper from the national institute of health. straight folks are less likely to be kiddy diddlers.

The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study - PubMed

Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20:1. The present study investigated whether the...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Abstract​

... the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually. This, of course, would not indicate that androphilic males have a greater propensity to offend against children.

(Quote trimmed for display purposes)

Edit: so will you accept that gay individuals are statistically more likely to be pedos now that there is scientific proof?

 

[LeftyGunner]

Silver Lake takes down a couple of No U-turn signs from 1990s

Street signs that officials said previously targeted LGBTQ community members were taken down from a Silver Lake neighborhood Monday.

www.nbclosangeles.com

They were put up to slow street prostitution.

Okay, yeah…that is retarded.

 

[rbhargan]

So, when will they be adding a "P" in the alphabet people acronym to recognize pedophiles? It is obvious they see them as fellow "oppressed" individuals. Own that sh*t and wear it with Pride!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[jamil]

You always want proof, (which is good) so here is your proof. A research paper from the national institute of health. Non straight folks are less likely to be kiddy diddlers.

The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study - PubMed

Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20:1. The present study investigated whether the...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

(Quote trimmed for display purposes)

Edit: so will you accept that gay individuals are statistically more likely to be pedos now that there is scientific proof?

Hold on there. I heard that NIH place is a far right wing biased source.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Hold on there. I heard that NIH place is a far right wing biased source.

Until they start trying to study gun violence and then give up when the stats dont look good to them. LOL

 

[jamil]

So, when will they be adding a "P" in the alphabet people acronym to recognize pedophiles? It is obvious they see them as fellow "oppressed" individuals. Own that sh*t and wear it with Pride!

Would it be a P? They really don't like that word.

 

[LeftyGunner]

You always want proof, (which is good) so here is your proof. A research paper from the national institute of health. Non straight folks are less likely to be kiddy diddlers.

The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: an exploratory study - PubMed

Previous investigations have indicated that the ratio of sex offenders against female children vs. offenders against male children is approximately 2:1, while the ratio of gynephiles to androphiles among the general population is approximately 20:1. The present study investigated whether the...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

(Quote trimmed for display purposes)

I have not seen this paper referenced anywhere before. I followed the link, but it only brought up the abstract. When I follow the “read text” link it takes me to a pay site.

Edit: so will you accept that gay individuals are statistically more likely to be pedos now that there is scientific proof?

Erm…not based on the abstract of one paper alone…one paper is scientific evidence, not scientific proof…and one abstract is less still.

However, I definitely respect this approach...give me something well researched and informative to pique my interest, and I’ll follow my own curiosity wherever it leads. I am certainly more inclined to read that paper you linked with an open mind than the partisan rage-bait that usually gets paraded across my socials.

Based purely on my own anecdotal experiences, I am definitely surprised by the purported ratio of 11:1, and I am certainly curious how they arrived at that number.

 

[BugI02]

Did you watch the video?

Are you prepared to address their actual complaint?

They are not arguing that LGBTQ is more likely to commit sexual crimes against children, they are arguing that LGBTQ is more likely to be criminally charged than members of the straight community who have committed those same crimes.

Do they have a point? Who is more likely to get the benefit of the doubt in our society? My mind goes to the drag queen vs youth pastor conversation we had recently here on INGO.

They make the example of sodomy laws. Many of todays most popular categories of heterosexual pornography center on acts of sodomy, indicating that straight people regularly seek out (and engage in) these acts…however, they make the claim LGBTQ are nine times more likely to be charged with sodomy than are straight people.

Looking at it from this perspective, I think they have a valid point: It isn’t just what a law says…how a law is implemented must also be considered...selective enforcement is a breeding ground for injustice.

If they know of someone in the straight community who is committing these crimes and is not charged, turn them in - we'll burn them too

You have to be in a compromising position to be charged with pedophilia, so maybe don't do that rather than complain that when you do such things you are more likely to be charged

Pedophilia should be a zero tolerance crime. See something, say something

 

[Cameramonkey]

I have not seen this paper referenced anywhere before. I followed the link, but it only brought up the abstract. When I follow the “read text” link it takes me to a pay site.



Erm…not based on the abstract of one paper alone…one paper is scientific evidence, not scientific proof…and one abstract is less still.

However, I definitely respect this approach...give me something well researched and informative to pique my interest, and I’ll follow my own curiosity wherever it leads. I am certainly more inclined to read that paper you linked with an open mind than the partisan rage-bait that usually gets paraded across my socials.

Based purely on my own anecdotal experiences, I am definitely surprised by the purported ratio of 11:1, and I am certainly curious how they arrived at that number.

So you are claiming the abstract of the paper lies and does not represent the actual contents of the paper? That's rich.


If so this is EXACTLY the flawed liberal logic I addressed upthread. You guys will do anything you can to deny facts that disagree with your feelz. We present a scientific paper disproving your belief, and its just not good enough to sway your preconceived notions.

You are unserious. Good day, sir.

 

[jamil]

Fair enough.



I follow you so far.



I am not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, and I cannot speak for them as a group or as individuals…can you?

I can only offer my opinion.

I can offer my opinion too, which is informed by reading what many of their leaders write. I can read the inventors of queer theory. I can read studies like the one @Cameramonkey posted. Which, BTW, I think was posted before, and probably in this thread. I think most of the rank and file LGBTQ+ community really doesn't want maps to be part of their community. But plenty of them sure seem to.

I think pedophiles use the cover of LGBTQ tolerance to try to legitimize their abhorrence by proximity and association. I do not think pedophilia is more broadly practiced or accepted in the mainstream LGBTQ community than it is in any other demographic.

To some extent, like I said, many of them don't want to be inclusive of them. I dunno. Maybe you don't listen to what they're saying. That stuff gets posted here all the time by people like Libs of TikTok. And yeah, you might not be keen to use tiktock as a source, but the content and volume of lunacy is pretty astonishing.

I stuck it down here about two years ago so I could have a face-to-face conversation with MAGA.


Ya think?

Ill assume, then, you haven’t had the pleasure of interacting online with Andrew Tate‘s army of incels?

I don't really think highly of Andrew Tate, but I don't really think of him as a conservative either. And no, why would I interact with his fanbois? You seriously interact with them?

You never answered my questions about Lolicon Hentai and its consumers…I assume it’s because you recognize the affinity the online alt-right has shown for this material, and the implications for your argument.

There's no such thing as alt-right. The people who the left calls "alt-right" aren't actually conservatives.

If only that were true.

It’s not, though…you know that, right?

Well. Idunno. Catholic Priests seem to get away with it. I wasn't aware that they're all rightwingers.

Okay. Fsir.



I try not to take any position without scrutiny…how closely have you scrutinized your own position?

Well, in this case, my instincts about the likelihood of Pedo's tending to join the group which is more tolerant of them, appear to be supported by the research. People with kinks tend to have some pretty nasty kinks.

The evidence seems rather clear to me: pedophilia crosses all kinds of demographic lines…race, class, education level, political perspective, etc…those creeps pop up everywhere.

It does. A lot of pedos pray on young family members and such. I have an extended relative, a female who was raped by her step mother. No one saw that one coming. Pretty shocking. But, no one is saying that pedo's are all in the LGBTQ+ ranks. But damned if we see someone who looks like a nutter, end up being a pedo, and all we can say is, "called it!"

To me, the pedo panic on the right looks a lot more like an attempt to demonize political opponents than it is to address an actual threat.

Well, it's a lot more than you think.

You live in your bubble. So you probably don't see what a lot of people see on the right. And it's not like there's not a right wing bubble either. I tend to think it's worse on the left because right wingers who live or work in metro areas can't help but be exposed to left wingers. Everyone I worked with in the past 15 years has been left wingers. Hilariously, they thought Trump was gonna be arrested for Russian Collusion any day, because Rachel Maddow promised them. The day before the Mueller report came out, I enformed them that's nutty, and I told them what the report would say. They laughed at me. Next day, I was sure to say my toldjah's.

If you're a lefty consuming mostly lefty sources, Joe Biden's debate performance was shocking to you, because all the left wing people were saying, "he's sharp as a tack!"

If you're a lefty consuming mostly lefty sources, you'd still believe "hands up, don't shoot" was real. It never happened.

I could go on. Saint George Floyd. Covid. Masks. Vaccines. Ivermectin. Even HCQ was vindicated.

If that’s real it’s retarded.

It's real. It's retarded. We can at least agree on that.

 

[jamil]

I have not seen this paper referenced anywhere before. I followed the link, but it only brought up the abstract. When I follow the “read text” link it takes me to a pay site.



Erm…not based on the abstract of one paper alone…one paper is scientific evidence, not scientific proof…and one abstract is less still.

However, I definitely respect this approach...give me something well researched and informative to pique my interest, and I’ll follow my own curiosity wherever it leads. I am certainly more inclined to read that paper you linked with an open mind than the partisan rage-bait that usually gets paraded across my socials.

Based purely on my own anecdotal experiences, I am definitely surprised by the purported ratio of 11:1, and I am certainly curious how they arrived at that number.

Really? How many pedo's do you know? You can look at LGBTQIA+ people and just know they're not pedos? Found out there was a pedo living down the street. That guy didn't look like a pedo. But he sure acted gay as ****.

Anyway, the composition of It's may not include the the G's. Very few L's. B's wouldn't surprise me at all. T's? Depends on why they're T's. It's likely to be mostly the Q's and the +'s.

Here's the thing. Dudes who get off on dressing in women's clothes might not have just one kink! They got that way somehow. Probably a really ****ed up childhood. And, well, **** happens. Not astonishing.

 

[oze]

When it comes to race, they’re also masters of baiters.

Anybody else see what @jamil did there?

 

[Tombs]

I am not a member of the LGBTQ+ community, and I cannot speak for them as a group or as individuals…can you?

I can only offer my opinion.

I think pedophiles use the cover of LGBTQ tolerance to try to legitimize their abhorrence by proximity and association. I do not think pedophilia is more broadly practiced or accepted in the mainstream LGBTQ community than it is in any other demographic.

I can.

I have spent a significant part of my life distancing myself from the LGBT nonsense. If you're a normal and functional person, it is absolutely not something to be associated with, regardless of your orientation.
There's not much tolerance in the LGBT community, especially across those different letters. It's always presented as a hypertolerant lot but it absolutely is not, and becomes far less so when you get into people who view it as a life style.

The issue isn't one of it attracting pedophiles, it's one of attracting people who are degenerate in the literal meaning of the word. People who view spreading aids as a badge of honor and view it the same as someone would view having a kid, don't really have the moral fortitude to consider kids off limits. People who consider it an accomplishment to rack up the highest body counts possible, and will go into pitch black rooms and have intercourse with random people for fun.

That's the issue and why you see the bizarre defense of pedophiles. Because anything limiting the endorsement of absolute degeneracy is putting a cramp on someone's fetish. And anyone still wanting to be associated with it is fully onboard with it.

It may have had more innocent purposes for association until marriage was settled, but it certainly doesn't have that going for it anymore.

 

[Leadeye]

Arguing with liberals/progressives is like arguing with Scientologists/Moonies - pointless. They live in their own universe, dictated to them by their handlers. They deny reality, preferring to embrace their fantasy world.

They are also masters of projection, accusing their political opponents of what they themselves embrace. Very sad. But that is how cults function.

Moonies, now there's a name I haven't heard in a long time.

 

[LeftyGunner]

So you are claiming the abstract of the paper lies and does not represent the actual contents of the paper? That's rich.

No, that’s not what I wrote…like at all.

I am assuming the abstract you posted does, in fact, accurately describe the contents of the linked paper. I cannot verify that assumption because I cannot access the complete paper…it’s behind a paywall from your link.

I am claiming that the abstract of one paper alone, without reading the supporting documentation, is not enough to change my mind…I need to see how the author came to their conclusions, and I’d like additional examples from other sources for context.

I am not rejecting the validity of your evidence, I am simply saying I want to see more than just a summary.

If so this is EXACTLY the flawed liberal logic I addressed upthread. You guys will do anything you can to deny facts that disagree with your feelz. We present a scientific paper disproving your belief, and its just not good enough to sway your preconceived notions.

You didn’t post a paper disproving my beliefs. You posted an abstract from a paper that appears to challenge one factor affecting one of my opinions…it’s a good start, but hardly a mind changer by itself.

Even if I take that abstract entirely at face value it raises more questions for me than it answers…I need to read the whole paper to make sense of their conclusions.

You are unserious.

Based on your mistaken reading of my post, I can see how you might come to this conclusion.

Good day, sir.

Yeah…uh, you too.