chat clients and social networks (zilchexo advocates child porn/drug abuse)

Flamdini wrote:

keemstar wrote:

Flamdini wrote:

samoyed wrote:

room wrote:when did this stop being about chat clients and social networks

when fd unironically told us that saying no to your kid was bad

Bitch Where

also daily reminder this conversation happened because mac b, dogman and spinny all three exemplars of social skills think children shouldn't be allowed to own smartphones until they're 159 years and 350 days old

...i never said that

oh i fucked up

youve been doin a lot of that lately

oaky wrote:you would punish a teacher for giving a kid bad grades but not for using her position of authority to have sex with a child?

no you didn't follow, i'd punish her for conspirating to rape if she wanted to give the kid bad grades in order to fuck him

Flamdini wrote:

oaky wrote:you would punish a teacher for giving a kid bad grades but not for using her position of authority to have sex with a child?

no you didn't follow, i'd punish her for conspirating to rape if she wanted to give the kid bad grades in order to fuck him

it isnt always that simple - the person is using her position of authority over the child to take advantage of him - one person is a child and the other is an adult

also how do you prove the adult 'wanted' to give the child bad grades

oaky wrote:

Flamdini wrote:

oaky wrote:you would punish a teacher for giving a kid bad grades but not for using her position of authority to have sex with a child?

no you didn't follow, i'd punish her for conspirating to rape if she wanted to give the kid bad grades in order to fuck him

it isnt always that simple - the person is using her position of authority over the child to take advantage of him - one person is a child and the other is an adult

also how do you prove the adult 'wanted' to give the child bad grades

Double-checking the teacher's grading work. Really the only way you could get away with this is essays and projects with rubrics and even in like an English class that's not going to be the whole grade.

"The court has determined your grading is unfair" sounds an awful lot like the 'abuse of authority'/'do what i say because i say so' kind of thing you complained about

take these two imaginary responses to a math test



the first student understands the concept (but made a slight error) but the second student does not - how does the court figure out that one of them hasn't received an 'unfair' penalty without bringing in an expert on the subject to evaluate all instances of 'unfair grading'?

i thought your whole issue was abuse of authority fd
how is using your status as a teacher to get sex out of a child with a failing grade as a punishment not an abuse of authority

well i actually see the arguments you guys are raising which is why i think maybe it would be best to keep sex in between two people in unequal positions like this as statutory rape, same for sex with your like boss or whatever. i still stand by the statement that just because it's statutory rape doesn't mean it's always rape per se, just that the law considers it as such for everyone's benefit

with the court thing you're right that deciding unfair grading would be very arbitrary which is why i retract that. if you're talking about the way they would enforce the infraction i see that less as "do what i say or get maced" and more as "do what the democratically voted law says or get maced", it's much less arbitrary like that

it's always rape of a participant is underage

keemstar wrote:it's always rape of a participant is underage

*if a participant can't consent
if you're 15 you can consent as romeo and juliet laws even admit

thats different and already in effect theres a difference between that and letting 13 year olds have sex with grandpa

Flamdini wrote:

keemstar wrote:it's always rape of a participant is underage

*if a participant can't consent
if you're 15 you can consent as romeo and juliet laws even admit

i am familiar with the laws and they are in my state
- you must be at least 18 to have sex with someone 20 or above
- minors under 18 can provide legal consent only if they are 16 or above and if under 18 a minor can only have sex with someone within 2 years of their age, for example a 17 year old and a 19 year old is legal
- federal law makes it completely illegal to have sex with anyone from another state who is under 18
- there is no federal romeo and juliet law

fd just wants to know that if he had a chance with mrs frizzle she cant use 'its illegal' as an excuse to turn him down

so is puerto rico just really really sexually open fd

because that's legit only way i can see you saying "lol 50 years olds can and should get it on with 13 year olds(just so long as the child says ok lol)"

puerto rico loves lolis?

Spoiler:

keemstar wrote:

Flamdini wrote:

keemstar wrote:it's always rape of a participant is underage

*if a participant can't consent
if you're 15 you can consent as romeo and juliet laws even admit

i am familiar with the laws and they are in my state
- you must be at least 18 to have sex with someone 20 or above
- minors under 18 can provide legal consent only if they are 16 or above and if under 18 a minor can only have sex with someone within 2 years of their age, for example a 17 year old and a 19 year old is legal
- federal law makes it completely illegal to have sex with anyone from another state who is under 18
- there is no federal romeo and juliet law

15, 16, potato tomato. the romeo and juliet laws are basically a way to reconcile the fact that those under 18 can obviously consent and fear of older partners being manipulative/deceitful (which can be prosecuted as rape or emotional abuse so i don't really see the point (or at least they should be i know some abuse laws are really lax))
that's to prevent age of consent tourism- probably a solid law and why puerto rico isn't pedodise

samoyed wrote:so is puerto rico just really really sexually open fd

it's kind of weird in that the country is very catholic/evangelical to the extent that city government efforts going towards religious events is pretty normal but the underlying secular culture is pretty progressive/culturally laissez-faire. basically people try to make their kids act like they would but other people's lives are their own private business- for example bathrooms were never even an issue here and there's no war on marijuana here (which is part of why so much gets into america (sorry)). there's not really a gotta-get-laid/be-in-a-relationship-to-be-cool culture like in america but we value healthy relationships and self-discovery. like the data i cited said our kids are only slightly less likely to get poon than american kids despite being so religious which really just proves kids are going to do their own thing regardless of how much you reprimand them if they think they can avoid the consequences you're warning them of. tl;dr puerto rico has two tiers of people, lowlifes that live life from party to party and have tons of sex, and then the Normal Upstanding Christian Citizens- we're just more honest about the first group and respect their life choices

oaky wrote:thats different and already in effect theres a difference between that and letting 13 year olds have sex with grandpa

samoyed wrote:because that's legit only way i can see you saying "lol 50 years olds can and should get it on with 13 year olds(just so long as the child says ok lol)"

i assure you my opinion is unpopular in puerto rico as well because the age of consent is typically seen as for much smaller age differences (14-19) because of the cultural context in which we look at this but the fundamental issue is whether both parties understand the meaning of the question "do you want to fuck" and have said "yes"

Tyson wrote:puerto rico loves lolis?

Spoiler:

no strong opinion on lolis one way or the other, i like all sorts of body types. it was a shitpost.

stop
stop talking about lolis
stop right now

also what the fuck just because a woman can understand how babies are made doesnt mean she is in anyway ready to take on parental roles

its like someone learning how to play jingle bells and you expect them to take part in a professional orchestra.

room wrote:also what the fuck just because a woman can understand how babies are made doesnt mean she is in anyway ready to take on parental roles

its like someone learning how to play jingle bells and you expect them to take part in a professional orchestra.

>sex=parenting
lelwewkekaftbhrnfamsmh

>significant amount of unwanted teen pregancies, much safer to wait.

>but i mostly misread your post

alright then

Tyson wrote:puerto rico loves lolis?

Spoiler:

cuz its pedophilia

Flamdini wrote:

keemstar wrote:

Flamdini wrote:

keemstar wrote:it's always rape of a participant is underage

*if a participant can't consent
if you're 15 you can consent as romeo and juliet laws even admit

i am familiar with the laws and they are in my state
- you must be at least 18 to have sex with someone 20 or above
- minors under 18 can provide legal consent only if they are 16 or above and if under 18 a minor can only have sex with someone within 2 years of their age, for example a 17 year old and a 19 year old is legal
- federal law makes it completely illegal to have sex with anyone from another state who is under 18
- there is no federal romeo and juliet law

15, 16, potato tomato. the romeo and juliet laws are basically a way to reconcile the fact that those under 18 can obviously consent and fear of older partners being manipulative/deceitful (which can be prosecuted as rape or emotional abuse so i don't really see the point (or at least they should be i know some abuse laws are really lax))
that's to prevent age of consent tourism- probably a solid law and why puerto rico isn't pedodise

it is a good law and should remain in place

yeah that's what i said it's a solid law so states like puerto rico or any state with an age of consent of 16 doesn't get a huge prostitution market especially since we're debating legalizing prostitution