Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse
-
What if, "The purpose of a system is what it does" ?
California 'teacher of the year' gets 30 years in prison for sexual abuse of elementary school children
Groomed & assaulted 11 & 12 year old boys.
-
adding a impactful catchphrase doesn't automatically turn this into a political discussion, you might need to elaborate your intent
-
Remember, this is Politics & Debate.
Pedos are a frequent topic of discussion here. It's not political because we slag off pedos from all walks of life.
-
@raphjd said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
Pedos are a frequent topic of discussion here.
oh really? how does it usually go?
-
It's been pretty quiet since Trump won.
Before that, most people seemed to agree that pedos were evil. There was a lot of comparison in how women pedos were treated compared to men pedos.
-
@raphjd "quiet since Trump won" indeed.
Some libs thought they knew what was going on, learned they did not, learned they don't even look good & are easy to ridicule. Oops.
-
@raphjd said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
Before that, most people seemed to agree that pedos were evil. There was a lot of comparison in how women pedos were treated compared to men pedos.
I don't think you're ever gonna get much debate on pedos since that's the only permissible standpoint. Anything else is probably flirting with a forum ban.
It's good to see that female pedos are also getting harsh punishments, and to see it enter the public eye more. I think far too often women get a pass on these things, just like they do on any kind of sexual crime. I have no shortage of stories from my straight guy friends about non-consensual things girls did to them that would get a guy years in prison.
-
@Rapsey-0 "Anything else is probably flirting with a forum ban." - Disagree. I'm 100% sure people can advocate for pedo or "MAP" here - keeping it to speech, no images.
They don't, maybe because
-
obscure corner of internet
-
they need "safe space".
Their arguments can't hold up to scrutiny, much less ridicule. -
or maybe they don't trust if anonymity will hold. If it doesn't hold, they might have legal problems.
Once, some lib here asked me if I'm into qanon (Q political movement). It was impertinent - they prob meant it as insult - but, as I'm not, it was easy to answer, No.
Then I said - Look, I was a good sport. So it's my turn. Is child porn on your computer?
They never came back
I have no shortage of stories from my straight guy friends about non-consensual things girls did to them that would get a guy years in prison.
It's often not taken seriously. South Park nailed it.
-
-
@blablarg18 said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
@Rapsey-0 "Anything else is probably flirting with a forum ban." - Disagree. I'm 100% sure people can advocate for pedo or "MAP" here - keeping it to speech, no images.
Speech is fine.
No images or stories.
-
@blablarg18 said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
They don't, maybe because
-
obscure corner of internet
-
they need "safe space".
Their arguments can't hold up to scrutiny, much less ridicule. -
or maybe they don't trust if anonymity will hold. If it doesn't hold, they might have legal problems.
Or...
- There's no reason whatsoever to try to have an objective good-faith discussion with people who are clearly not interested in doing the same
For example, I find it fascinating how pedophiles (= people who are attracted to minors) are treated as synonymous with child molesters (= people who act on those attractions). Like most of you I believe that anyone who abuses a child (including indirectly by providing a market for underage porn) deserves the worst punishment, i.e. castration, life imprisonment or death. But I find the lack of nuance interesting because as gay people we should know better than most that people don't choose who/what they are attracted to, and that you can't just change it. Telling pedo's to "just like grownups" seems about as myopic as when gay men used to be told to "just like women".
So in my mind that puts pedo's in a strange duality, where on the one hand they are the most pitiable people on earth, condemned to a life of desire unfulfilled. But on the other hand, if they ever act on it, they immediately become the least deserving of any sympathy. Plus they are kind of a threat regardless, just like a psychopath fighting to contain his homicidal impulses, but I'm pretty sure none of them chose to be this way (who on earth would?).
But why even try to have that conversation when the other people in the room are like: fuck nuance, all pedo's are monsters! Why would I bother putting myself in the line of fire? I don't even have a stake in this. It's just an interesting intellectual quandary.
Those of us on the more conservative side often bash the libs for their "emotion over rational thinking" tendencies, and rightfully so in my opinion. Which makes it all the more curious that on this issue it's the complete inverse. When it comes to people being attracted to minors it's the conservatives who take their positions on the basis of emotion and moral outrage, abandoning their usual cold detached rationality. Not to defend the libs though - many of them who treat the issue more "open-mindedly" only do so because they are themselves pedo's who seek to push for normalization of sex with minors. But that also goes back to my original point: no one who doesn't have a personal stake in this is going to risk taking any position other than wholesale condemnation. Except maybe the occasional idiot like me who cares more about abstract reasoning than his own reputation.
-
-
@Rapsey-0 said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
- There's no reason whatsoever to try to have an objective good-faith discussion with people who are clearly not interested in doing the same
Proceeds to do it regardless
-
@Rapsey-0 Pathetic.
Rarely are the MAP/pedo types "just like a psychopath fighting to contain his homicidal impulses".
More often, they do seek to act them out, or/and, get laws changed so they can ie. so kids won't be protected from them.
You just compared them to Gay men, in other words, YOU just reinforced the Gay = Pedophile stereotype.
I don't. I reject that sterotype - consistently.
"you can't just change it" - Excuse me but the ones who make some effort to change it eg. in therapy, often say "you can".
You are way..... WAY...... off here.
-
@blablarg18 Thank you for proving my point. There really isn't any point in trying to have a conversation about this topic with someone like you. All you get is outrage and false accusations.
-
Another pedo teacher. Why always, ones you least suspect?
Preston Palmer of Minnesota.
https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1923080847428915340
Palmer allegely wrote about being s—xually attracted to his students who are as young as the third grade. He allegedly wrote that it gets him off to groom underage boys. He mentioned allegedly having 87gb of child s—x abuse content which he liked sharing. He allegedly spent significant amounts of time sending adult material to the child decoy and encouraging him to do s—xual activity.
https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1922777402574283165
Unsurprisingly, leftist activist Preston Palmer has a long history of hatred of police. He wants to see law enforcement abolished.
Oh no.
How did I not see that
coming? 
NOTE:
Palmer self-identifies under "Queer" label. Red flag.
I've posted before, how founders of Queer Theory in their writings are explicitly pro-pedo..... explicitly anti-age-of-consent.....explicitly anti-LE.
Just as I always reject Gay = Pedophile as false...... I always admit truth of Queer = Pedophile.
Video of Palmer's arrest..........................................
https://x.com/i/status/1922763726211436575
................arrest for................... wait for it..................
............for -really & actually trying to act on his impulses-.
Because you know...... Pedos are only MAP, they don't act.
-
@blablarg18 said in Top CA teacher gets 30 years for sexual abuse:
Just as I always reject Gay = Pedophile as false......
So do I. All I said was gay people don't choose who/what they are attracted to. I certainly didn't choose to be attracted to men. I don't know any gay person who did, nor anyone who could choose not to be. As poorly understood as sexual attraction is, the one thing we do know pretty much for sure is that it's not a matter of choice.
I'm pretty sure straight people didn't "choose" to be attracted to the opposite sex either. Now that I've said that, are you gonna say OMG Rapsey reinforced the straight = paedophilia stereotype?
-
I hate the police, and I'm not a pedo.
My hatred of the police stems from their bad actions, and in some cases, inaction.
----Back on topic.----
OOOPS, didn't mean to tag @Rapsey-0
-
I agree with you.
People don't just decide who/what they are attracted to.
Not all people engage in what they are attracted to.
That being said, the availability of the item/person(s) is a factor in how much people will engage in it. Even if it's 100% available, it does not mean all people will engage in it.
-
@raphjd further: Murderers & rapists rarely ask sympathy for their impulses or easier laws with better victim access.
If some action is bad, so is desire for it.
If someone wants sympathy for their favorite crime with victims, or wants easier laws for better victim access: Fuck them. As in, "don't even waste my time you sicko. Go back to prison."
Side matter (not to spend too much time on it): people do control what they are attracted to........ ...over time. This truth got mis-used historically to harm Gays, yet is true anyway.
"I woke up today wanting A? Wow. I accept that feeling in itself - but A isn't victimless, A has victims. Ethically, I'd better check myself & focus rather on B & C. To start, I'll discard A materials."
Every person must do that
about something criminal they wanted, sometime. Thievery, revenge, hard drugs, urge to cheat, whatever. Pedos: You had best do it on your pedo.
again: Idea was historically mis-applied to harm Gays. - but, so what? Still truth.
Adult consensual Gay, "private" except known to those concerned, is victimless - like adult consensual Straight. No crime.
& let's not imply it is a crime. No comparisons to pedo. That would be homophobic.
-
Comparing two things doesn't mean they are equal in nature. Raspey used an argument to demonstrate that homosexuality was once a crime and that homosexuals had to hide or supress their own nature to avoid public outcry, prison or death, and that all of that happened despite the fact that two men being together does not hurt or affect the life of any other person whatsoever, that it was criminal based solely on moral/religious beliefs.
It being a crime back then didn't make gay people stop being gay, as you have pointed yourself in your argument:
"I woke up today wanting A? Wow. I accept that feeling in itself - but A isn't victimless, A has victims. Ethically, I'd better check myself & focus rather on B & C. To start, I'll discard A materials."
No crime is victimless, so for homosexuality to be a crime, a victim must exist, and in this case it is the people as a whole, and God. Now as a gay man you know you're a sick pervert and that you must not indulge in your sinful desires as not to disturb the public order and bring shame to your name and your family, which is exactly what many gays had to do back then, and is what many pedophiles do today.
Historically, neither practices were bashed, it is known that the Romans would engage in homosexual practices publicly and it wasn't either shameful or a sign of a weak moral. And it was not just "regular" homosexual practices as you'd call, because many would turn to the younger males, and it was perfectly fine.
Making that comparison does not signal any virtue or vice in itself. In your head, it seems, you assume that the comparison alone leads to the premise "for A to be okay then B must be equally okay" which is a reductivist interpretation.
No one is asking for you to have simpathy for child rapists, only that you understand that you should not reduce one's urges to a mere moral question. I tell you that you could be a pedophile yourself, and I don't say that implying that you are, and I don't intend to say it as a way to attack you. I'm simply saying that if you are not, you could have been, it is not up to you.
Now, were you a pedophile, you'd go through that path your own way, perhaps you'd be a lawful MAP who is disgusted with yourself for what you desire, but manage to not offend.
Not being a choice one can make doesn't turn it into something that is inherently rightful or that should be allowed. That part I'm pretty sure you get.
But, on the same matter, not being a choice means you cannot not be judged as if it were. Even if offending is wrong, you are to be judged for offending, never for the mere thought of offending.
