Ah Mr King. How are you?
I would be more than willing to debate this issue with you without the petty name calling and malice that I'm sure you receive on a daily basis and as such have become both accustomed and immune to. Quite the contrary to your beleaguered repost, I have thought long and hard about the issue you have raised.
The fact is, you can call people closet homophobes all you want and for the most part you probably have a good point. A lot of people (myself included) treat homosexuals differently to the way they treat heterosexuals of the same age. Before you start calling me homophobic, allow me to elaborate. I for one didn't realise I did this until tonight when I was discussing the issue with a friend. He pointed out that my attitude to a 15 year old girl having sex with a man was different to my attitude of a 15 year old boy doing the same. This at first was difficult for me to accept, since I had always thought of myself as being belligerently accepting of all sexual orientations. However, as I’ve thought further into the issues brought about by your quite frankly piss poor attempt at musical theatre I have come to realise that it is not my attitude towards homosexual relationships that need to change, but rather my attitude towards the heterosexual. As a result, quite conversely it appears as though I have somehow held homosexuality at a higher moral stand point than that of heterosexuality.
As I have said in earlier posts, the age of consent is wide open for debate. The age at which a person feels they are ready to engage in their sexual journey in life differs from person to person and as such a lot of people feel that there is some sort of grey area around that age. However, the fact is that the law is the law. While a society that would not completely socially condemn a man for sleeping with a 15 year old girl, and yet at the same time treat a man who sleeps with a 15 year old boy as a paedophile is clearly wrong, it is not the attitude toward the homosexual relationship here that needs to change. Rather than being a homophobic issue as you would like to believe, it is instead an issue of sexism. Society has a whole appears to believe that women are more of a sexual object than men, and as such should be ready to receive a good ploughing as soon as possible. An unsaid belief that is clearly wrong. At the end of the day the age of consent was put in place for a reason, and you knowingly and willingly broke that. The defence you offer merely aids a feminist cause and does nothing to make you seem like any less of a sick fuck.
I would genuinely be interested in your thoughts on this, and hope you respond
( , Sun 11 May 2008, 2:37, Reply)
I would be more than willing to debate this issue with you without the petty name calling and malice that I'm sure you receive on a daily basis and as such have become both accustomed and immune to. Quite the contrary to your beleaguered repost, I have thought long and hard about the issue you have raised.
The fact is, you can call people closet homophobes all you want and for the most part you probably have a good point. A lot of people (myself included) treat homosexuals differently to the way they treat heterosexuals of the same age. Before you start calling me homophobic, allow me to elaborate. I for one didn't realise I did this until tonight when I was discussing the issue with a friend. He pointed out that my attitude to a 15 year old girl having sex with a man was different to my attitude of a 15 year old boy doing the same. This at first was difficult for me to accept, since I had always thought of myself as being belligerently accepting of all sexual orientations. However, as I’ve thought further into the issues brought about by your quite frankly piss poor attempt at musical theatre I have come to realise that it is not my attitude towards homosexual relationships that need to change, but rather my attitude towards the heterosexual. As a result, quite conversely it appears as though I have somehow held homosexuality at a higher moral stand point than that of heterosexuality.
As I have said in earlier posts, the age of consent is wide open for debate. The age at which a person feels they are ready to engage in their sexual journey in life differs from person to person and as such a lot of people feel that there is some sort of grey area around that age. However, the fact is that the law is the law. While a society that would not completely socially condemn a man for sleeping with a 15 year old girl, and yet at the same time treat a man who sleeps with a 15 year old boy as a paedophile is clearly wrong, it is not the attitude toward the homosexual relationship here that needs to change. Rather than being a homophobic issue as you would like to believe, it is instead an issue of sexism. Society has a whole appears to believe that women are more of a sexual object than men, and as such should be ready to receive a good ploughing as soon as possible. An unsaid belief that is clearly wrong. At the end of the day the age of consent was put in place for a reason, and you knowingly and willingly broke that. The defence you offer merely aids a feminist cause and does nothing to make you seem like any less of a sick fuck.
I would genuinely be interested in your thoughts on this, and hope you respond
( , Sun 11 May 2008, 2:37, Reply)
Quite right Furness
It is clearly not only wrong but illegal to have sex with anyone below the age of consent.
It is not wrong to have consensual sex with males or females who are above the age of consent and want to do so.
That's what the song clearly says.
Some people however prefer to hear something else.
A little demon in their souls.
But no matter how often it is pointed out they will never hear the truth.
Intellectual and emotional deafness.
( , Sun 11 May 2008, 16:10, Reply)
It is clearly not only wrong but illegal to have sex with anyone below the age of consent.
It is not wrong to have consensual sex with males or females who are above the age of consent and want to do so.
That's what the song clearly says.
Some people however prefer to hear something else.
A little demon in their souls.
But no matter how often it is pointed out they will never hear the truth.
Intellectual and emotional deafness.
( , Sun 11 May 2008, 16:10, Reply)
If you know that it's wrong and illegal
and that the message of the song is to wait for "boys" to reach the age of consent, then why did you fail to follow your own advice when you were jailed in 2001 for four indecent assaults and two serious sexual offences on boys aged 14 and 15?
People aren't being homophobic when they criticise you. They just don't like paedophiles, regardless of their sexual orientation.
At the end of the day you're free to post whatever you want, but are you really that evil that you don't care what your victims will feel if they stumble across this? I imagine you've fucked up enough lives for one life time, how about fading into obscurity and letting these people try and get on with theirs.
( , Mon 12 May 2008, 14:03, Reply)
and that the message of the song is to wait for "boys" to reach the age of consent, then why did you fail to follow your own advice when you were jailed in 2001 for four indecent assaults and two serious sexual offences on boys aged 14 and 15?
People aren't being homophobic when they criticise you. They just don't like paedophiles, regardless of their sexual orientation.
At the end of the day you're free to post whatever you want, but are you really that evil that you don't care what your victims will feel if they stumble across this? I imagine you've fucked up enough lives for one life time, how about fading into obscurity and letting these people try and get on with theirs.
( , Mon 12 May 2008, 14:03, Reply)
Your mediocre song might have made a fleeting reference to it yes,
but the main focus on it was that its ok to bugger boys, and a boy is any male aged from 16-17ish all the way down to 1.
Speaking of intellectual and emotional deafness, I'll just take full blown deafness if I have to listen to that again.
Anyway I can't be arsed with you anymore, so I'm going to refer you back to my first post with a gung-ho FUCK OFF
( , Mon 12 May 2008, 22:18, Reply)
but the main focus on it was that its ok to bugger boys, and a boy is any male aged from 16-17ish all the way down to 1.
Speaking of intellectual and emotional deafness, I'll just take full blown deafness if I have to listen to that again.
Anyway I can't be arsed with you anymore, so I'm going to refer you back to my first post with a gung-ho FUCK OFF
( , Mon 12 May 2008, 22:18, Reply)
Is
it really completely beyond your ken why some of us might suspect your motives? That perhaps your insistence that the first line means "they've got to be legal" rings a bit hollow to us, given your recent history?
What about the line "don't startle the horses or make too much noise"? Are we to believe you think boy-buggering ought to be done furtively? Is it your belief that a relationship that must be kept secret from all the boy's loved ones is likely to be a mutual, healthy relationship?
Madame Arcati's review was all true; you've raised some legitimate points about inequity in the law, and you've poked fun at some people who needed poking fun at. I acknowledge it on the merit of its postmodern artistic value, and I'll defend to the death your right to create it.
The fact that you have exercised that right in this way proves only that you have a profound lack of moral maturity. Adults care about the effects of their words and actions. An adult would see that the aforementioned right is outweighed by your debt to the people you've harmed.
Since it's clear that you plan on reoffending, I hope your inevitable incarceration meets with a clerical error that lands you in the general prison population. I hope you are raped mercilessly and beaten to within an inch of your life before the administrators figure out their mistake. I hope the entire brutal ordeal ends up on YouTube, set to your charming song.
Now THAT would be worthy of the newsletter.
Fuck along now.
( , Tue 13 May 2008, 0:52, Reply)
it really completely beyond your ken why some of us might suspect your motives? That perhaps your insistence that the first line means "they've got to be legal" rings a bit hollow to us, given your recent history?
What about the line "don't startle the horses or make too much noise"? Are we to believe you think boy-buggering ought to be done furtively? Is it your belief that a relationship that must be kept secret from all the boy's loved ones is likely to be a mutual, healthy relationship?
Madame Arcati's review was all true; you've raised some legitimate points about inequity in the law, and you've poked fun at some people who needed poking fun at. I acknowledge it on the merit of its postmodern artistic value, and I'll defend to the death your right to create it.
The fact that you have exercised that right in this way proves only that you have a profound lack of moral maturity. Adults care about the effects of their words and actions. An adult would see that the aforementioned right is outweighed by your debt to the people you've harmed.
Since it's clear that you plan on reoffending, I hope your inevitable incarceration meets with a clerical error that lands you in the general prison population. I hope you are raped mercilessly and beaten to within an inch of your life before the administrators figure out their mistake. I hope the entire brutal ordeal ends up on YouTube, set to your charming song.
Now THAT would be worthy of the newsletter.
Fuck along now.
( , Tue 13 May 2008, 0:52, Reply)
tosser
Dear Jonathon, you manky old spunker, its great that you have published your work in a public forum, i'm sure when you go down to sign on to the sex offenders register each week they will be pleased to see that you are taking your law breaking antics seriously. i'm also glad that the next time you are in court for dragging your decrepid old ball sack over some innocent teenager, the court will have a charicture reference of how you haven't learned your lesson and indeed laugh at the law.
anyway you talentless fat wanker, i have to go busy myself posting your charming video on as many anti paedo vigilanty sites as I can whilst also searching for your address.
good luck with the lynch mob, I hope they go at your genitals with a belt sander and some TCP before jamming a hot poker up your arse sideways you fat degenerate cunt, why don't you just kill yourself.
( , Tue 13 May 2008, 13:34, Reply)
Dear Jonathon, you manky old spunker, its great that you have published your work in a public forum, i'm sure when you go down to sign on to the sex offenders register each week they will be pleased to see that you are taking your law breaking antics seriously. i'm also glad that the next time you are in court for dragging your decrepid old ball sack over some innocent teenager, the court will have a charicture reference of how you haven't learned your lesson and indeed laugh at the law.
anyway you talentless fat wanker, i have to go busy myself posting your charming video on as many anti paedo vigilanty sites as I can whilst also searching for your address.
good luck with the lynch mob, I hope they go at your genitals with a belt sander and some TCP before jamming a hot poker up your arse sideways you fat degenerate cunt, why don't you just kill yourself.
( , Tue 13 May 2008, 13:34, Reply)