|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 19:12:34 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:The bulk of it rabbitguy refusing to admit gradeschool grammar/semantic mistakes and why they illustrate the near-impossibility of fruitful discussion with him. FIFY |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 19:16:46 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:I guess you have not yet reached the chapter on gerunds, home Engish teacher. Nor are you aware of the existence of word reference tomes, it seems! "No idea", yet "what I think you mean". Please send me your compositional style manuals! Depends on what you mean by "break", my hyper-literal frantic obfuscator of pure hideousness, I mean, home "moral integrity" teacher. Same stuff that kept the gays down, I know.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 19:25:44 GMT
tpfkar Eva Yojimbo said:I guess you have not yet reached the chapter on gerunds, home Engish teacher. Nor areMy mistake, I guess it is a word. (see how easy it is to admit mistakes? Why don't you try it sometimes). Now, what did you mean by it in that context? If you're trying to accuse me of offering 4-year-olds as fodder for predators, then it's a damned disgusting lie just like I said it was. YOU'RE the one that used the term "break 18-month baby over it," and given the reference was regarding phludowin's advocacy of abortion at 18-months past birth it seems pretty obvious what you meant. So, again, for you to include me in something you know I never even discussed, and do not support, is just more evidence of what a disgusting human being you are. It was. Glad you're catching on. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 19:26:31 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:More like FTFYOFTP. And you'd better get on to explaining basic case to Bryce before it stops him cold in your previous post.  Just do it.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 19:34:58 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:More like FTFYOFTP. And you'd better get on to explaining basic case to Bryce before it stops him cold in your previous post. Just do it.Am I supposed to know what FTFYOFTP is supposed to mean? Or is that just more of rabbit's autistic "it makes sense in my brain so it should in everyone's" nonsense? Likewise: WTF are you talking about "explaining basic case to Bryce" and what "previous post?" There are a lot of previous posts. And again you link to that post with a nonsensical phrase without explaining what you think I need to reply to that I didn't already reply to. WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO REPLY TO IN THAT POST? |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 19:35:58 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:First you've got to tell me what "is" is. Whatever you can master each time, grashopper.  Take care not to overstretch.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 19:58:11 GMT
Dude, I responded to that post HERE. So what in your post do you think I failed to address with my post? It shouldn't be that difficult to answer the question of what significance you think your post has that I need to respond to again. Because right now I still stand by what I said in my response. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 20:02:48 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:Well, you know the "F", and by position and similar forms of your vapid usage you should be able to figure out the "T". The 3nd "F" is standard. The last "F" and the "P" you can likely guess by the theme of this discussion. Go! As you pathetically so often try so hard to convey  , I want you to learn, Mr. Bond.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 20:16:46 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:Well, you know the "F", and by position and similar forms of your vapid usage you should be able to figure out the "T". The 3nd "F" is standard. The last "F" and the "P" you can likely guess by the theme of this discussion. Go! So it was more of rabbit's autistic "it makes sense in my brain so it should in everyone's" nonsense. Thanks for clearing that up. Why can't you just answer a simple question? I'm not a mind reader. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 20:20:47 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:To "address" does not always, or with the youngy ones even frequently, "satisfactorily answer", grasshopper. Nor is, how is it said, gas-bagging words to new vistas like the great word master Arlon-F!. Once again.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jul 17, 2017 20:37:07 GMT
Jesus Christ, isn't it about time you guys started a new thread? It's 24 pages in and it's been 2 guys having a conversation about other universes on a thread that was about "child sex robots". Err, Bryce, there's only been a handful of replies on this multiverse tangent. The vast majority of the discussion has been between rabbit and I over the child sex robots and related pedophilia issues (and a lot of semantic/grammar confusion). I didn't realize cupcakes was rabbit. I'll have to put him back on ignore now. Thanks!  |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 20:39:22 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:To "address" does not always, or with the youngy ones even frequently, "satisfactorily answer", grasshopper. So what didn't I answer satisfactorily? Be specific. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 20:41:08 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:Sure, you doing your little pique flashdancing is a "mistake". And if I do something more than my not infrequent cumbersome prose, typos, and even last-edit-pass-lazily-skipped garble then I'll surely apologize. But whenever you dump your imbecilic diversionary spew, you'll just keep getting the figurative version of deezens's criteria. Here you go again, buckaboo - "someone who can support 4 year-olds being subject to sexual use by adults, or has to ponder if the big ill of pedophilia is just the stigma, or spends reams on trying to divert to general consent-based approaches as opposed to the specific criteria at hand, and lies profusely about that and other things - is either a pedophile, or as I've subsequently granted, profoundly broken in the social/empathy gland." No, it was language conveying both of you guys' induration (that's colorful language, beepaboo) (at the very least) to the consumption of minors.  Better get protesting! Learn from all your mistakes.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 20:58:58 GMT
tpfkar And if I do something more than my not infrequent cumbersome prose, typos, and even last-edit-pass-lazily-skipped garble then I'll surely apologize. You've repeatedly lied about me defending Eddie's position. Start your apologies there. 1. Haven't done that. 2. Haven't done that (wondering how much stigma contributes to the psychological effect of crimes is not pondering if it's "the big ill.") 3. You diverted to the specific criteria. My posts, from the very beginning, were about classifying Eddie's criteria as a consent-approach. I already proved this by linking to my first posts where I did so. 4. Haven't lied about anything, as both AJ and phlodowin attested to. You're just too stupid most of the time to understand what I'm saying so you warp it into lies in your mind. 5. Still doesn't follow. A pedophile is someone who's sexually attracted to children. I am not. Likewise, I'm not going to take seriously claims of being "profoundly broken in the social/empathy gland" from a guy who has no compunction about spewing blatant lies. This isn't making it any less disgusting. |
|
|
|
Post by Cinemachinery on Jul 17, 2017 21:03:24 GMT
Whoa this thread is still goi-- Oh it's Eva and Rabbit.  |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 21:04:31 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:Or perhaps "utter lack of respect for a ghastly autistic lacking any semblance of integrity, watch him dangle" And yet you still have your mind on it. I have complete faith in you armchair abilities.  Go! Try. Do. Not that!
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 21:06:16 GMT
Whoa this thread is still goi-- Oh it's Eva and Rabbit. You'd think I'd know better by now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jul 17, 2017 21:08:18 GMT
I'm going to ask one more time and then I'm done with this: what, specifically, do you want to respond to in that post that you think I didn't already satisfactorily respond to in my post HERE? |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 21:08:44 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:No. Drop a line in and we'll break it down again if you like. You... can..
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jul 17, 2017 21:13:38 GMT
tpfkar Topline: none of the surrounding wankery escapes the advocates criteria + criteria subject 4 year-olds to sexual use by adults. Nor the community service for rape thing. Eva Yojimbo said:I haven't told a single lie. And I don't expect any apologies to me for your thoroughly atrocious behavior nor any integrity in you at all. Disingenuous insipid "apologies" to the board, sure, like you did on the last board and then just ramped up you mania. You'll have the rest in a minute.  I utterly refuse to respond to rabbit in this thread.
but from what I remember it was journalofeddi who advocated for sex with children as young as 4 years old |
|
