Page 4 of 4
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Tue 05 Jul 2011, 11:46 pm
by York Minster
gregf wrote:@scapaflow.
That picture of Obama is used by the extreme right in America, the Klu Klux Clan right.
I find it even more disturbing then your discussion here.
You really are circling the drain hole aren't you.
This is a worth while community ; my advice is to value being here.
Why do you find my discussion here disturbing? Because I say that children are sexual beings? Is that really so shocking for everyone?
And it must be so obvious how far right I am by this discussion.
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Tue 05 Jul 2011, 11:47 pm
by York Minster
If anyone takes issue with my avatar, I ask you, what does my avatar MEAN? (not who is it used by)
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 12:20 am
by skyhigh
Scapa Flow wrote:skyhigh wrote:Wonder how many paedophiles base their desires on theory.....
Probably none?
funny that!
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 1:42 am
by York Minster
skyhigh wrote:Scapa Flow wrote:skyhigh wrote:Wonder how many paedophiles base their desires on theory.....
Probably none?
funny that!
What are you on about?
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 6:18 am
by Undertaker
Scapa Flow wrote:gregf wrote:@scapaflow.
That picture of Obama is used by the extreme right in America, the Klu Klux Clan right.
I find it even more disturbing then your discussion here.
You really are circling the drain hole aren't you.
This is a worth while community ; my advice is to value being here.
Why do you find my discussion here disturbing? Because I say that children are sexual beings? Is that really so shocking for everyone?
And it must be so obvious how far right I am by this discussion.
I think it's because you have made several posts in different topics that seem to obsess over young girls and sex. It's very odd behaviour IMO. Personally, i think you are doing it for attention and to be controversial because you know you can't insult people or break the rules.
If it was a one off, fair enough but you keep going on and on about kids in different threads.
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 7:32 am
by York Minster
Please be aware that I didn't start the discussion about kids here, it was brought up by skyhigh when he brought up pedofilia.
As far as this issue goes, all I can tell everyone is, this is my view. I don't hold it just for fun, just to have a laugh.
But what I'm really interested in is opinions a about pansexuality. Which, in theory, has nothing to do with kids.
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 8:15 am
by raggatwin
Scapa Flow wrote:raggatwin wrote:I think Freudians account for foot fetishes as developmental. Boys kept at a distance from their mother, usually at her feet and therefore do not develop a full attachment.
Scapa I've just read you think sex with sixteen year olds is okay, can you clarify this position please? I teach sixteen year olds and they really are rather silly. Please do not see this as a reversal, I still accept the social construction perspective, though do not condone sex with children..... or sixteen year olds...
It depends on age and maturity of both parties. Most 16 year olds are immature in our world. But some are not. If the other party is, say 16 or 18 years old, then I find no problem with it at all. Could I concieve of a 30 year old and 16 year old working sexually together? Perhaps, though in general, that doesn't seem like a good idea. It's not a black and white issue. Just calling all 16 year olds "rather silly" doesn't work as an argument for me (but I do understand what you mean).
Okay, I see where you are coming from.
Re: Pansexuality - what IS it?
Posted: Wed 06 Jul 2011, 11:04 am
by skyhigh
Scapa Flow wrote:
What are you on about?
You and your attempts to appear intelligent and give reason to your odd little thoughts.