Thread #547

>>570
>>566
>>565
>>563
>>562
>>561
>>560
>>559
>>558
This is like the text version of him yelling to himself in the video.
I hope everyone who reads this shit actually watches the video, in which he repeatedly asserts that there is *no* shame in finding an 11-year-old character played by a 14 (not 15, Alex; it does take TIME to make a TV show, you know.) -year-old "attractive," "appealing," etc. And this isn't Alex-style strawman scarequotes. He said these words himself several times. He the proceeded to call everyone in the room "stupid" and/or "malevolent" for opposing his casual sexual remarks about a kid.
Never mind the horrible irony between that insult and him actually being too shitty a person and too stupid to realize that all the things he's saying about her (e.g. "She's vivacious!" "she's CHARMING" "the creators of the show deliberately sexualize her") are about the CHARACTER and not the PERSON, meanwhile he laughs at our perceived inability to tell the difference. No, Alex, in this case it is clear, the difference between fantasy and reality, and the pertinent things about the two ARE NOT AT ODDS. You're a disgusting, shameless human being. I'm out.

>>572
I'm not denying any of your statements, because I'm agree. But Maisie Williams (Arya Stark), just made 16 yesterday April 15th, 2013. Still, that doesn't mean that Alex isn't a pedo.

>>573
Okay. But here:
2011-2013 Game of Thrones Arya Stark Main role (20 episodes)
Nominated – 2011 Scream Award for Best Ensemble
Won – 2012 Portal Award for Best Supporting Actress / Television
Won – 2012 Portal Award for Best Young Actor

In 2011-2013 she was barely a teenager at all, and that's the Arya he's hot for.

>>573
*I agree. Damn typos.

>>574
Yes, my point was that Alex keeps pointing out, as a defense, the current age of the actress, despite he has only seen episodes of the first season. So he's contradicting himself.

>>576
Right, and he also uses her FUTURE age ("In a year she'll be playing a pole-dancer!!!!!!!!") to justify his perversion, but that doesn't make it a fair self-assessment/accurate in any sense.

>>577
Of course, of course......Everyone agrees that Alex is a pedophile.....and a blackmailer.....and a liar.....and a murderer......blah blah blah.....That'll teach him to call us a bunch of sad nasty little shits, won't it?
I'm really not going to lower myself to arguing with you about whether a

>>578
If you're Alex, congratulations on childishly ignoring my point, which I made specifically for you, as I could have just let everyone circlejerk about you being a pedo unbothered. Fuck you, dude. You're actually the most dangerous kind of pedophile: The kind that doesn't feel any remorse... no, you don't feel like what you say and feel are wrong or worth questioning at all. There are tons of sex offenders exactly like that. Vile.

Are you people still discussing this? wow.

I can't believe liking kids is considered a horrendous crime at this corner of the internet.

>>581
Whether you like it or not, this so-called corner is public domain. Several well-adjusted people talk to each other by means of this very site. Can you try to deal with the fact that if you want a totally amoral place to air your weirdness, you should veer deeper into Deep Web?

>>582
Look I honestly can't handle the combined fascistic nature of the Tinychat - from which I have been repeatedly banned whenever I say anything that doesnt please Dolly or someone - and this posting system of Ely's, which appears to cut off a post every time some idiot interrupts with an insult.
Someone is going on above about speaking "for me" somehow - which hardly seems to jibe very well with his calling me a "sex offender" two lines later.
This shit is just insane - and if you can't SEE that it is then you must either be insane or too choked with malevolence to recognize anything even faintly resembling reason.
I'm a "sex offender" now, it seems, because I made a remark in a chatroom about a 15-year-old actress. Are you people nuts? The only society I know in which such a thing would constitute an "offence" is the one described by George Orwell in "1984";
This whole pseudo-discussion is, as I say, nothing except a bunch of people who hate me and who have hated me for years thrashing desperately around looking for yet another stick they can beat me with because I didn't give them the love

>>583
Then don't, Alex. Go the fuck away. No one would miss you.

>>582 Are you actually "offended" by weirdness? What the fuck.

>>586 Pedophilia =/= child molesting. Liking something doesn't make you a horrible person.

>>585
The sort of weirdness that encourages the defense of pedophilia? Yes, that offends me a lot.

>>585I
I never said pedophilia = child molesting. Both are reprehensible, and if you ask 100 pedophiles whether they have/ever would actually lay a hand on a child, they would all enthusiastically say NO. But that isn't true, and children are the easiest people on Earth to manipulate. You can't expect someone with THAT - or any, really - paraphilia to NEVER, EVER act on it. So sorry, anyone/anything that turns a blind eye or actively supports feelings of sexual attraction to children IS dangerous. DOES normalize pedophilia. DOES indirectly contribute to molestation.

>>587
This sounds like saying "liking money is likely to make you a thief". People aren't that uncontrolled.

>>588
PEOPLE ARE NOT OBJECTS. Children and sex are not equivalent to money at all. sick of these bullshit attempts to (can you let me reply, or do you want to take this to TC? Nobody's going to be fucked reading these out of order.)

>>589
People are not objects. which is why people will be much more likelier to be self-controlled about their actions concerning humans.

>>590
I'll say one last thing before I tear myself from this page for the rest of the day: if only that were true, but it ISN'T. What more predictably and reliably controls people's unethical urges is not that sense of inherent goodness that you estimate the majority of pedos to have, but cultural norms that FORBID the flippant confessions of finding children sexy, and secondarily, undesirable REPERCUSSIONS for actually harming a kid, which unfortunately are not all that imminent to people who commit sex crimes against children, as the majority of these abuses go unreported. Look, I'm asking anyone who reads this to try to have some compassion for people who were harmed directly or indirectly by child porn, lolicon, shotacon, and even mainstream not-clearly-immoral-coded things like people online saying Arya Stark is "appealing" or "has erotic appeal." Okay? These things, no matter how small, do contribute to a general understanding that the majority of messed up things aimed at children are "grey area" and therefore permissible. >>592 You can go fuck yourself.

shut the fuck up you fool

please stop pretending that this is a fair and rational discussion.....

you are inviting people to "discuss" my sexuality with

>>591 Mm, I agree with what you're saying. But I still thing those things are pretty small contributions. And are not worth ostracizing people who like kids, welp.

>>595
perfectly well that I have been deprrived of that right.....spew your demagogic lies and hatred as much as you wish; But PLEASE stop pretending that you are discussing or debating ANYTHING
You are a gang of bullying; terrorizing thugs who shout down and silence anyone who disagrees with you

>>595 And in any case, I haven't watched the video or anything but no one seems to be talking about actual kids, but a 15-year-old. Have I missed something?

>>597
Oh for fuck's sake will you stop treating this infantile vicious little collective hate-trip as if it had anything to do with TALKING about ANYTHING?
People in this shitty "community" have been slinging vicious groundless lies at me for YEARS about how I "want to molest children" etc (including; of course, the two "children" in their mid-twenties in Shoreditch). Being a good, guileless man who cannot REALLY believe that Dolly and Camel and the others are the UTTER CUNTS that they actually are even after all these years experience of them, I HANDED them the ammunition that they have been gagging for last night by saying that I found the fantasy figure of Anya Stark or whatever her name is kind of attractive;
This or any one of a dozen things - my saying that I enjoyed watching "Leon the Profi Killer" or reading "Lolita" could have kicked off this vengeful hate-binge; It just happened to be this.
They're just scum, mad to humiliate and punish me because I have insisted on pointing out what consistently deeply shitty users sites like this attract.
I think the fact that one of the gang of five or six people spewing, eating up, and re-spewing all this stuff about my having said I was sexually excited by a 15 year old in the chat last night was himself in fact someone who had been questioned by the police for FUCKING a 15 year old says it all; doesn't it? How can you POSSIBLY carry on a serious conversation with these people in the light of THAT?
This is not about "children" or "underage sex" or anything vaguely related to that. If the hate being spewed wasnt this particular hate, it would be another kind - something to do with me "harassing" and "threatening" Kimi and RavRav or something (i.e; equally unfounded and ridiculous total crap).
The bottom line is: I don't LOVE you all, so YOU DON'T WANT ME HERE. And you're going to screech and lie and ban and harass and bait until I leave; and let you sink back into your dream and delusion of what lovely, lovely people

You are all missing the point. The point is wether this last episode of Alex's retardness is proof enough to finally expell him from this place. Vote:

http://impoll.net/cgi-bin/pp.cgi?p=10522

>>598
I don't think it's about you (although you will not agree). It's just Loli and a few others thinking a tinychat is a public announcement board where people's opinions on anything change thousands of peoples' lives.

>>598
Oh yeah, the recording and immediate posting of this was probably an attack on you, no question there.

you all are

>>601
Yeah well, the important thing to me is that no one except the little gang of haters themselves is fooled into imagining that there is actually any ISSUE here at all. Disgusting hypocrites like the person going on above about how "children are not objects", as if the "fight against Alex" were some sort of noble moral crusade against a notorious "predator" (oh yeah, the same "predator" who "preyed" on Kimi and Stephanie and supported them gently and selflessly for years without getting even a kind word of friendship in return), SHOULD be exposed for the hypocrites they are.
The "fight against Alex" is nothing but the fight against someone who has had the decency to speak frankly and truthfully to these people, about both himself and them. It is a fight that they are conducting with methods so vicious and underhand that they would discredit even a LEGITIMATE cause. Used to defend a cause as illegitimate as the hollow, insatiable vanity of Dolly or Camel or the wounded "internet big-shot" self-image of pathetic creeps like Shroud or Suede, these methods are just disgusting.
PLEASE don't give these fuckers the credibility of engaging in their sick pseudo-debate about just how old the 100 per cent fictional fantasy figure of Anja or whoever the fuck Stark is supposed to be and what it says about a person that they find her attractive.
It's nonsense placed in the service of vanity and hate. Leave them to wallow in their hate by themselves

>>603
There is an issue, it's just that you are too moronic to understand it.

Don't feel bad though, it isn't your fault you are a pedo, it's just part of your damaged brain.

what is the issue, then?

>>605
Are you seriously going to accuse all of the thousands of millions of people who have watched and enjoyed Japanese anime featuring fantasy schoolgirls doing impossible things of being "pedophiles"?

Not that I actually have watched many such anime, they're not really my thing

Oh I see, your policy is : shout "pedo pedo pedo" and run away.....What a surprise.....Well, you've banned me from the Tinychat now, so you are free to tell your lies to Camel, who will confirm them for you, and she will tell her lies to Suede, who will confirm THEM for HER.....and no one needs to be disturbed by the truth

>>605 The issue seems to be >>591 this. I don't consider it an issue, really.

>>609
Anyone using the word "seems" in a post is bound to be one of the "sitting on the fence" cunts, like Schwill. PLEASE, shut the fuck up unless you are going to say what NEEDS to be said to these lying vicious bastards

>>610
Don't be like that. You're acting like them now.
Taking a board/chatroom ultra seriously.

>>611
Never mind how I am acting. I am not prepared to be submerged by some crazy formless ocean of "we must oppose certain attitudes that are vaguely diffused throughout society".....ESPECIALLY not when the person who is posting that kind of self-righteous PC flim-flammery is CHUMMING AROUND WITH A STATUTORY RAPIST for God's sake
You make me as sick as the rest of them.

http://impoll.net/cgi-bin/pp.cgi?p=10522

>>613
Look, let me give you some historical perspective on this kind of nonsense; If you do some research on the life of the British author Graham Greene you will probably come across the incident where half the world started calling for his blood when he wrote a review of a fim starring Shirley Temple - a child star at the time - pointing out that a large part of her appeal to her audience was sexual.
Greene was not a pedophile. But I have no doubt that he was made the object of hundreds of pompous denunciations by characters like the person who posted above, claiming that to even POINT OUT that a child star like Temple could be seen that way was to "encourage child abuse" and so on

>>614
I find hilarious how you love to compare yourself with characters of significant historical importance. You are nothing, Alex, you will be remembered by no one. Get over yourself already.

Your contributions to the existence of mankind are below zero.

>>615
And yes, for anyone who needs further instruction about the nature of just what is going on here, this latest piece of snide abuse, delivered from the safety of a chatroom I've been banned from; is pretty instructive.
When the "you're a pedo" thing begins to get a bit old, you can always switch over to the "you're nobody, you're a failure" thing, and when that gets old over to the "you tried to blackmail Kimi" thing or whatever;
You see, the accusation DOESN'T MATTER, All that matters is: HATE ALEX....he won't be our friend, so HATE HIM

>>616
I doubt the people who hate you have a hivemind. >>615 makes sense in the way that no one cares what you like or don't like and therefore ostracizing you on the assumption or belief that you're a pedophile is fucking meaningless.

>>617
who gives a fuck what you doubt or don't doubt......you're a little coward shooting off cheap lying inults at someone from a place where you know he can't get at you

>>618 lol what. I haven't insulted you.

>>619
Oh no, of course.....I'm sure you are Schwill or someone.....one of my "friends".....Jesus Christ, if you think ANY evidence of ANY warmth or fairness toward me has been given by ANYONE on this thread, yourself included, then you ARE crazy.
How do you think I feel about "benevolent" "fair-minded" "non-insulting" posts like yours that just prefer to "shelve the question" of whether I am or am not a pedophile? ANYONE with ANY sense of decency would clearly and immediately denounce this whole bullshit witchhunt as just that

>>620 I know there were no posts friendly to you. I just said I haven't insulted you.

As I've said, there is no reason to discuss this. I think you're taking it needlessly seriously, like Loli does. I don't believe you're a pedophile but an ephebophile, if that matters.

>>621
Failing to say right out "this pedo stuff is BULLSHIT, Alex, I KNOW this'" IS an insult as far as I am concerned

>>622
It's an insult to me to say that I am even THAT; Do I really have to explain why?

THE craziest and most surreal part of all this is the glaring Orwellian failure to draw ANY distinction between THINKING something and DOING it. In fact, its even CRAZIER. As I said, one of the people who was jeering at and cursing me for having THOUGHT about the sexual aspect of an "ephebe" was someone who had actually FUCKED one and been prevented by the police from continuing to do so.
I would only accept being called an "ephebophile" if I spent my days running around trying to entice 14- and 15-year-old girls into my bed. I do NOT do this, never have, and never will.
Therefore, saying that you "believe I am an ephebophile" is an INSULT. I am no more an "ephebophile" than any other man of perfectly normal sexuality who occassionally indulges in schoolgirl fantasies.. But no one calls 99 per cent of the THOUSANDS OF MILLIONS of men who do that an "ephebophile"
Clear?

>>623 Pff, it's hopeless. You're too easily offended.

>>624 >failure to draw ANY distinction between THINKING something and DOING it.

That's what I've been saying above. Also, if you're going into the suede thing again, don't, it's getting boring.

>>624
Aha, we just see the same word differently. You think philes are the "act"ors. I think they're labelled philes because of their thoughts.

>>627
Well, to you, let me say this; saying "don't talk about Suede, it's boring" in this situation is something roughly equivalent to a man on trial for minor assault being told "please try to ignore the fact that the judge and jury here have all committed multiple murders and were never tried for it"

>>629
I was saying it's getting boring because you're on no trial here. Although it's starting to seem like that.

In any case, I thought you and suede had talked about suede's adventures with the police a few months ago and decided that there was no fucking going on, or maybe I'm remembering it wrong, nevermind.

>>628
And as to

>>630
Well, let me deal with this first; as it IS pretty indicative of the quality of "knowledge" on which this "discussion" is being conducted. No, it's nothing to do with "doublethink", just simple ignorance. You adopt this blithe "I'm doing no harm" attitude and yet you blithely spread disinformation.
LISTEN to the recording that was made yesterday. Suede openly confirms to Dolly that full sexual intercourse DID occur betwreen him and a girl under 16. Dolly take a few seconds off to tell him how much she sympathizes and then gets back to calling me a sick disgusting animal for THINKING about sexual relations with a 15 year old

in before doublethink
(I'm not trying to defend anyone if you think I am)

>>632
Oh okay, sorry. I actually am taking this too blithely.

>>634
Yes, you are. These people are deeply vicious nasty unprincipled people who will say ANY shit, however false or self-contradictory, when they spot an opportunity - which I, in my honesty and guillelessness, gave them - of avenging the wounds I inflicted on their vanity

>>628
And if the "phile" person is not the same person, I will say that your "contribution' seems to me equally "harmlessly' harmful. Despite the Greek etymology and so on, I think we both know how words with "-phile" are used today. They tend to be used not to describe people with MILD PREFERENCES for a thing but people with EXCLUSIVE FIXATIONS on that thing. In actual parlance, "ephebophile" is used to mean someone who CAN ONLY feel desire for, say, 12 to 16 year olds and who is therefore almost bound to strike up an actual sexual relationship with one at some point in his life.
That is NOT my case. I have occasionally found 15 and 16 year old girls attractive - I would argue that about 70 per cent of normal hetrosexual men have at one point or another - but I have also found women of 20, 25, 30, 35 or older attractive.
I am no more an "ephebophile", then, in the sense in which the term is actually used, than I am a "pedophile"

>>636
Agreed. I hate the implications of words with -phile anyway. I should stop using them. I hate the fact that people have converted the completely non-sexual love into out of the mainstream sexual interests (fuck, can't delete. disregard the grammatical weirdness of the sentence).

whoa what is this clusterfuck. Just read this thread and watched 1.20minutes of the video and so far i can only agree with alex (except maybe about the suede thing, depending on how it's interpreted). This indeed looks like a bunch of groupthink, witch hunt, hysteria, thought crime persecution, not applicable and misguided USA-style "think of the children" exclamations, hypocritical aura, black and white thinking, slippery slope fallacies, anti-honesty statements, semantic bullshit and [deliberate] misinterpretations, revenge "justice", nonexistent moral high ground, gross generalizations, unscientific and most likely anecdotal evidence based statements asserted as facts, and perhaps a bunch more fallacies, made by a bunch of ex-crackyfags (how old was she again?), half of them who pride themselves on being well read, but all of them unable of clear, unbiased, critical thinking.
you deserve each other

>>638
At last, a bit of common sense spoken about this matter. Some of the points are made more clearly than I myself would have been able to make them, since I am (understandably) rather angry about this whole business.
"Slippery slope thinking" is a very good term for the kind of pseudo-humane, pseudo-righteous homilies that someone was coming out with a few posts back about how anyone admitting that precocious, athletic early-teenage girls sometimes give off a certain sexually stimulating aura is "objectively encouraging and promoting child-molestation" or some such bullshit.
Even assuming that that stuff IS "well-meant" - which I doubt it is, in the present context of "any-stick-to-beat-an-Alex-with" - what "slope" are we being encouraged to slip down here? Is the poster calling for a winding back of history and human consciousness a couple of hundred years to an early Victorian era before Freud and psychoanalysis, when children were assumed to be interested in pretty flowers and toy soldiers entirely and exclusively until they were 21?
As the last poster says, "black and white thinking" like Dolly's and Camel's - which ALL of you bought into so uncritically and enthusiastically last night - must be sent back to the kindergarten where it belongs. Recognizing that there is a sexual dimension to the interaction between adults and children does not make you a leering, slavering child molestor. And running around like a headless chicken screaming for the Thought Police or National Guard every time someone alludes to the beauty or the fascination of an individual under 18 does not make you a "normal" or "well-balanced" individual. On the contrary, it points rather to your suffering from some deeply repressed problems in this regard yourself. The Stark girl - the actress in part, and in part the fantasy figure she helps to create - is beautiful and exciting. I really have no time for, or belief in, your silly, shallow chest-puffing denials that you perceive either of

>>638
Gtfo Faith nobody cares about what you think. You are here for the sole reason of hoping that one day Alex will become truly gay and go find you and fuck you in the ass.

these things. They are solely intended to cry from the rooftops - well, at least the rooftops of your little 'group hug' - the news that you are 'normal'". And people who bleat and bellow most loudly about their "normality" seldom actually possess it.
And was that Faith? Possibly, I suppose, since he is the only one who has ever judged me with any fairness or intelligence unclouded by hatred here. Whatever the facts about him, I doubt that anything he wrote, if he wrote it, was motivated by "gayness". His points are objectively and internally sound and coherent - and the fact that you fail or refuse to recognize that is a case wort bearing in mind of that thing that is so often alluded to here without being understood: the "ad hominem" attack.
And finally, to "Faith" again: I suspect that the "Suede business" is sadly less open to interpretation than you think it is. It's just an unequivocal case of sex with an underage girl, nothing more, nothing less.
I've tended to let it pass in recent months, though, and refer as seldom as I can. I can hardly be expected NOT to bring it up, though, when I find THIS guy, of all people, joining in a mob screeching and screaming at me for just THINKING about sex with an underage girl...But enough...

There is so much samefagging in here, it's ridiculous.

>>641
A hundred pages of writing, and all you are saying is that you are a pedo. Learn to be concise please, you are no longer a child.

>>640
not faith

>>644 Poor attempt at a rile-up post. Still, it may get Alex to respond.

>>646
GAAAAAAAAH FUUUUUUUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!! Say that o my faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace.....screeches and howls of impotent middle-aged rage

If there is one thing everyone can get behind it's the beat Alex with a stick bandwagon.

>>648
No, but all humour aside, I think you should delete this ridiculous vindictive shit from your board, Ely. If Shroud and Schwill want to let their Tinychat be turned into some kind of fascist pseudo-PC domain by Camel and Dolly, I suppose it"s their business. II hate em all and they hate me, so yeah, I hardly have any business there.
But this "Big discovery! Alex thinks teenage warrior princesses are kind of sexy so - wow! - turns out we WERE right and he wants to fuck little girls" is just so fucking weak that it is turning your board from shit into one of those nasty little pieces of shrivelled-up DRIED shit that you see lying on the road in summer-time sometimes.
Threads like this serve no useful or positive purpose except to provide intelligent people with evidence that my condemnations of the lingering dregs of the Crackyverse as a bunch of cowardly, evil-minded nasty little creeps and shits were GOING TOO EASY on them.
Clear this infantile silly vindictive junk out, will you - if only for the sake of your board

I love you ALL, but this thread is so dumb. Alex is a pest but fuck these Daily Mail comment threads.

Alex has jerked off to this scene countless times:
http://autunni.tumblr.com/post/40058418333

Please remember that you are arguing with Dolly, a girl so delusional she actually faked a suicide attempt to "prove a point" (her own words) to her own parents.

>>655
I heard she bought 50 dicks on amazon.com and sucked them all

>>547 (OP)
OK. An interesting discovery - and the last word on this vicious bullshit.
After ranting about various cultural topics on the Boxxy board for a few weeks, I had the good fortune to be directed by someone to the 4Chan /lit/ board - where I have been happily working off my neuroses by posting in threads on Immanuel Kant, Italo Calvino, Louis-Ferdinand Celine and a dozen other writers for about a week now.
Inevitably, there are also several Game of Thrones / Song of Ice and Fire threads on /lit/. I also posted a couple of times on these since, although I have never read the books, the grotesque over-praise of the TV series as something of a comparable order of depth to The Sopranos annoys me greatly.
My opinions about the quality of GoT aside, though, a piece of information about the books the series is based on came to my attention in the course of one of the thread discussions that I think WOULD, in a community of decent and fair-minded people, put a definitive end to this bullshit right away, and prompt everyone involved in it to offer me a formal apology. (Why do I feel that this won't quite be the result HERE?)

I have been repeatedly charged in this thread with committing, instigating or propagating all sorts of terrible social evils by mentioning in a chat-room that a girl in late childhood played by a mid-teenage actress could be experienced as an object of sexual desire. Most of the "charges", admittedly, have just been illiterate /b/board style abuse and baiting but there has also, of course, been all the pseudo-'gender-political' talk à la Dolly about opinions like this contributing to an evil and harmful perception of children in society etc etc. We have heard people say or seen people write that any allusion to the sexuality or sexual appeal of a girl not yet fully adult made among a Game of Thrones audience in a bar would inevitably lead to righteous mass violence against the person (me) making the allusion, that references to the sexual lives of underage girls in George Martin's fantasy world should only be made in the Deep Web, amidst shameful secret communities of like-minded sickos etc etc.
Let me communicate three facts / sets of facts here, the third of which I learnt only yesterday from the 4Chan /lit/ board
i) George R R Martin's Song of Ice and Fire books, on which Game of Thrones is based, have sold 15 million copies worldwide. They represent a massive forming influence on the perceptions particularly of younger people regarding social, sexual and gender matters (at least if one makes the - highly questionable - assumption that has been being made throughout this whole thread that the characters and events of fantasy fiction really do affect social attitudes).
ii) One of the early volumes of the series features scenes in which Daeerys Targaryen is fondled in a sexual manner by her brother, subjected to a long, sensually-described bathing and perfuming by a beautiful servant girl, has full sexual intercourse on her wedding night with a huge barbarian chieftain in the prime of manhood, learns various erotic tricks and arts from an ex-prostitute and applies

these to her husband, and goes on to lead a full and happy sexual life with this man until his death a few months later.
iii) At the time of these (fictional) events the (fictional) Daenerys Targaryen is.....wait for it......13 years old.

Now I personally am not impressed enough by the TV Game of Thrones to want to read the Song of Ice and Fire novels, but if I were to read them, I wouldn't have any more of a problem with this than 15 million readers, HBO, varous awarders of fantasy fiction and other prizes etc etc seem to have had. Because I, you see - like the great majority of sane and intelligent people who are not casting desperately around for some channel through which to vent their seething hatred of Alex Reynolds - look on the world of Song of Ice and Fire / Game of Thrones as a fantasy world which bears no relation at all to the world of actual sexual practices or any actual sexual desires that would ever be acted on.

But you people, of course, as is amply demonstrated by this thread, believe that there is a close and necessary connection between even THINKING about an underage girl - even a totally fantastic, cartoony underage girl who can walk through fire unharmed etc - in a sexual context and the actual practice of kidnapping, molesting and raping girls of that age

I quote :

I never said pedophilia = child molesting. Both are reprehensible, and if you ask 100 pedophiles whether they have/ever would actually lay a hand on a child, they would all enthusiastically say NO. But that isn't true, and children are the easiest people on Earth to manipulate. You can't expect someone with THAT - or any, really - paraphilia to NEVER, EVER act on it. So sorry, anyone/anything that turns a blind eye or actively supports feelings of sexual attraction to children IS dangerous. DOES normalize pedophilia. DOES indirectly contribute to molestation

So OK, it seems to me that you have a choice here. You can either

i) immediately stop reading all George R R Martin books, stop watching all episodes of Game of Thrones, and organize a big march to the man's house to demand his arrest, boycotting, public lynching or whatever. I mean, let's be clear here, this is a man who has "actively supported feelings of sexual attraction toward children" by portraying at great length and in great detail a 13-year-old child having sexual intercourse with a grown man, very soon learning to actively enjoy it, and even profssing undying love for this man all long before her 14th birthday. I mean, we've established that any audience of the Game of Thrones TV series in a bar would just FUCKING TEAR APART anyone who came up with a scenario like that, right? Admittedly, it would be kind of embarrassing for them that they'd be tearing apart the same guy as wrote the scenario for the TV series they're watching and greatly enjoying, but really that's just a detail....

or

ii) you can all formally apologize to me as a way of ending this stupid thread, which I also think would be best deleted once all the formal apologies are in.

I don't really think any long or elaborate form of words is needed in this instance. Just something like:
"I'm sorry Alex. There is just no denying now that I WAS talking completely out of my ass on this one. If you are an "enabler of pedophilia" or a "pedophile" then so are George Martin and his millions of readers. This whole thing was vicious bullshit; Sorry;"

Frankly, I don't seriously expect any such apology from the really hopeless cases amongst you - I mean obvious and incorrigible liars and cunts like Suede and that thick-lipped coon who claims to be a Mexican and who started this vicious thread in the first place.
But I'm actually not as lacking in faith in people as I'm made out to be, so I don't consider it entirely beyond the bounds of possibility that "rescue-able" people like Schwill, Suede, possibly even Dolly or Camel, might decide to do the obviously right thing here and apologize.

Also Leon and Lolita exist, therefore I am not a pedophile.

>>667
I'm sorry, you're going to have to clarify that.

Did I claim at any point that fictional characters exist?

Oh, sorry, I see. It was just an attempt to retort in some way to an argument that it is actually logically impossible to retort to.

OK, you've saved a little face, whoever you are.

Now just admit you were wrong and apologize.

That, or shut your stupid mouth.

>>660
woah woah woah... hang on... did you just wrote that you've been hanging out in a boxxy board? Wtf there is no mercy for faggot boxxyfags here.

Please ban this fag, boxxyfags have no room in the wired.

>>669
Yeah, I did just wrote that......(Holy Mother of Jesus, being a "grammar Nazi" about the scribblings of a retard like this guy would be using a Howitzer to swat a house-fly. Are there any Grammar Right-Wing Democrats out there?)

I love this thread so much~

>>671
Yes. It is a lovely thread. It has, in any case, effectively demonstrated the development of whatever one wishes to call this ex-"community" into an effectively fascist gathering. I won't bother trying to explain why the word "fascist" really isn"t too strong in this case. Clearly, explanations are pointless. Discussion is pointless. Reasoned argument is pointless. No one is going to try to answer any of the points I have made in my own defence in this thread - and in your condemnation - and the attempt to confront any of the people who contributed to it in the Tinychat now always takes the same inevitable course.
I enter, to find Camel or Dolly discoursing quietly and sweetly on such noble topics as gender equality or gay rights, as if they were Assistant Professors in these areas at respected universities. The few other remaining semi-members of the Crackyverse sit at their knee and gaze up at them with the admiration and tenderness that such beacons of humanity and enlightenment deserve.
Nobody but me seems to be struck at all by the marked (even if marked by me alone) transformation that occurs as soon as I enter the room. Camel maintains her carefully cultivated semblance of rationality for maybe thirty seconds - but Dolly goes into full mob hysteria mode in the first five, spitting infantile jeers at my accnent, my age, even my grammar (a new and obviously desperate contention, that) and ropes in the ever-malleable loser "boyfriend" to add some further volume and drag the whole thing a year or two further down the scale of mental and emotional age. Camel can't maintain her facade of reason and dialogue under the battering of Dolly and her appendage"s "He wants to fuck an 11 year old!! Ban him ban him ban him NOW!" and she grabs at the "feminine" passive-aggressive variant of fascist brutality and pleads "Oh I just can't handle it.....Oh I feel so threatened right now."
At this point, inevitably, Schwill leaves off his engrossed enjoyment of the

volume - or is it volumes? - of Song of Ice and Fire where a prostitute instructs a 13 year old in the arts of ensuring that her adult husband finds so much pleasure in penetration of her that she can lead the continuing sexual congress in the direction that pleases her and rushes to rescue the poor reasonable humane friendly girls from the malevolent pedophile by banning him - for the fourth time in a week.
I think I get the message. Hope the last 15 minutes of naked and undeniable fascism won't make it any more difficult for you to continue pretending to be reasonable, decent human beings:
But what am I saying? I know it won"t.

>>673
eat a dick
bitch ass faggot

>>673
blah blah blah pedophilia rocks

>>675
quod....

>>676
erat....

>>677
demonstrandum

bitch ass nigga

Won't someone please think of the children!!?? Seriously, take your pedo hysteria and shove it up your ass with a pinapple for a cork.

>>1173
pedophile detected

>>1173

>>1175
are you >implying there's anything wrong with that?

thanks for bumping the thread, those screenshots are golden

>>1177
no bro raping children is hella ok

>>1184
>being a pedo is wrong because of rapists
bretty clever ruse

>>1173
>>1175
>>1176
>>1177
>>1184
>>1192
Stop bumping the thread, retards. If you want drama go talk to dolly on a chat room or sth.