Prince Philip Dead | Ceremonial Funeral to take place on Saturday 17th April | Prince Andrew is NOT a pedophile

esmufc07 said:
We are a batshit crazy country

Click to expand...


It's a pretty smart move by the Tories.

They get to reel off a load of bull that plays to what will mostly be their voting base, whilst their rivals have to spiel off a load of nonsense they have to pretend to care about despite it going against what a lot of their base feels.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Found @tugger 's Twitter, I see.
Click to expand...

I never experienced any kind of servitude to HRH, though I can only imagine he largely was a benevolent master, short of the odd moment of anger at a subordinate.

Though a source close to the Windsor’s did once divulge that His Royal Highness would only wipe his buttocks on the pillow cases of the house staff. After he had completed staff were not allowed to boil wash the case, they were only allowed to run it under a cold tap for 30 seconds, whilst attempting no more than three strategic brush strokes at the stain, before air drying the case and reusing it the same night.

This was particularly unpleasant for whomever was on the receiving end of his evening ablutions. Many staff would forgo sleep in this instance, as they did not want to wake up with a shitty pillow stuck to the side of their head, or having been “Duked” as it came to be known.
 
The BBC have a devoted Prince Philip section of the news website now. Presumably for if you need to check that he's still dead.

4j9WerJ.png
 

On another note, British news stations are unwatchable at this point.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Yeah, he's a pedophilic rapist who refuses to work with multiple authorities' investigations.

He fecked kids and lied about it, is what I'm trying to say.
Click to expand...
So far there have been no allegations that his primary sexual desires have been for prepubescent children, instead adolescents under the legal age of consent.
 
The Firestarter said:
So much better.
Click to expand...
oates said:
I'm not saying it is better, just that unfortunately Pigeon's post was inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Is there evidence he met the girl when she was under 16? I know Maxwell and Epstein were involved with them from very young.

Both are incredibly wrong but it really is much better that it is not a prepubescent child. Not sure how that could be debated.

The fact the royals still have anything to do with him is the only thing I really have against our Monarchs. On that alone we should get rid.
 
bsCallout said:
Is there evidence he met the girl when she was under 16? I know Maxwell and Epstein were involved with them from very young.

Both are incredibly wrong but it really is much better that it is not a prepubescent child. Not sure how that could be debated.

The fact the royals still have anything to do with him is the only thing I really have against our Monarchs. On that alone we should get rid.
Click to expand...
Put simply, it isn't better in any way. I just think it is better to call out a child rapist and molester with the correct descriptor. That and I want @Mr Pigeon to bob his head in shame.
 
oates said:
Put simply, it isn't better in any way. I just think it is better to call out a child rapist and molester with the correct descriptor. That and I want @Mr Pigeon to bob his head in shame.
Click to expand...

You don't think going with someone under say 11 is worse than going with someone 15(may have been 16)? One of them potentially could look older than 18, the other is a kid no matter how you look at them. :confused:
 
bsCallout said:
You don't think going with someone under say 11 is worse than going with someone 15(may have been 16)? One of them potentially could look older than 18, the other is a kid no matter how you look at them. :confused:
Click to expand...
That's clearly not what he's saying.

It's just a distinction - paedophiles are those with a sexual attraction to children i.e. before the onset of puberty, 'prepubescent'.

Epstein, Prince Andrew and their ilk aren't paedophiles in the literal sense. @oates hasn't condoned either behaviour.
 
bsCallout said:
You don't think going with someone under say 11 is worse than going with someone 15(may have been 16)? One of them potentially could look older than 18, the other is a kid no matter how you look at them. :confused:
Click to expand...
No, and I could bore everyone's arse off talking about that but it isn't the point of my initial post to @Mr Pigeon - my belief is that any child molestation or rape has equal potential to be horrifically and life-long damaging.

Conflating Pedophilia and Child Molestation isn't great because the two are completely different things. Pedophilia is the desire relating to prepubescent children but it is also important to realise that it isn't an act in and of itself, but also that a large percentage of pedophiles manage to suppress the desire and never in fact act upon the desires.

Pedophilia when acted upon is child molestation but with a different age group.
 
The Corinthian said:
That's clearly not what he's saying.

It's just a distinction - paedophiles are those with a sexual attraction to children i.e. before the onset of puberty, 'prepubescent'.

Epstein, Prince Andrew and their ilk aren't paedophiles in the literal sense. @oates hasn't condoned either behaviour.
Click to expand...

To be fair he said one isn't 'better'. It's a bizarre debate to be honest. One is just clearly much worse on many levels though. The Duke of York could have genuinely been informed she was of legal age and believed it(although unlikely).
 
oates said:
No, and I could bore everyone's arse off talking about that but it isn't the point of my initial post to @Mr Pigeon - my belief is that any child molestation or rape has equal potential to be horrifically and life-long damaging.

Conflating Pedophilia and Child Molestation isn't great because the two are completely different things. Pedophilia is the desire relating to prepubescent children but it is also important to realise that it isn't an act in and of itself, but also that a large percentage of pedophiles manage to suppress the desire and never in fact act upon the desires.

Pedophilia when acted upon is child molestation but with a different age group.
Click to expand...

In some countries, including western countries, at the age of 15 they would be 'legal'. The other instance they haven't even reached puberty. I mean I don't know how anyone can think that isn't worse.
 
bsCallout said:
In some countries, including western countries, at the age of 15 they would be 'legal'. The other instance they haven't even reached puberty. I mean I don't know how anyone can think that isn't worse.
Click to expand...
Well that is what you believe and I've no desire to, as I said, bore the arse off everyone having a debate about it.

Before I retired (more or less) I worked with adolescents who had been abused as both prepubescent and adolescents and have formed my beliefs from my own experiences.
 
oates said:
Well that is what you believe and I've no desire to, as I said, bore the arse off everyone having a debate about it.

Before I retired (more or less) I worked with adolescents who had been abused as both prepubescent and adolescents and have formed my beliefs from my own experiences.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, without that experience you've had I can't understand it in the slightest. Sounds like valuable work you did though.
 
bsCallout said:
Fair enough, without that experience you've had I can't understand it in the slightest. Sounds like valuable work you did though.
Click to expand...
I think if you are really interested you could read up on the differences between the two which might help you.

It wasn't the most enjoyable work but on the whole the work and hopefully the outcomes were what made it hugely enjoyable. It was so much more rewarding than what I had done before which was basically manipulate buyers of catering products.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.