Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 9:14 PM, sfcityduck said: What exactly are you trying to say now? Is the same true for 13, 14, 15 and 16 year-olds? And why are we talking about "all over the world"? Prince Andrew's scandal was a 17 year-old, but I really don't think he, Jeffrey Epstein, or Ghislaine Maxwell were the victims. You are digging a hole and probably should clarify what message you are trying to get across, because the message you are communicating now is completely at odds with any age of consent laws. Now you're just being outrageous. Again, no crime was committed here. There was no sex involved. There wasn't even physical contact and from what. it looks like, less than a few messages. Stop reaching. RockMyAmadeus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 7:12 AM, Prince Namor said: First of all, there's NO CRIME HERE. So why do you keep referring to it as if there was? ALL we have to establish is WHY he decided to continue talking to her after he found out her age. Was it just an attraction of an older man to a younger girl? Or did they really have something common? Well they DID. Everyone has something in common. We're not going to be able to assess "why" he kept talking to her. He admits he shouldn't have once he found out her age. That's a suggestive admission that's the "why" it was not some entirely innocent reason. But I don't see enough evidence for any conclusions either way. So I'm pretty positive this will remain a subject of debate. But no reason to smear the young woman as some comments appear to be doing. jimjum12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sauce Dog Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) On 4/3/2024 at 7:45 AM, jimjum12 said: Is that fouling your narrative up? A 17 year old girl, who chooses to interact with adults on the internet without parental supervision, cannot still, simultaneously , claim some sort of innocent waif status, and then play the victim, without a little more than the verification from some social worker of questionable skill sets. Grooming? WTF is that? Did he comb her hair? I get all the rage against pedophilia, but I'm sorry, a grown man "hitting" on a near adult who sought him out in the first place, should not be facing a prison offence, nor should he be labeled a pedophile, when many, many societies allow marriage at that age. He never even touched her, nor tried to. I'm all for consequences, but I don't support a bunch of lynch mob, scarlet letter dolts trying to get a rise out of hurting people. Was it inappropriate? Possibly, that depends upon intent. Could it possibly have been some good natured flirting that got a little out of hand? What did this gal think was going to happen to him? Did she ask him to stop? Did she block him? I'm not so sure about just how much of a victim she actually was.... yet Ed was treated as if he had dragged a 7 year old out into the underbrush and sodomized them, which is Not OK ... over-reaction should not be a necessary evil, or the cost of doing business. Seems to me like Ed may have been the victim too. GOD BLESS ... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) Jesus wept, gross...hand waiving away her possible victimhood because it doesn't match your own notions of what rises to that definition is certainly a choice - she felt manipulated enough, as did other women, to come forward to raise a red flag (often the ONLY recourse women feel they have when there isn't anything outright illegal, whether it was the right decision is a separate beast). Regardless of what societies 'allow' does not mean it is correct or just - the average age of consent in the world is 14-16 but I personally don't think that makes it right for an adult to be involved just because it's legal. Just because she sought him out first, or made spicy art, doesn't mean she should have known what was coming to her or is any less a victim. Maybe you would like to also question what she was wearing at the time when he decided to DM her? Were people calling him a pedophile wrong, yes, and were there people who took it too far and harassed him online, of course (in that case he was a victim over a news/online cycle that overreacts and feeds into itself) but this nitpicking of the victim involved really evokes the tired & problematic myth of the perfect or ideal victim. Edited April 3 by Sauce Dog sfcityduck, jimjum12, RockMyAmadeus and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) On 4/3/2024 at 7:23 AM, Prince Namor said: Now you're just being outrageous. Again, no crime was committed here. There was no sex involved. There wasn't even physical contact and from what. it looks like, less than a few messages. Stop reaching. I'm responding to comments in a discussion which encompasses not just Ed but also the issues of "grooming," age of consent laws, and the reactions of people who live elsewhere in the country than Ed. I'm also strongly reacting against the "blame the alleged victim" mentality which some comments here are expressing. If you are going to try to corral the discussion, you should start with yourself. Look, I think it is a tragedy that Ed committed suicide for all of the reasons I've stated above. The one thing I hope we all agree on is that he made a very bad choice. He should be the one arguing his case and its too bad he's not here to do so. But Ed's final message does not impress me one bit and is not credibility enhancing to me. He clearly felt a lot of vitriol and he clearly wanted his legacy to be one of fear and intimidation. I really hope that folks here and elsewhere don't take up that banner against the young woman who did nothing wrong by telling her story. Those kind of attacks deserve a strong response. Edited April 3 by sfcityduck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 9:25 PM, sfcityduck said: Everyone has something in common. We're not going to be able to assess "why" he kept talking to her. He admits he shouldn't have once he found out her age. That's a suggestive admission that's the "why" it was not some entirely innocent reason. The reason is because he knew it was inappropriate and bordering illegal. If she'd been 18, he may not have felt the same. He might have fought it. Because she was 17 for... a week? A month? A whole year? Do we even know? Those texts could've been a week before she turned 18 for all we know, we she magically became a full functioning adult. I get the lack of grey area when it comes to this but... AND the reason why... But in this instance there is no crime any way. On 4/3/2024 at 9:25 PM, sfcityduck said: But I don't see enough evidence for any conclusions either way. So I'm pretty positive this will remain a subject of debate. But no reason to smear the young woman as some comments appear to be doing. RockMyAmadeus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 9:33 PM, sfcityduck said: I'm responding to comments in a discussion which encompasses not just Ed but also the issues of "grooming," age of consent laws, and the reactions of people who live elsewhere in the country than Ed. I'm also strongly reacting against the "blame the alleged victim" mentality which some comments here are expressing. If you are going to try to corral the discussion, you should start with yourself. Look, I think it is a tragedy that Ed committed suicide for all of the reasons I've stated above. The one thing I hope we all agree on is that he made a very bad choice. He should be the one arguing his case and its too bad he's not here to do so. But Ed's final message does not impress me one bit and is not credibility enhancing to me. He clearly felt a lot of vitriol and he clearly wanted his legacy to be one of fear and intimidation. I really hope that folks here and elsewhere don't take up that banner against the young woman who did nothing wrong by telling her story. Those kind of attacks deserve a strong response. Too late. She pulled her online presence due to the blow back she got even before Ed took his own life. That online mob is an ugly beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 7:36 AM, Prince Namor said: The reason is because he knew it was inappropriate and bordering illegal. After that comment, I don't think there's anything left for me to say. Those who are trying to bash the young woman are completely out of line and I'd hope they stop and consider before they do so. After all, isn't that what they wanted to happen with bashing of Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 9:42 PM, sfcityduck said: After that comment, I don't think there's anything left for me to say. Those who are trying to bash the young woman are completely out of line and I'd hope they stop and consider before they do so. After all, isn't that what they wanted to happen with bashing of Ed? How am I bashing her? What are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 7:43 AM, Prince Namor said: How am I bashing her? What are you talking about? Look up. My posts are clear, and I have nothing else to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Prince Namor Posted April 3 Popular Post Share Posted April 3 Doubtful. Dr. Love, CAHokie, october and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Cataldo Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) So no one else thinks that a 17-year-old girl producing artwork of that nature is strange? Not normal? Edited April 3 by Chip Cataldo jimjum12 and Juno Beach 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 10:50 AM, Chip Cataldo said: So no one else thinks that a 17-year-old girl producing artwork on that nature is strange? Not normal? I think trying to assess a person's psychology from such a minimalist, arm's-length approach is not very constructive. MatterEaterLad, Juno Beach and Sauce Dog 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Cataldo Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 10:57 AM, Ryan. said: I think trying to assess a person's psychology from such a minimalist, arm's-length approach is not very constructive. I'm just trying to understand how it's possible to form that type of style when it's not a direction historically usually chosen by young people. ...or do you think that most young people, especially women, conceive images of rats killing things and then injecting their arms with heroin? jimjum12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 10:59 AM, Chip Cataldo said: it's not a direction historically usually chosen by young people I have zero interest in a rhetorical debate on this but I'll just say that I have no idea what you mean by this as creative expression doesn't usually have a specific "historical direction". F For Fake, Lazyboy and Juno Beach 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Mr Sneeze Posted April 3 Popular Post Share Posted April 3 I had a really good friend commit suicide years ago. I miss him. I really wish he had found another way or at least waited a few more minutes for the monster to pass. I think about him all the time. We had great conversations, he made my world a better place what a terrible sad tragic end jimjum12, Ken Aldred, sfcityduck and 2 others 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 This is why it's almost impossible to have a discussion of this type on the Internet. Everyone has their own view on what they think the discussion is about and they can only speak from that angle. Mr Sneeze 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 10:42 AM, Prince Namor said: She pulled her online presence due to the blow back she got even before Ed took his own life. Personally I would be more concerned with the "blowback" someone gets for sharing their story than the person the story is about. Sauce Dog, Lazyboy and jimjum12 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Prince Namor Posted April 3 Popular Post Share Posted April 3 (edited) On 4/3/2024 at 9:59 PM, Chip Cataldo said: I'm just trying to understand how it's possible to form that type of style when it's not a direction historically usually chosen by young people. ...or do you think that most young people, especially women, conceive images of rats killing things and then injecting their arms with heroin? You see art you like. You imitate it. That's how. Has nothing to do with who they are. An artist shows you what they want to show you. What people's reactions are to it, is usually more telling than how it reflects the artist. Bob Marley didn't really shoot the sheriff. It was just a song. Edited April 3 by Prince Namor Ryan., postersandstuff, Lazyboy and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 10:15 PM, wombat said: Personally I would be more concerned with the "blowback" someone gets for sharing their story than the person the story is about. I didn't see any of it, but according to someone in the know, it was bad. She didn't deserve that. The Internet is an ugly beast. sfcityduck 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Cataldo Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 On 4/3/2024 at 11:22 AM, Prince Namor said: You see art you like. You imitate it. That's how. Has nothing to do with who they are. An artist shows you what they want to show you. What people's reactions are to it, is usually more telling than how it reflects the artist. Bob Marley didn't really shoot the sheriff. It was just a song. It has nothing to do with who they are that they LIKE that stuff begin with? Why choose lyrics about shooing someone? Why not helping someone instead? It's like the Saw movies. Why do people enjoy movies about humans being killed in disgusting ways with copious amounts of gore? Why? jimjum12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
