bradd80 said:
Comparing apples to oranges? You see Die Hard, this is the problem. You don't have your facts straight. I was comparing MINOR girls having sex with an ADULT man, to the case we're discussing here where boys are having sex with an ADULT woman
12 year old girls and 18+ guys... If you feel that's the same thing, you really need to get your head checked.
It's comparing apples and oranges.
This woman was an adult having sex with boys, and she was in a position of authority/trust. That is statutory rape, and legally is no different from a 12 year old girl having sex with a 25 year old man.
This shows the great error in your reasoning... You are explaining what
Texas law says about her behavior and somehow try to convince me and everyone else here that we should replace our
free minds and blindly align our
personal opinion with whatever this law says.
You're basically saying: "
Texas law finds her acts a horrible crime and punishes her with 5 years in jail, so I TOO find her acts a horrible crime and want her punished with 5 years in jail."
So you basically have no opinion of your own, Brad... Wow, I never knew you were this simple minded! And to make things worse, you are trying to force your idiocy onto me and everyone else here
Dude,
FVCK what Texas law says, I got an opinion of my own! But apparently you don't, so why are you even partaking in this discussion? You'll just say that the law finds her guilty, and therefor everyone must find her guilty. And if we don't, you shake your head at us and act like
WE are crazy? Are you serious?!?!?! :crackup:
1. Ethically, what she did was wrong because she cheated on her husband and had sex with boys.
2. Legally what she did was wrong, she is a grown adult again having sex with boys while she was in a position of authority/trust of such boys.
And you're claiming she's the victim?? YOU HAVE GOT TO BE OUT OF YOUR MIND! Your sense of justice is obviously different from everyone else's. Thank god cooler and more educated heads than yours prevailed in this case.
Your second point is a travesty, as I've explained above: whatever Texas law thinks about her actions cannot be used as an argument to dismiss my opinion or anyone else's opinion, unless you believe that all people in the world should blindly adjust their personal opinions to the opinion of Texas law...which makes you a total lunatic, THE END.
And let me add, these were not just "boys", as you are intentionally referring to them everytime. They were all AT LEAST 18, some of them even OLDER! So quit trying to pretend like this is a case of an
adult abusing
infants. You're being fake as fvck, dude...
Furthermore, that Texas ass law that you're substituting for your own personal opinion, says the age doesn't even matter. She would've been convicted even if the guys (yes GUYS, not boys) were OLDER than she. So again, quit trying to pretend this is about age.
As for your first point, I've already explained that this has nothing to do with her being convicted, nor does it have anything to do with her claiming she has been victimized. She does not claim she's the victim
OPPOSED to her man being the victim, so your point is invalid. Learn to read and scroll back to my earlier posts (which you should've done BEFORE you responded to my posts).
That brings us back to my original reason for responding to this thread. Some pathetic faggot called Burroughs came across this story and felt the need to create a whole new thread in order to express his frustration about it. And what was his point? It was that this woman supposedly victimized someone and then claimed she was the victim herself.
Well, it's clear as fvck that she didn't victimize the guys who gangbanged her. It was a wish coming true for them, lol, and they all said so themselves that they didn't feel victimized.
So who did she victimize then, according to Burroughs the faggot? Must be her husband... Well, I agree, she cheated on her husband and this makes him a victim of hers, no doubt about it.
But she doesn't claim that she's a victim of his! We all know how women often fvck a man over and then typically deny their responsibility for it, claiming he is not her victim but she is his victim.
Faggot ass Burroughs acts as if this is the case in this story, naming the thread
Gangbang teacher says "she's the victim" and then adding his comment
"typical".
Again, this is not the case. She is NOT fvcking a man over and then "typically" trying to turn it around.
She claims she was victimized by the students (which is true, even if she should've seen it coming that they would spread the video around). Now if she had victimized those students and consecutively claimed that they had victimized her, then it would be a typical case of a woman fvcking a man (several men, in this case) over and then trying to turn things around. But she did not victimize those students, so there is no question of her typically turning things around with regard to the students.
Nor is there any question of her typically turning things around with regard to her husband. Yes, she fvcked him over but she is not saying he fvcked her over. If she did, it would be a typical case of her turning things around. But she didn't, THE END.
In other words, Burroughs the pathetic faggot chose the wrong example to make his case that women typically turn things around when they fvcked a guy over. It shows that this moron is all too eager to SEE WHAT HE WANTS TO SEE (
oh, all women are evil bytches and turn things around when they fvck a man over!)
Then betheman eagerly joined in to label the woman's statements as those of a "psychopath", coz she didn't feel guilty towards the students. Again, this would make all of us psychopaths coz each and everyone of you would feel no guilt over fvcking a group of 18+ girls who consented to it, not even if they were your students. Besides, the students themselves don't feel she has fvcked them over at all, so why in hell should she feel guilty to them, let alone be labelled a psychopath for not feeling guilty to them?
In other words, betheman is way too eager to SEE WHAT HE WANTS TO SEE (
Oh, all women are acting like psychopaths!) and projecting this prejudice onto this woman.
And that's why I responded to this stupid thread in the first place, it has been my main point from the beginning. The very fact that people feel the need to create new threads about sh!t like this is pathetic (
MatureDJ being the prime example, with his neverending spamming of stupid threads like this). Seriously, a lot of you guys are way too caught up in their negative views of women.
Yes, women will fvck you over if you allow them to,
we all know that already. So arm yourself against it and go out there ravaging their pussies, people! No need to wallow in the negativity, scrolling the internet for examples of women fvcking guys over, then creating threads on SoSuave about it each and every day, till the end of time...
It's a pathetic, butthurt, unconstructive, loser attitude. But if you still feel the need to do this, then at least make sure you find REAL examples of it, not stories like these, where it really isn't the case...
But like I said, many of you are just totally caught up in this negative attitude, turned it into a prejudice and are projecting it onto situations where it really doesn't apply. This goes for all of you who have been arguing against me:
Burroughs,
betheman,
PairPlusRoyalFlush,
Danger and
Bradd80. The logical fallacies in your posts are too big and plentiful to be a result of low intelligence. So that leaves only one other explanation for them: prejudice, attention bias and confirmation bias... If you want to grow as a man (and eventually be happy with women), you need to get rid of those.
Get over it, people... Being vigilant of women's evil ways is a very healthy thing. However, actively searching for examples of women's evil ways all the time and even seeing it in situations where it's not there, is a very
unhealthy thing.
plate's_empty said:
Serious question: Why do you hate women so much? What happened to you??
What's going on here?
Why the hate speech? Faggot? What are you hiding? Are you trying to repress something?
And dude, you're stupid smileys and bold lettering don't make your ridiculous statements make any more sense Naughty Ninja. :crackup::crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup: :crackup:
Don't waste time on Burroughs, he's an idiot. I realized this when he created a thread telling us that some new virus had been identified and he claimed it was a way of "the elite" trying to kill us
Without any evidence to back his assumption up, of course... I knew right then and there that this guy is a complete paranoid idiot.
He drives this point further home with his habit of responding to other members' arguments with ad hominums (
moderators, take notice: including ad hominums while still bringing forward arguments to make your case, is acceptable. But writing down ONLY ad hominums is blatant trolling.)
