Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Matt Gaetz Under Investigation for Sex Trafficking


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, -fish- said:

And now allegations he drugged women and also paid to try to get them to bring him more women.  Why no calls from the GOP for his resignation?

Something something Northam...something something Cuomo.  Or just flat out going to ignore it here is what we have seen and will continue to see.

Has any prominent Democrat stood up for Northam or Cuomo?  Have most not come out against them?  Have Dems in NY not begun the investigation into Cuomo and are seeking their ways to oust him?  Have most not called for him to resign at this point?

And unlike Northam and Cuomo...this isn't just a state matter.  A matter in which leadership in Washington don't really have authority to do anything.  What will GOP leadership do? Ignore it and hope it goes away?  Im guessing the reaction is far different than the reaction in the Cuomo thread here...and far different than the GOP's reaction to Cuomo and Northam.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Commish said:

Not in today's GOP :shrug: 

Pretty much business as usual for the GOP.  All Gaetz needs to do is say "der goona tak yur gunz" and all will be forgotten.  Puts the Q followers in a tough spot again too.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, beef said:

Pretty much business as usual for the GOP.  All Gaetz needs to do is say "der goona tak yur gunz" and all will be forgotten.  Puts the Q followers in a tough spot again too.  

My fiance's old hairdresser was a Q follower and constantly posts on social media about sex trafficking stories. She's been radio silent on Gaetz.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

Clearly not but I meant more in the legal sense like kiddie porn for having and sharing naked pictures of a minor.

He'd be in far more trouble legally than politically...no question 

Edited by The Commish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's refreshing to see D's lead the charge against Cuomo and his alleged transgressions/crimes.  I'd hope that the R's would be doing something similar in regards to Gaetz.......but I don't know.  It doesn't look like there isn't anyone from that side of the aisle stepping up to lead.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thunderlips said:

It's refreshing to see D's lead the charge against Cuomo and his alleged transgressions/crimes.  I'd hope that the R's would be doing something similar in regards to Gaetz.......but I don't know.  It doesn't look like there isn't anyone from that side of the aisle stepping up to lead.  

Yeah....the GOP didnt end Northam, and he's a Dem. At least they are consistent?

Edited by The Commish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thunderlips said:

It's refreshing to see D's lead the charge against Cuomo and his alleged transgressions/crimes.  .....

 

I agree it would have been refreshing had it happened before Election Day, when some lives could have been saved.

Just like how refreshing it was when the Governor of Oregon called in the National Guard for the first time after all that rioting and looting and burning and destruction, but right after Election Day.

The D's waited. These accusations and concerns and complaints were not silent long ago, it's just the left leaning MSM did their best to shade it. Big Social Media did their best to shade it down. And people died.

The D's waited and people died.

If some here want to say Trump did X and Y bad about the pandemic and people died, I can see that argument. That he said this and that and he shouldn't have and some Americans took that advice or that path and it might have cost them their lives. I can see that too. Or that he should have taken action on this day instead of that day, but waiting even just that one day or one week or one month probably cost lives. I can see that as well. No disputes here.

But the D's waited and people died. They did it for votes and for the election. They sure didn't complain when Cuomo was winning an Emmy, talking about "being single and ready to mingle" and being lauded and praised by Hollywood and the MSM and the optics that gave them for political capital.

Was it refreshing to see them wait and cost American lives?

There were people in NY who could not see their elderly relatives who died of COVID19 in those nursing homes. Maybe that's all different if there wasn't this waiting game for Election Day. Let's compile two lists. All people who died and anyone who says Trump is blameless can contact all of them and say that's not true. See how well that is going to go over.... And all the people who died in NY and anyone who says the Democratic Party holds some kind of mythical high ground here, go on, let's have you call each and every relative of everyone who died in NY and see how they feel about your refreshment.

You know how political tribalism ends? EVERYONE NEEDS TO OWN THEIR OWN SH**T. ACCOUNTABILITY IS THE MENU OF THE DAY.  PEOPLE ACCEPT THEIR OWN COMPLICITY IN WHAT ACTUALLY WENT WRONG. WE SEE THE STAGGERING LOSSES AS AMERICANS FIRST AND FOREMOST, AND NOT RED OR BLUE.

Look under your feet, son. There's no elevation here.

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sabertooth said:

This is a kid though.  Right?  I mean #### Cuomo too but Gaetz is accused of humping a kid.  Doesn’t that matter to you?  It does to me.  I have a 17 year old daughter.  It matters a lot to me.  

Does there have to be levels to this? Can't all sexual misconduct, whether it's molesting a little boy or raping a teenager or sexually assaulting a co-worker, it's all heinous right Sabe? To try and sepearate these politicians...so you're OK with what Cumo did and support that?

I know you don't (support Cumo's actions) so please in the future can we dial the rhetoric back, you make me feel very uncomfortable when you post in that light.

-Do we need to list all the heinous sexually charged crimes we all stand against? (Rape, Sexual. Battery, Trafficking) I thought we were all on the same team when it comes to sexual assault, I didn't know anyone felt they were above others in here on the topic. 

None of us in here want to see anything like this happen and it shouldn't be taken lightly. 

Edited by Ministry of Pain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Does there have to be levels to this? Can't all sexual misconduct, whether it's molesting a little boy or raping a teenager or sexually assaulting a co-worker, it's all heinous right Sabe? To try and sepearate these politicians...so you're OK with what Cumo did and support that?

I know you don't (support Cumo's actions) so please in the future can we dial the rhetoric back, you make me feel very uncomfortable when you post in that light.

-Do we need to list all the heinous sexually charged crimes we all stand against? (Rape, Sexual. Battery, Trafficking) I thought we were all on the same team when it comes to sexual assault, I didn't know anyone felt they were above others in here on the topic. 

None of us in here want to see anything like this happen and it shouldn't be taken lightly. 

Ummmm, absolutely?

This is completely separate from politics, but you absolutely separate between kids and adults. It’s kind of insulting to imply that you shouldn’t.  They’re all bad, but there are definitely degrees. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

Ummmm, absolutely?

This is completely separate from politics, but you absolutely separate between kids and adults. It’s kind of insulting to imply that you shouldn’t.  They’re all bad, but there are definitely degrees. 

As a survivor from being molested as a kid myself at a far younger age, I really don't understand where you're trying to go here. A woman being raped against her will in her 40s, would bring just as many tears to my eyes sitting on a jury vs also hearing about a 17 year old boy who was taken advantage of by a teacher. You have your view on it, I think they both are heinous and the abusers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. 

Again I thought everyone was on the same team here, I'm lost so I'll just close the curtains on this thread. 

Cheers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cuomo bothers me far more mainly because he is a governor, a major player in politics, and someone who (prior to this) I admired very much and thought might be President someday. I’m extremely disappointed by Cuomo. 
 

Gaetz on the other hand is a minor blowhard schmuck. I didn’t care about him before and I don’t now. He’s nothing but noise. The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:
46 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

Ummmm, absolutely?

This is completely separate from politics, but you absolutely separate between kids and adults. It’s kind of insulting to imply that you shouldn’t.  They’re all bad, but there are definitely degrees. 

As a survivor from being molested as a kid myself at a far younger age, I really don't understand where you're trying to go here. A woman being raped against her will in her 40s, would bring just as many tears to my eyes sitting on a jury vs also hearing about a 17 year old boy who was taken advantage of by a teacher. You have your view on it, I think they both are heinous and the abusers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. 

Wat?

Rape is nonconsensual by definition.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

No, it's another shining example of politicians. 

Cuomo ring a bell to you? Don't act like sexual misconduct doesn't happen on both sides, in fact I think that post is a fishing hook in all likelihood. 

I agree, it happens to both sides of the aisle. What is different is how each sides leaders handle those whose scandals come to light. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Cuomo bothers me far more mainly because he is a governor, a major player in politics, and someone who (prior to this) I admired very much and thought might be President someday. I’m extremely disappointed by Cuomo. 
 

Gaetz on the other hand is a minor blowhard schmuck. I didn’t care about him before and I don’t now. He’s nothing but noise. The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

Your critique is not with the media, but with your fellow Americans.  Are certain outlets trafficking in the sensational and tawdry? There sure is.  It's enough to make your monocle fall out.  

They only started doing that when ratings made it clear that Americans wanted that.  

It's not really important.

What's important is:

This freaking dude was having hotel Ecstasy parties with sugar babies, and paying them with Apple Pay.  

 

:towelwave:

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Cuomo bothers me far more mainly because he is a governor, a major player in politics, and someone who (prior to this) I admired very much and thought might be President someday. I’m extremely disappointed by Cuomo. 
 

Gaetz on the other hand is a minor blowhard schmuck. I didn’t care about him before and I don’t now. He’s nothing but noise. The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

You can choose not to be interested.

Any congressman (much less a blowhard like this dude) in a drug, sex scandal with an underage girl is going to be a story that people are going to follow regardless if it should be tabloid fodder in your opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Cuomo bothers me far more mainly because he is a governor, a major player in politics, and someone who (prior to this) I admired very much and thought might be President someday. I’m extremely disappointed by Cuomo. 
 

Gaetz on the other hand is a minor blowhard schmuck. I didn’t care about him before and I don’t now. He’s nothing but noise. The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

Cuomo bothers me less...because I don't live in NY.  I still think he should resign and those in power in NY should take very step in their power to remove him.  But its a state issue.  Id think that no matter what party the person is from.  Sub in any Dem governor of another state.  Their jobs typically won't affect me here in TN.

Gaetz is a player nationally...he is in power in things that can affect me even though I don't reside in the state he represents.  Decisions he makes and things he does can affect me from that perspective.  Id want leaders that represent me to be calling him out.  Given who my representatives and senators are...there is little chance there will be much movement there.

Edited by sho nuff
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Cuomo bothers me less...because I don't live in NY.  I still think he should resign and those in power in NY should take very step in their power to remove him.  But its a state issue.  Id think that no matter what party the person is from.  Sub in any Dem governor of another state.  Their jobs typically won't affect me here in TN.

Gaetz is a player nationally...he is in power in things that can affect me even though I don't reside in the state he represents.  Decisions he makes and things he does can affect me from that perspective.  Id want leaders that represent me to be calling him out.  Given who my representatives and senators are...there is little chance there will be much movement there.

And Gaetz still sits on a committee that has oversight over the department that's investigating him.

  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, The Commish said:

Not in today's GOP :shrug: 

I read that Jim Jordan has stated that he believe Gaetz's denials of sexual improprieties.  I'm sure Rep. Jordan really wrestled with that decision.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tri-man 47 said:

I read that Jim Jordan has stated that he believe Gaetz's denials of sexual improprieties.  I'm sure Rep. Jordan really wrestled with that decision.

Hang on a second here.  Do you know for sure if he's guilty of the accusations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Commish said:

Yeah....the GOP didnt end Northam, and he's a Dem. At least they are consistent?

Well, you know the Dems took over the VA House of Delegates shortly thereafter.  They could have done something about Northam as well.  Let's just be totally honest here.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shula-holic said:

Well, you know the Dems took over the VA House of Delegates shortly thereafter.  They could have done something about Northam as well.  Let's just be totally honest here.

Why?  It's just easier for him to spout partisan DNC talking points all day long.  "Honest" just really gets in the way of that. 

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, beef said:

FYI Gaetz, don't mess with Dick Chaney's daughter.  Dick is ending you.  :lol:

Just like when Trump entertained notions of a coup and Cheney told him "No, we're not doing that." It's pretty much clear who runs the army and the dissenting wing of the party and is powerful enough to do so. So that's Trump, his associates, now Gaetz....

Hmm...

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, timschochet said:

......The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

 

Direct Headline: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: I 'fully admit' our bias is 'more left-leaning'

By John Bowden - 08/18/18 05:57 PM EDT

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-i-fully-admit-our-bias-is-more-left-leaning

 

Direct Headline: Twitter is so liberal that its conservative employees ‘don’t feel safe to express their opinions,’ says CEO Jack Dorsey

“I don’t think that’s fair or right,” Dorsey says.

By Kurt Wagner Updated Sep 14, 2018, 11:06am EDT

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics

 

Direct Headline: Facebook, Twitter CEOs struggle to name a single liberal who has been censored on their platforms

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey couldn’t name a specific person or entity

By Brian Flood  10/28/20

https://www.foxnews.com/media/facebook-twitter-ceos-struggle-to-name-a-single-liberal-who-has-been-censored-on-their-platforms

 

*******

If you like, I can give you a little time here to move those goal posts. I've been told they are heavy. If you want, you can recruit from the FFA and/or Shark Pool to see if you can find some there to help you carry that burden.

Roughly 53 percent of all adults in America use social media as their main source of news. The distribution skews heavier as the demographics get younger. This means as older generations, used to traditional media, pass away, that number is only going to grow exponentially.

It's not just "if" there is liberal bias. ( Dorsey says it exists) but it also matters "where" this bias is happening.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

Direct Headline: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: I 'fully admit' our bias is 'more left-leaning'

By John Bowden - 08/18/18 05:57 PM EDT

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/402495-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-i-fully-admit-our-bias-is-more-left-leaning

 

Direct Headline: Twitter is so liberal that its conservative employees ‘don’t feel safe to express their opinions,’ says CEO Jack Dorsey

“I don’t think that’s fair or right,” Dorsey says.

By Kurt Wagner Updated Sep 14, 2018, 11:06am EDT

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17857622/twitter-liberal-employees-conservative-trump-politics

 

Direct Headline: Facebook, Twitter CEOs struggle to name a single liberal who has been censored on their platforms

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey couldn’t name a specific person or entity

By Brian Flood  10/28/20

https://www.foxnews.com/media/facebook-twitter-ceos-struggle-to-name-a-single-liberal-who-has-been-censored-on-their-platforms

 

*******

If you like, I can give you a little time here to move those goal posts. I've been told they are heavy. If you want, you can recruit from the FFA and/or Shark Pool to see if you can find some there to help you carry that burden.

Roughly 53 percent of all adults in America use social media as their main source of news. The distribution skews heavier as the demographics get younger. This means as older generations, used to traditional media, pass away, that number is only going to grow exponentially.

It's not just "if" there is liberal bias. ( Dorsey says it exists) but it also matters "where" this bias is happening.

Yeah.  It's absurd to deny there is no liberal bias in media.  I mean, that's just being willfully ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Are we ever getting in thorny waters. Was she eighteen or seventeen? Huge difference? I'm sorry, there's just not. Rape is statutorily decided, and states have differing statutory definition of what rape is. Just because you cross state lines, the morality of the act doesn't change, if morals are universal. Which most Christians and Catholics would tell you they are (which is where a large portion of morality-based laws come from). It's stupid to have distinctions like this.

This guy is caught up in a Puritan/feminist trap where we've raised the age of consent unnaturally. This is long a relic of progressive thought and feminism. Jack the ages up as high as you can and shock people's conscience with the charge.

This guy had sex with a seventeen year-old. Who cares but for the ninnies? He's long done stupider stuff that proves he's not a worthy Congressman. The "trafficking" and other charges sound bad until you read what constitutes "trafficking." They're part and parcel to outdated prostitution laws.

Anyway, I know nothing of IDs and prostitution rings. If they get him for that, then good. That sounds like a real scandal. Not sleeping with a seventeen year-old. Hell, Seinfeld did that.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Wow. Are we ever getting in thorny waters. Was she eighteen or seventeen? Huge difference? I'm sorry, there's just not. Rape is statutorily decided, and states have differing statutory definition of what rape is. Just because you cross state lines, the morality of the act doesn't change, if morals are universal. Which most Christians and Catholics would tell you they are (which is where a large portion of morality-based laws come from). It's stupid to have distinctions like this.

This guy is caught up in a Puritan/feminist trap where we've raised the age of consent unnaturally. This is long a relic of progressive thought and feminism. Jack the ages up as high as you can and shock people's conscience with the charge.

This guy had sex with a seventeen year-old. Who cares but for the ninnies? He's long done stupider stuff that proves he's not a worthy Congressman. The "trafficking" and other charges sound bad until you read what constitutes "trafficking." They're part and parcel to outdated prostitution laws.

Anyway, I know nothing of IDs and prostitution rings. If they get him for that, then good. That sounds like a real scandal. Not sleeping with a seventeen year-old. Hell, Seinfeld did that.

It sounds like the issue is paying for sex and doing drugs with a 17-year-old. But for now it’s all speculation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

It sounds like the issue is paying for sex and doing drugs with a 17-year-old. But for now it’s all speculation. 

From a bunch of posters in here it sounds like it's already a done deal and proven.  :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigbottom said:

It sounds like the issue is paying for sex and doing drugs with a 17-year-old. But for now it’s all speculation. 

Those are significant things. I don't want to come off as a GOP defender here. I wouldn't vote for a GOP member with a ten foot pole these days, especially this guy. I also think those allegations are troubling, and from hearing the stories about the Congress floor, he should immediately resign unless innocent of all charges. Congress is not a place to be sharing noodz, especially if they fall under the auspices of child pornography.

But I think we have to be really careful before we go after people for consensual relations with seventeen year olds. That might drive the fathers among us nuts, and knowing that brain development doesn't stop until twenty-five is a good reason to stay away from women not of age ethically, but we have to be really careful lest the mirror get shone on one of us (that we like otherwise) one day in event of that happening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, timschochet said:

...The fact that this story is getting media attention only goes to my main critique about media: not the supposed “liberal bias” (which really doesn’t exist no matter how many conservatives swear it does) but the endless fascination with the sensational and tawdry. 

 

Direct Headline: Mark Zuckerberg: ‘I Understand’ Why Conservatives Think Silicon Valley Is Biased

Sean Burch October 18, 2019

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/mark-zuckerberg-understand-why-conservatives-211113900.html

 

Direct Headline: Here’s Why CNN Became a Lightning Rod for Accusations of Media Bias

By Tom Huddleston Jr. December 3, 2016 6:38 AM PST

https://fortune.com/2016/12/03/cnn-media-bias-donald-trump/

 

Direct Headline: Actual Whistleblower Releases CNN Videos Admitting Trump Bias, ‘Media Created’ Mess

by Team Bongino October 15, 2019

https://bongino.com/actual-whistleblower-releases-cnn-vids-admitting-trump-bias-media-created-mess

 

VIDEO: CNN President Jeff Zucker BLASTS Trump & Republicans on 9am Call with Senior Leadership •Dec 1, 2020

CNN President Jeff Zucker: “This is a president who knows he's losing, who knows he's in trouble, is sick, maybe is on the aftereffects of steroids or not. I don't know. But he is acting erratically and desperately, and we need to not normalize that.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XdboqIIuaQ

 

******

Translation: "Normalize"  in media speak means allowing the person to be portrayed and/or edited as appearing to the general public as an actual human being.  He can only be painted as a caricature representation of all Republicans/Conservatives.

Easy to silence and slaughter the opposition when you've stopped seeing them as human beings.

So bringing this back to Gaetz, then it's very clear that the DNC wants his scalp. he's defended Trump twice in impeachment and spoke out against BLM, the Border Crisis, but worst of all, he's gone after Hunter Biden. And since this happened when Joe Biden was Obama's VP, no, no no, that can't happen.

No one can ever criticize the almighty Obama ever. How dare Gaetz edge around that corner.

That being said, Gaetz open himself up to this mess. If he wanted peace and quiet, he should have not put himself in a position to be cancelled.

This story isn't getting attention because it's tawdry, it's getting attention because there needs to be a message sent.

Conservatives need to fall in line or fall period. Nothing has been proven yet and look at how good blood tastes to some of you.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Hang on a second here.  Do you know for sure if he's guilty of the accusations?

I think that was just an opportunity for a Jordan wrestling reference. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

That being said, Gaetz open himself up to this mess. If he wanted peace and quiet, he should have not put himself in a position to be cancelled.

 

Can you expand on this?  If these are all made up lies, then it’s hard to fault him for putting himself in a position to get canceled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Wow. Are we ever getting in thorny waters. Was she eighteen or seventeen? Huge difference? I'm sorry, there's just not. Rape is statutorily decided, and states have differing statutory definition of what rape is. Just because you cross state lines, the morality of the act doesn't change, if morals are universal. Which most Christians and Catholics would tell you they are (which is where a large portion of morality-based laws come from). It's stupid to have distinctions like this.

This guy is caught up in a Puritan/feminist trap where we've raised the age of consent unnaturally. This is long a relic of progressive thought and feminism. Jack the ages up as high as you can and shock people's conscience with the charge.

This guy had sex with a seventeen year-old. Who cares but for the ninnies? He's long done stupider stuff that proves he's not a worthy Congressman. The "trafficking" and other charges sound bad until you read what constitutes "trafficking." They're part and parcel to outdated prostitution laws.

Anyway, I know nothing of IDs and prostitution rings. If they get him for that, then good. That sounds like a real scandal. Not sleeping with a seventeen year-old. Hell, Seinfeld did that.

There more to this story then I know or have had the inclination to research, and I generally agree with a careful approach before besmirching someone’s name and permanently damaging their reputation. But there is something morally bankrupt about a 38 yr old man and a 17 yr old girl (and yes I’d extend that to 18). 🤷🏻‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

There more to this story then I know or have had the inclination to research, and I generally agree with a careful approach before besmirching someone’s name and permanently damaging their reputation. But there is something morally bankrupt about a 38 yr old man and a 17 yr old girl (and yes I’d extend that to 18). 🤷🏻‍♂️

I disagree with you, and so does most of recorded history. But we're getting into thorny waters here that stray off the subject. Girls, by and large, hit puberty at ten or eleven. They're sometimes fully developed by fifteen with only weight gain and gravity to affect bodily changes. They're also most fertile at around fifteen or sixteen. Laws and Westernism might not like it, but evolution will always, always have the last laugh on man-made constructs, especially artificial ones like the eighteen year-old cutoff. Aristocracy tells us that even literate humans had radically different conceptualizations of aging, as did arranged marriages. Not that we should go back, but those man-made constructs were in better keeping with evolution than any feminist progressivist one. We've seen how feminist and progressive senses of biology have failed us. And badly.

Edited by rockaction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I disagree with you, and so does most of recorded history. But we're getting into thorny waters here that stray off the subject. Girls, by and large, hit puberty at ten or eleven. They're sometimes fully developed by fifteen with only weight gain and gravity to affect bodily changes. They're also most fertile at around fifteen or sixteen. Laws and Westernism might not like it, but evolution will always, always have the last laugh on man-made constructs, especially artificial ones like the eighteen year-old cutoff. Aristocracy tells us that even literate humans had radically different conceptualizations of aging, as did arranged marriages. Not that we should go back, but those man-made constructs were in better keeping with evolution than any feminist progressivist one. We've seen how feminist and progressive senses of biology have failed us. And badly.

Exactlhy.  Just got into it with a friend of mine today on this issue.  Dude literally didn't believe me when I told him that back in the day (200+ or more years ago), women were ROUTINELY married off at 14, 15, 16 to form alliances and other power structures.  And this was to men MUCH, MUCH older than them - like 30's, 40's, 50's or older.  And they started families at that age.

Not saying we should be doing that, but that's recorded history.

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I disagree with you, and so does most of recorded history. But we're getting into thorny waters here that stray off the subject. Girls, by and large, hit puberty at ten or eleven. They're sometimes fully developed by fifteen with only weight gain and gravity to affect bodily changes. They're also most fertile at around fifteen or sixteen. Laws and Westernism might not like it, but evolution will always, always have the last laugh on man-made constructs, especially artificial ones like the eighteen year-old cutoff. Aristocracy tells us radically different conceptualizations of aging, as do arranged marriages. Not that we should go back, but those man-made constructs were in better keeping with evolution than any feminist progressivist one. We've seen how feminist and progressive senses of biology have failed us. And badly.

Sure. You’re arguing biology and I said morality. Morally our society has progressed to the point where that is no longer socially acceptable. As a father of a daughter I completely agree with society here, and I agree largely because of your prefrontal cortex development argument.   A 17-year-old girl is completely outmatched by 38-year-old man.  

Edited by dkp993
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Exactlhy.  Just got into it with a friend of mine today on this issue.  Dude literally didn't believe me when I told him that back in the day (200+ or more years ago), women were ROUTINELY married off at 14, 15, 16 to form alliances and other power structures.  And this was to men MUCH, MUCH older than them - like 30's, 40's, 50's or older.

Women were also subjugated to all kinds of other atrocities that aren’t unacceptable now.  Just like human beings evolve physically we evolve emotionally and intellectually as well.  Unfortunately the latter 2 happen at a slower pace.   

Edited by dkp993
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dkp993 said:

Sure. Your arguing biology and I said morality. Morally our society has progressed to the point where that is no longer socially acceptable. As a father of a daughter I completely agree with society here, and I agree largely because of your prefrontal cortex development argument.   A 17-year-old girl is completely outmatched by 38-year-old man.  

Partially arguing that. I'm also arguing biology will trump moral constructs eventually. It won't even be close. It'll happen in some way -- it might come at the hands of a a foreign power -- but the cost of our depressed fertility rates will come to bear on us eventually, at least domestically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Sure. Your arguing biology and I said morality. Morally our society has progressed to the point where that is no longer socially acceptable. As a father of a daughter I completely agree with society here, and I agree largely because of your prefrontal cortex development argument.   A 17-year-old girl is completely outmatched by 38-year-old man.  

What about the other way around?  17 year old boy with 38 year old woman?

17 year old BladeRunner wanted a "Hot for Teacher" moment with his Geometry teacher so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Sure. Your arguing biology and I said morality. Morally our society has progressed to the point where that is no longer socially acceptable. As a father of a daughter I completely agree with society here, and I agree largely because of your prefrontal cortex development argument.   A 17-year-old girl is completely outmatched by 38-year-old man.  

The "morality" of denying these relationships is questionable, at best. It comes from a distinct Christian/Christian evangelical line of though that mixed with radical feminism in the 20th Century teens to give us new laws we were supposed to abide. We could have said that the Women's Christian Temperance Union was once a progression that would keep going, and see how that worked out. We went back to drinking to where the thought of it wasn't even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Exactlhy.  Just got into it with a friend of mine today on this issue.  Dude literally didn't believe me when I told him that back in the day (200+ or more years ago), women were ROUTINELY married off at 14, 15, 16 to form alliances and other power structures.  And this was to men MUCH, MUCH older than them - like 30's, 40's, 50's or older.  And they started families at that age.

Not saying we should be doing that, but that's recorded history.

Yes, girls/women have been subjugated and treated as chattel for much of human history. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

What about the other way around?  17 year old boy with 38 year old woman?

17 year old BladeRunner wanted a "Hot for Teacher" moment with his Geometry teacher so bad.

No different. 
 

So did I. Was still not OK.  17 yr old dkp would not agree but 45 dkp has grown a bit (though my wife might argue not enough. Lol)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Partially arguing that. I'm also arguing biology will trump moral constructs eventually. It won't even be close. It'll happen in some way -- it might come at the hands of a a foreign power -- but the cost of our depressed fertility rates will come to bear on us eventually, at least domestically.

This is a conversation I’d very much like to have (as I understand your arguments but just disagree) but would be better served to be done over a beer (or soda).  I really don’t want to type all night on my phone.  Lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...