On "Horrific"

[bybee]

So youre saying dozer, caused what happened to you?

How is that statement any different than when dozer says that a persons own actions can cause them to become a victim of _fill in the blank with anything_?

Dozer didnt strip you of anything.

Of course he didn't! But, jeepers, do you think he contributed to it?
I stand by what I say and take the consequences.
Knight has a board to run and I do not second guess his decisions.
That doesn't mean that I agree with all of them.

 

[glorydaz]

So youre saying dozer, caused what happened to you?

How is that statement any different than when dozer says that a persons own actions can cause them to become a victim of _fill in the blank with anything_?

Dozer didnt strip you of anything.

Playing the victim is America's favorite pastime. Bybee's comments to me and about me (before she was "stripped") were certainly things I've never seen from any other moderator on here since I arrived. I just didn't report it because I've given up reporting anything....PJ does enough for us all.

 

[glorydaz]

Of course he didn't! But, jeepers, do you think he contributed to it?
I stand by what I say and take the consequences.
Knight has a board to run and I do not second guess his decisions.
That doesn't mean that I agree with all of them.

Oh, like someone's bad behavior can contribute to what happens to them? :think:

 

[bybee]

Oh, like someone's bad behavior can contribute to what happens to them? :think:

I'm letting you have the last word here. It seems to be so very important to you.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Of course he didn't! But, jeepers, do you think he contributed to it?

No, i don't think he contributed to it even, because Knight is own person. I dont think that dozer has any control over knight.

I stand by what I say and take the consequences.
Knight has a board to run and I do not second guess his decisions.
That doesn't mean that I agree with all of them.

Agree, just like i disagree with the decisions of late to pass out so many infractions to tambora and glory, for doing what you and everyone else on this board does with people who push THEIR buttons - while patrick is held to be innocent when he isnt - he starts it most of the time then cries innocent, you guys dont see everything, i on the otherhand, read most of the threads on this board, even when im not posting in them.

You have your nemesis's and so do others. To get an infraction for posting a pic of a baby when tol has a baby pic to post itself, is unbelievable to me.

Also for someone to get an infraction for posting the lucy psych shop, after already having long been posting charlie brown cartoons, just because it happened AFTER patrick entered the chat, is also unbelievable to me.

Dude needs to grow up and not be hidden under yalls skirt, i thought tol was for the thick skinned, not whiny babies.

Thats the epitome of ignoring consequences for ones own actions, and is equally one sided as ignoring that YES, there are things we all do that contribute to things, which point you miss on dozers scenerios because of your bias against him for other things.

Good greif, i was told to ignore eeset when she was attacking my son who had just died and demanding evidence of his death, she didnt even get a day off.

But patrick can cry, oh she called me a baby boo friggin whoo.

 

[ok doser]

What lie?

the part i was responding to :duh:

 

[bybee]

No, i don't think he contributed to it even, because Knight is own person. I dont think that dozer has any control over knight.



Agree, just like i disagree with the decisions of late to pass out so many infractions to tambora and glory, for doing what you and everyone else on this board does with people who push THEIR buttons - while patrick is held to be innocent when he isnt - he starts it most of the time then cries innocent, you guys dont see everything, i on the otherhand, read most of the threads on this board, even when im not posting in them.

You have your nemesis's and so do others. To get an infraction for posting a pic of a baby when tol has a baby pic to post itself, is unbelievable to me.

Also for someone to get an infraction for posting the lucy psych shop, after already having long been posting charlie brown cartoons, just because it happened AFTER patrick entered the chat, is also unbelievable to me.

Dude needs to grow up and not be hidden under yalls skirt, i thought tol was for the thick skinned, not whiny babies.

Thats the epitome of ignoring consequences for ones own actions, and is equally one sided as ignoring that YES, there are things we all do that contribute to things, which point you miss on dozers scenerios because of your bias against him for other things.

Good greif, i was told to ignore eeset when she was attacking my son who had just died and demanding evidence of his death, she didnt even get a day off.

But patrick can cry, oh she called me a baby boo friggin whoo.

A point of order. I did give P.J. a ban.
Thank you for the critique of my behavior on this board. I shall think about it.

 

[ok doser]

No, i don't think he contributed to it even, because Knight is own person.

maybe he's one of my mulnics

:noid: maybe i'm one of his


maybe we're all mulnics of billybob and don't even know it

like alters in a patient with DID (used to be multiple personality disorder)


is you me or is i you?

 

[ok doser]

A point of order. I did give P.J. a ban.

for using a word that the following people had used with impunity:

jefferson
crow (when she was a mod)
knight (in quoting somebody)
artie
town
etc
etc
etc

 

[glorydaz]

I'm letting you have the last word here. It seems to be so very important to you.

You sure do love to jump to conclusions. If you weren't so bent on leaving the door open a crack I wouldn't even look. You don't know your statement above is a dare? :think:


Come on, Bybee....you weren't born yesterday. If you really meant it, you wouldn't say that. :chuckle:

 

[CabinetMaker]

the part i was responding to :duh:

Nope, didn't think you would step up.

 

[Angel4Truth]

A point of order. I did give P.J. a ban.
Thank you for the critique of my behavior on this board. I shall think about it.

Yes, you did for a profane word use, not for the same things they are being popped for, that is no different than what he does all the time, push and push for response then pop when they give him what hes begging for.

Then he reports them for what he started and did worse, but erased or feigned it was about something else, after he editted it. then he brags he isnt like that, when hes worse.

Ive seen no "frivolous" comments on his whining reports or seen no "ignore it patrick" like on quetzels report.

I understand im taking a chance now of being infracted for just talking about it since its been said to ignore Patrick completely as if he can do as he damn well pleases and then mock right after he crawls out from under the skirt that shielded him.

So im off my soapbox now, i think what i had to suffer for months when my son died at the hands of a witch, and nothing was done expect repeated verbal warnings - gives me the right to speak up of what i see as total insanity.

My grief, of course doesn't touch claims of mental illness i know though huh. Being called a baby using an image, is much worse than stealing my avatar and posting it naked in chat - saying I look like a tranny hooker based on my user page pic and told i claimed my dead son was gay and that he didnt really die, of course is much more acceptable than a baby pic, right?

So i hope you can understand what lens im seeing this through.

If patrick cant handle being called a baby after taunting people to death, patrick is the one who needs to leave.

Hes being truth smacked when hes called on his lies too. Isnt that part of what this board is about?

 

[ok doser]

Nope, didn't think you would step up.

the part of your post that i excerpted and responded to in my post: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4523344&postcount=37

you posted:

"So in your mind, anything that you can think of that is "worse" makes rape okay."

that was a lie

 

[kmoney]

Yesterday a poster suggested that rape was always horrific. I was considering it last night and wanted to see if folks here agreed that rape is always horrific.
See caveats below.

The following scenario is accepted as "rape" - it was counted as rape in the statistics, it was investigated as rape - I do not know how it resolved - clearly, to me, what this woman underwent was not horrific:

Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student “was in her room with a guy with whom she’d been hooking up for three months”: “They’d now decided — mutually, she thought — just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. ‘I basically said, “No, I don’t want to have sex with you.” And then he said, “OK, that’s fine” and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didn’t do anything — I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.’” Six weeks later, the woman reported that she had been raped.

As I thought about it last night, I started considering another angle (that I plan to explore in a different thread eventually) that involves rhohypnol - the "date rape" drug, aka "roofies". One of the effects of rhohypnol is that the user becomes compliant and open to suggestions that they would otherwise reject. Another effect is that of amnesia - MRI studies have shown that the regions of the brain responsible for creating short term memory and converting it to long term memory are inactive when taking rhohypnol. IOW, it's not that memory is masked. No memory is created.

Apparently, without memory of traumatic events, no psychological effects develop. (As an aside, there's been some interesting research done using rhohypnol to extinguish memory in patients with PTSD)

In the settings that often are related to rape - clubbing, raves, frat parties - rhohypnol is usually taken (or given) with other drugs such as alcohol, marijuana, ecstasy, etc. These combinations usually exacerbate the effects under consideration.

And so, the following scenario often ensues:

A woman takes or is given rhohypnol. When she awakes in the morning, she has no memory of the events of the night before, but suspects that she may have been raped. She reports it and is examined in the hospital where it is determined that she was sexually active the night before. No physical damage is noted. She is currently taking birth control pills. There was nobody at the party with whom she would normally have had sex - no ex-boyfriends, no acquaintances - in fact, every guy at the party was incredibly ugly - if sex occurred, she is certain that she did not give consent. She admits that she may not have refused consent. The hospital reports it as a rape and it is investigated as a rape.

And so we have a woman who has been "raped".

No physical damage has occurred.

No memory was created, so no psychological damage has occurred.


Was this "rape" horrific?

Yes. You say no psychological damage has occurred because she didn't remember the actual act. But knowing that it occurred could still be traumatizing to someone. And no need to use quotes.

But really, why ask if it's horrific or not? :idunno:

 

[bybee]

Yes, you did for a profane word use, not for the same things they are being popped for, that is no different than what he does all the time, push and push for response then pop when they give him what hes begging for.

Then he reports them for what he started and did worse, but erased or feigned it was about something else, after he editted it. then he brags he isnt like that, when hes worse.

Ive seen no "frivolous" comments on his whining reports or seen no "ignore it patrick" like on quetzels report.

I understand im taking a chance now of being infracted for just talking about it since its been said to ignore Patrick completely as if he can do as he damn well pleases and then mock right after he crawls out from under the skirt that shielded him.

So im off my soapbox now, i think what i had to suffer for months when my son died at the hands of a witch, and nothing was done expect repeated verbal warnings - gives me the right to speak up of what i see as total insanity.

My grief, of course doesn't touch claims of mental illness i know though huh. Being called a baby using an image, is much worse than stealing my avatar and posting it naked in chat - saying I look like a tranny hooker based on my user page pic and told i claimed my dead son was gay and that he didnt really die, of course is much more acceptable than a baby pic, right?

So i hope you can understand what lens im seeing this through.

If patrick cant handle being called a baby after taunting people to death, patrick is the one who needs to leave.

Hes being truth smacked when hes called on his lies too. Isnt that part of what this board is about?

And you do not know what goes on behind the scenes to try to resolve problems.

 

[CabinetMaker]

the part of your post that i excerpted and responded to in my post: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4523344&postcount=37

you posted:

"So in your mind, anything that you can think of that is "worse" makes rape okay."

that was a lie

Oddly amusing are the lengths to which you will go to avoid an honest conversation.

 

[Angel4Truth]

And you do not know what goes on behind the scenes to try to resolve problems.

baby pic = infraction vs taunting a grieving mother for months and months with obscene pics and outrageous comments resulting in nothing but "next time you'll get it" for the 100th time is all i needed to see.

I am not so stupid that i didnt get that her 500$ lifetime membership bought her immunity.

If i had to suck that up, and get over it, patrick sure needs to suck up being called a baby for acting like one.

 

[ok doser]

i tell you that i won't engage you because you lie, show you what the lie is and you come back with this?

Oddly amusing are the lengths to which you will go to avoid an honest conversation.

go away CM, you're not interested in having an honest conversation

 

[patrick jane]

i tell you that i won't engage you because you lie, show you what the lie is and you come back with this?


go away CM, you're not worth bothering with

View attachment 20805

 

[CabinetMaker]

i tell you that i won't engage you because you lie, show you what the lie is and you come back with this?


go away CM, you're not worth bothering with

You're spiraling in.

I offered you a snarky comment to help you refine your position and you start whining about me lying. Wasn't a lie mate, it was a synopsis of what your coments lead a person to believe.