🚀 go-pugleaf

On Feb 11, 10:25 am, Ace♠™ <blackstu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's some dialog I've been having with a couple of pedophiles on a
> You Tube comments section:
>
> Ace:
> He was probably a latent pedophile (at the time), but latent
> pedophiles need to continually have the crap scared out of them, to
> keep them under their rock. This is one type of "witch hunt" that
> should always continue full force, because these sickos are real life
> monsters. Never give them an inch of wiggle room. Zero tolerance in
> all aspects of pedophilia is what's needed.
>
> Timmy:
> Latent pedophile? Seriously? He ran a website to share photos of
> little girls, socialize with other pedophiles, and publicize real life
> kiddy events. There was nothing 'latent' about Jack. He was, and still
> is a genuine pedophile. There is nothing that can change this fact. He
> wasn't guilty of any crimes. He was simply persecuted for being a non-
> offending pedophile. And yet, scaring the "crap out of him" failed to
> prevent him from airing his opinion on tv! Go Jack!!
>
> Ace:
> By latent pedophile I meant, according to him, he hasn't molested any
> children yet. If he is as you say a full pedophile, the chances of him
> acting on those urges are likely to extremely likely. Scaring the
> crap out of him i.e. "persecuting" him, will hopefully keep him from
> crossing the line after what's happened to him already. Pedophiles are
> depraved individuals who pose a threat to our children in all
> instances. His website advertized these kids to other pedophiles who
> do molest children.
>
> Timmy:
> Meeting the criteria for pedophilia does not require the molestation
> of children. Child sexual assault is a basis for diagnosis, but its
> absence does not preclude it. Jack can, and probably will, live his
> entire life without molesting a single child, and yet still meet the
> criteria for pedophilia. He was coping with his attractions by living
> within the law, as so many pedophiles do. Persecuting individuals
> based on their life-long, unchosen, sexual attractions, is not worthy
> of a modern society.
>
> Ace:
> Every pedophile is a latent child molester. Fear is often the only
> thing that keeps them from acting out. They don't consider sex
> a"consenting child" molestation/assault. Guys like you who defend it,
> rationalize it and advertise being one worry me as a PhD in behavioral
> science who's dealt with these issues for over a decade. I've talked
> to dozens of guys like you. Many have end up as convicted molesters.
> Don't look for sympathy. Pedophiles are depraved creeps, not victims.
>
> Timmy:
> "..all efforts to direct or change feelings of sexual attraction are
> experimental. There is as yet no scientific evidence that any
> particular method is generally effective and safe." - agetaboo. org
> Why would a fifteen year old boy with such feelings, place himself in
> the hands of someone who considers such people to be 'depraved
> creeps'?
>
> Ace:
> There's no good form of pedophilia. It is a self-serving self-
> justifying selfish pathology that exploits and victimizes people in
> every way shape and form it exists in. The 15 year old was probably
> the victim of pedophilia and now he will probably go on to make new
> victims like a virus or a vampire. Those of us who have worked the
> dirty side of the street, hip deep in its filth, know too much about
> it. How exploited were the boys in that picture? Is it the beginning
> shot of a porn spread?
>
> Timmy:
> You can play the ignorant fool to suit your argument, but the facts
> remain, the cycle of abuse you refer to has little scientific support.
> Pedophiles are the result of a biological predisposition, and many,
> probably most, are not the result of child molestation. They are young
> boys who upon reaching adolescence, discover this about themselves, in
> the same way that homosexual youth discover their sexuality. Not quite
> worthy of a response, the answer to your cheap shot is actually NO.
>
> Ace:
> Pedophilia is recognized by us who deal with it as a pathology. What
> you want to euphemize it as makes no difference to us who've been hip
> deep in it. I'm a behavioral scientist who's dealt with this for over
> a decade. I've heard everything you're trying to sell a thousand
> times. We who deal with this stuff and help law enforcement have never
> been swayed by it and we never will be. Pedophiles always trying to
> use kids as a plea it the real cheap shot and it's completely
> transparent.
>
> Timmy:
> The only thing transparent is your evasion of the facts. You repeat a
> fallacy ( the cycle of abuse theory) for which I call you out on, and
> you make no effort to deny it. Regardless of how pedophilia is
> defined, you know I speak the truth. This disorder occurs in children
> and remains with them throughout their lives. Logically, if you care
> about children (which I really doubt), then you need to care for those
> with pedophilia as well !
>
> Ace:
> Cycle of abuse is something counselors and law enforcement encounter
> all the time. I certainly have in the 25 years I've worked with the
> system.Sometimes the disorder occurs on it's own, sometimes it stems
> from cycle of abuse. But I'm glad you recognize it as a disorder. It's
> a disorder that causes a lot of damage via exploitation and
> molestation. Lets say I care more about the victims of pedophiles. And
> I think pathological pedophiles trying to counsel other pedophiles
> constitutes enabling.
>
> Timmy:
> "Disorder" is a meaningless term when so many people can meet some
> diagnoses or another under the DSM. As a homosexual person who also
> has pedophilia, it is impossible for me to differentiate or separate
> the two conditions. If one belongs in the DSM as a disorder, then they
> both do. They are separate only due to political reasons, not
> scientific ones, which you're no doubt already aware.
> A disorder it may be, but, so what??
> And enabling? Whatever that infers. I'm merely expressing an opinion.
>
> Ace:
> I still like you classifying pedophilia as a disorder rather
> euphemistically calling it an "orientation", when in actuality it's a
> pathology. I'm very aware pedophiles want in on the gay rights
> movement. The gay community as a whole will fight you more on that
> than I will. I was speaking of sage pedophiles offering support to
> novice pedophiles in general as enabling. Hundreds of adults have
> testified how pedophiles have ruined their lives. Pedophilia is ugly,
> harmful and destructive.
>
> Boy P:
> you wrong bro. check this out
> cogsci.stackexchange. (remove space) com/questions/587/is-pedophili­a-
> a-sexual-orientation-or-a-me­ntal-disorder
>
> Ace:
> This kind of fringe science / pseudo science has been around for a
> very long time. I've been a behavioral scientist for 25 years, bro.
> I've seen it all and it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Pedophiles
> need to recognize pedophilia as an illness that needs to be combated,
> instead of seeking to enable it further and thus continuing to inflict
> harm. Do you care about how many men have become drug and alcohol
> addicted, because of a pedophile in their past? Look what happened to
> Corey Haim.
>
> Boy P:
> and this one also
> lifesitenews. com/news/pedophilia-a-sexual-o­rientation-experts-tell-
> parlia­ment/
>
> Ace:
> That's nothing different than stuff I've seen as far back as the
> 90's. The focus is always going to be on the kids, no matter what a
> team of pedophiles or pedophile apologists/supporters come up with.
> People aren't going to be okay with an adult having a sexual/romantic
> relationship with a child. And there's just been too many adults who
> were in such relationships as kids coming forward and detailing how
> badly it screwed them up. Things aren't easing up for pedophiles,
> they're getting tougher.
>
> Timmy:
> Some might consider needlessly marking other's comments as spam,
> unfitting behavior for an individual with a PhD in Behavioral Science.
> You could easily block me, ignore me, or not even return to the
> thread. Possibly, I've hit a nerve?. Perhaps you are indeed harboring
> some guilt or feel personally responsible for an unknown number of
> child sexual assaults?
> I absolutely hold you responsible as well. Time to change your
> tactics!
> continue to acknowledge your guilt by marking as spam if you like
>
> Ace:
> Why would I mark your comment as spam? I have no problem dialoging
> with you. I'm always hopeful such dialogs will be educational. You're
> not saying anything I haven't heard a zillion times. Why do you think
> a nerve would suddenly be hit after all this time? Stop being
> ridiculous.
>
> To be continued (?)

You certainly have a big mouth and yet you cannot even condemn a
cowardly
lying bigot bob&carole for lying about Barney, suggesting that he gets
pageboys stoned and then rapes them, something he has failed to prove
despite being asked to many times.

On Feb 11, 3:24 pm, "ram...@truthonly.com.swordofbaal"
<ramrodattrutho...@gmail.com> wrote:
]
>
> You certainly have a big mouth and yet you cannot even condemn a
> cowardly
> lying bigot bob&carole for lying about Barney, suggesting that he gets
> pageboys stoned and then rapes them, something he has failed to prove
> despite being asked to many times.

There you go again, trying to pull my strings. You're going to have t
o come to grips with the fact that you simply can't psychologically
manipulate someone who has a PhD in behavioral science.

As for the rest, I don't stalk B&C and therefore... at this time...
Have no idea what B&C has said about Barney.

And me not joining you in your whining and meltdowns, does not equate
to me supporting a particular person.

I am the one who decides what I post, not you.

However, I have heard things of this nature about Barney apart from
whatever B&C has had to say about it... so B&C is obviously not the
exclusive generator of these accusations. However, usually where
there's smoke, there's fire.

Initially nobody could prove Bill Clinton was having sex with Monica
Lewinsky in the Oval Office. That didn't mean it wasn't happening at
the time.

On Feb 11, 9:29 pm, "Max" <Klon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Ace♠™ <blackstu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 11, 3:24 pm, "ram...@truthonly.com.swordofbaal"<ramrodattrutho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You certainly have a big mouth.
>
> Hey Ace, did you notice how he seems to be against you denouncing those pedophiles?

No, that didn't escape my attention. It's the same attitude he
displayed in alt.support.boy-lovers when I was speaking out against
pedophilia to pedophiles there. It really seems to bother him.