Generation Wuss and related crap
Fondled from the start.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...13qQCrIi1HDgM0
"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”
Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.
The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.
Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.”
Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.
...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...13qQCrIi1HDgM0
'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males'
How some university academics make the case for paedophiles at summer conferences
"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”
Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.
The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.
Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.”
Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.
...
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Actual* police conversation:
"Well, sir, the suspect was holding a rubber chicken."
"A rubber chicken?
"He was holding it brazenly, sir."
"Ah, well, clearly a sex offender, then."
* = not an actual police conversation.
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Actual* excerpt from Virginia Criminal Code:
§ 18.2-67.4:2. Sexual abuse of a child under 16 years of age;
No personal shall possess or display any chicken, or facsimile thereof, within a distance of 500 feet of any school, library, church, playground, or other public space commonly used as an assembly place for persons under 16 years of age.
* = If Brainey wrote the laws.
§ 18.2-67.4:2. Sexual abuse of a child under 16 years of age;
No personal shall possess or display any chicken, or facsimile thereof, within a distance of 500 feet of any school, library, church, playground, or other public space commonly used as an assembly place for persons under 16 years of age.
* = If Brainey wrote the laws.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Elite Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Reply
0
0
Honk if you're living in a clown world
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/29...I-lW8.facebook
Clark will be subject to arrest if any police officer has 'reasonable' grounds to believe that he's referred to his daughter as female in public or private. APRIL 29, 2019 By Jeremiah KeenanLast Wednesday, The Federalist reported that the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, declared a father guilty of family violence for his polite refusal to refer to his daughter as a boy in private, and his repeated choice to affirm in media interviews that she is a girl.
At about the same time that story was published, the Supreme Court issued an additional, more heavy-handed “protection order” from the same ruling. The three-page document declares that the father, Clark*, will henceforth be subject to arrest, immediately and “without warrant” if any police officer has “reasonable” grounds to believe that he has in any way referred to his daughter as a girl in public or in private....
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/29...I-lW8.facebook
Authorities To Arrest Canadian Father If He Refers To Trans Child As Her Real Sex
Clark will be subject to arrest if any police officer has 'reasonable' grounds to believe that he's referred to his daughter as female in public or private. APRIL 29, 2019 By Jeremiah KeenanLast Wednesday, The Federalist reported that the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, declared a father guilty of family violence for his polite refusal to refer to his daughter as a boy in private, and his repeated choice to affirm in media interviews that she is a girl.
At about the same time that story was published, the Supreme Court issued an additional, more heavy-handed “protection order” from the same ruling. The three-page document declares that the father, Clark*, will henceforth be subject to arrest, immediately and “without warrant” if any police officer has “reasonable” grounds to believe that he has in any way referred to his daughter as a girl in public or in private....
Reply
0
0
related:
https://munchies.vice.com/en_us/arti...infection-cure
https://mashable.com/article/dont-put-garlic-in-vagina/
https://www.oprahmag.com/life/health...th-dr-guntner/
https://thetakeout.com/doctor-tells-...nas-1834301079
https://www.health.com/yeast-infecti...east-infection
how in the **** are women this dumb?!
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 22,204
Total Cats: 3,560
From: Tampa, Florida
Reply
0
0
Canada seriously went full crazy...
https://sovereignnations.com/2019/04...Ia1pv3ndRTGgaw
Canada’s Ontario province has passed legislation that allows the government to seize children from families that refuse to accept their child’s chosen “gender identity” or “gender expression.”
The so-called Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017, or Bill 89, was approved by a vote of 63 to 23, according to The Christian Times.
It requires child protection, foster, adoption service providers, and judges to take into account and respect a child’s “race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.”
“I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently,” Minister of Child and Family Services Michael Coteau, who introduced the bill, was quoted as saying. “If it’s abuse, and if it’s within the definition, a child can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.”
The bill replaces the Child and Family Services Act, or Bill 28, which governs child protection, foster care and adoption services.
Bill 28 stated that the parent of a child in care retains the right “to direct the child’s education and religious upbringing.” However, the new law amends it thus: “to direct the child or young person’s education and upbringing, in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.”
Irwin Elman, Ontario’s provincial advocate for children and youth, said in a statement, “I believe that this new Act, in its principles, represents a paradigm shift for the province with its commitment to the participation of children and youth in every decision that affects them, the creation of a child-centered system of service, and commitment to anti-racism and children’s rights.”
Jack Fonseca, senior political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, disagrees, and was quoted as saying, “With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history. Make no mistake, Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”
In April, a Christian couple filed a lawsuit against Hamilton Children’s Aid Society for removing two foster children from their home because they refused to lie to the girls by saying that the Easter bunny is real.
“We have a no-lying policy,” Derek Baars, one of the foster parents, said at the time, pointing out that a child support worker insisted that he and his wife, Frances Baars, tell the two girls in their care, aged 3 and 4, the Easter bunny is real. “We explained to the agency that we are not prepared to tell the children a lie. If the children asked, we would not lie to them, but we wouldn’t bring it up ourselves.”
The eligibility of the Baars, members of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, was canceled and the children were taken away. The CAS worker, who insisted that the Baars teach the kids that the Easter bunny is genuine, told them that the Easter bunny was an important part of Canadian culture.
Read more at https://sovereignnations.com/2019/04...JqvYY7bWsry.99
https://sovereignnations.com/2019/04...Ia1pv3ndRTGgaw
Ontario Passes Law Allowing Gov’t to Seize Children From Parents Who Oppose Gender Transition
The so-called Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017, or Bill 89, was approved by a vote of 63 to 23, according to The Christian Times.
It requires child protection, foster, adoption service providers, and judges to take into account and respect a child’s “race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.”
“I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently,” Minister of Child and Family Services Michael Coteau, who introduced the bill, was quoted as saying. “If it’s abuse, and if it’s within the definition, a child can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.”
The bill replaces the Child and Family Services Act, or Bill 28, which governs child protection, foster care and adoption services.
Bill 28 stated that the parent of a child in care retains the right “to direct the child’s education and religious upbringing.” However, the new law amends it thus: “to direct the child or young person’s education and upbringing, in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.”
Irwin Elman, Ontario’s provincial advocate for children and youth, said in a statement, “I believe that this new Act, in its principles, represents a paradigm shift for the province with its commitment to the participation of children and youth in every decision that affects them, the creation of a child-centered system of service, and commitment to anti-racism and children’s rights.”
Jack Fonseca, senior political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, disagrees, and was quoted as saying, “With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history. Make no mistake, Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”
In April, a Christian couple filed a lawsuit against Hamilton Children’s Aid Society for removing two foster children from their home because they refused to lie to the girls by saying that the Easter bunny is real.
“We have a no-lying policy,” Derek Baars, one of the foster parents, said at the time, pointing out that a child support worker insisted that he and his wife, Frances Baars, tell the two girls in their care, aged 3 and 4, the Easter bunny is real. “We explained to the agency that we are not prepared to tell the children a lie. If the children asked, we would not lie to them, but we wouldn’t bring it up ourselves.”
The eligibility of the Baars, members of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, was canceled and the children were taken away. The CAS worker, who insisted that the Baars teach the kids that the Easter bunny is genuine, told them that the Easter bunny was an important part of Canadian culture.
Read more at https://sovereignnations.com/2019/04...JqvYY7bWsry.99
Reply
0
0
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 356
Total Cats: 93
From: Central Texas
Any chance ya read the bill instead of trusting the journalistic integrity of sovereignnations.com?
It's a pretty dang high bar to take someone's kid away according to the text, and this is the absolute closest thing mentioned in the last re: gender fluidiwatchamacallit. Doesn't scream socialist transgender child army conspiracy to me but what do I know.
Sec 74(2), which describes when a child is in need of government protection, is essentially the crux of this whole hullabaloo, specifically if we look at subpoints (f) through (j):
(f) the child has suffered emotional harm, demonstrated by serious,
(i) anxiety,
(ii) depression,
(iii) withdrawal,
(iv) self-destructive or aggressive behaviour, or
(v) delayed development,
and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the emotional harm suffered by the child results from the actions, failure to act or pattern of neglect on the part of the child's parent or the person having charge of the child;
(g) the child has suffered emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) and the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide services or treatment or access to services or treatment, or, where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to the treatment to remedy or alleviate the harm;
(h) there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) resulting from the actions, failure to act or pattern of neglect on the part of the child's parent or the person having charge of the child;
(i) there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) and that the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide services or treatment or access to services or treatment, or, where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to treatment to prevent the harm;
(j) the child suffers from a mental, emotional or developmental condition that, if not remedied, could seriously impair the child's development and the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide treatment or access to treatment, or where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to the treatment to remedy or alleviate the condition;
"
It's a pretty dang high bar to take someone's kid away according to the text, and this is the absolute closest thing mentioned in the last re: gender fluidiwatchamacallit. Doesn't scream socialist transgender child army conspiracy to me but what do I know.
Sec 74(2), which describes when a child is in need of government protection, is essentially the crux of this whole hullabaloo, specifically if we look at subpoints (f) through (j):
(f) the child has suffered emotional harm, demonstrated by serious,
(i) anxiety,
(ii) depression,
(iii) withdrawal,
(iv) self-destructive or aggressive behaviour, or
(v) delayed development,
and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the emotional harm suffered by the child results from the actions, failure to act or pattern of neglect on the part of the child's parent or the person having charge of the child;
(g) the child has suffered emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) and the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide services or treatment or access to services or treatment, or, where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to the treatment to remedy or alleviate the harm;
(h) there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) resulting from the actions, failure to act or pattern of neglect on the part of the child's parent or the person having charge of the child;
(i) there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer emotional harm of the kind described in subclause (f) (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) and that the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide services or treatment or access to services or treatment, or, where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to treatment to prevent the harm;
(j) the child suffers from a mental, emotional or developmental condition that, if not remedied, could seriously impair the child's development and the child's parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide treatment or access to treatment, or where the child is incapable of consenting to treatment under the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to the treatment to remedy or alleviate the condition;
"
Reply
0
0
^And what doctors make the diagnosis for "suffered emotional harm"? Not doctors employed by the state, right? Oh wait.
Do you know how low the bar is to diagnose that stuff if you're getting paid to make sure it ends up that way?
8yr old girl wants to play baseball and wear boardshorts... parent's say no, you'll wear a dress and keep a ponytail. Kid gets on with her life until a teacher overhears her talking to a girlfriend about how strict her parents are... so sends her to the guidance counselor, who refers her to the principal, who calls in the physchologist and diagnoses her a having "severe anxiety"... now she's an orphan but has gov't funded ***** surgery followed by a suicide. How woke.
This is the same country pulling kids our of foster care if the parent's tell them the Easter Bunny is fake. Nothing to see here.
Do you know how low the bar is to diagnose that stuff if you're getting paid to make sure it ends up that way?
8yr old girl wants to play baseball and wear boardshorts... parent's say no, you'll wear a dress and keep a ponytail. Kid gets on with her life until a teacher overhears her talking to a girlfriend about how strict her parents are... so sends her to the guidance counselor, who refers her to the principal, who calls in the physchologist and diagnoses her a having "severe anxiety"... now she's an orphan but has gov't funded ***** surgery followed by a suicide. How woke.
This is the same country pulling kids our of foster care if the parent's tell them the Easter Bunny is fake. Nothing to see here.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Honk if you're clowny.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/01/s...1T05%3A44%3A58
A landmark ruling concerning one of the most contested issues in sport -- gender identity -- has sent shockwaves through track and field in setting out new parameters for female athletes.
On Wednesday, double Olympic champion Caster Semenya lost her appeal against the introduction of new rules regulating the testosterone levels for athletes with a difference in sex development (DSD).
The 28-year-old South African, who is hyperandrogenous -- meaning she has elevated levels of testosterone -- will now need to take medication to reduce her testosterone if she wants to compete internationally at events between 400 meters and one mile. Semenya is the dominant force in women's middle distance running.
In its ruling the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) announced that its three-person panel had rejected Semenya's challenge against athletics' governing body -- the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) -- "by majority" but did add that it had "serious concerns as to the future practical application" of the new rules.Under the IAAF's policy, which will now come into effect on May 8, all DSD athletes, who are usually born with testes, would have to reduce their blood testosterone levels to below five nmol/L for a continuous period of at least six months, and maintain those levels continuously for the rest of their athletic career, if they want to compete internationally at middle-distance events.
but if youre a guy and just say youre a woman, you can compete.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/01/s...1T05%3A44%3A58
Caster Semenya ruling redefines what it means to be female in sport
A landmark ruling concerning one of the most contested issues in sport -- gender identity -- has sent shockwaves through track and field in setting out new parameters for female athletes.
On Wednesday, double Olympic champion Caster Semenya lost her appeal against the introduction of new rules regulating the testosterone levels for athletes with a difference in sex development (DSD).
The 28-year-old South African, who is hyperandrogenous -- meaning she has elevated levels of testosterone -- will now need to take medication to reduce her testosterone if she wants to compete internationally at events between 400 meters and one mile. Semenya is the dominant force in women's middle distance running.
In its ruling the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) announced that its three-person panel had rejected Semenya's challenge against athletics' governing body -- the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) -- "by majority" but did add that it had "serious concerns as to the future practical application" of the new rules.Under the IAAF's policy, which will now come into effect on May 8, all DSD athletes, who are usually born with testes, would have to reduce their blood testosterone levels to below five nmol/L for a continuous period of at least six months, and maintain those levels continuously for the rest of their athletic career, if they want to compete internationally at middle-distance events.
but if youre a guy and just say youre a woman, you can compete.
Reply
0
0
How to play the game:
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/take...UF1ouexWql0iJU
https://www.thepetitionsite.com/take...UF1ouexWql0iJU
Demand Captain Marvel is Played by a Woman of Color, not Brie Larson!
Reply
0
0
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...4_EUGSZMJxc6h8
Best of both worlds! Dateless 16-year-old takes HIMSELF to his school prom in a one-of-a-kind outfit that is half-suit and half-dress
- Wyatt Cheatle, a 16-year-old student at Brighton High School in Rochester, New York, went all out while creating his one-of-a-kind look before his junior prom
- The idea came about after he joked with his family about wearing a dress to the prom because he was thinking about going alone
- He and his mother, Kelly Cheatle, headed to Goodwill, where they picked up a dress, a *****-bow blouse, a purple dress shirt, and a pair of black pants
- His mother put the look together, placing the blouse and skirt of the dress on one side and the button-down and pants on the other before sewing it in place
- Wyatt said he a 'good time' at prom and 'got a lot of compliments' on his outfit
Reply
0
0
