@stormydaycuddle I didn't read every post on here. Don't know who the rapist bff is. Who is telling you to give rapists a second chance? Did someone really say that?
All I'm saying that listing someone as "ex-convict" with no other information is a terrible way to try to sort out good people from bad people. Most people who will sexually assault someone will be people who will not have a criminal record. And I was pointing out that I know several people with criminal records of some sort and none of them are dangerous people even two of them who I believe are on the sex offender list. (They didn't commit any sort of sexual violence.)
So even if we did collect names and identifications and ran them through some filter, it would create a false sense of security as well as punish people that are not at all of a risk. In other words it would be pretty useless. You would have to go through each one by hand and read the case history and find out if they did something involving sexual violence. And of course doing that probably drive most people away. Who is going to check out some new site if the first thing you need to do is do a background check. That's quite a barrier to entry.
But I'm also saying that whether someone should be trusted, should be a personal decision of the person putting themselves at risk not some rule run by the site. Everyone should do that by themselves. Most people conduct some kind of interview where they have a conversation. That's a much better way to make a decision on whether someone is safe. If someone wants to give an actual rapist a second chance as you say, that's entirely up to them. Some people might feel, and it may be backed up by data as someone brought up, that such a person might not be any more likely to offend and be ok with it. Others may not be.
I don't know who "pseudo intellectual" was aimed at. He didn't say. I am just saying that it is rude whether it is me or anyone else. You'll never hear me call people names because I don't agree with their point.
Anyway, I don't quite understand the level of hostility here but I think you are somehow misunderstand what I was saying.
Sometimes I wonder where the warm fuzzies come from? Lack of decorum. Pseudo intellectualism. Needing to be seen as right on a technicality (which I don't believe for a second is true) or the need to defend ones personal sins. I truly hope this isn't a personal argument. It sounds personal. The fact that this is still being hashed out word for word to obtain some smidge of a win in an argument makes me lack faith in human decency. I wish Hades is a place and all bffs never see the Elysian fields. Anger level: pretty low. I do wish all the bffs would go to hades but I'm not mad about it.
Also, on another matter. I think people may have missed my post about attempting to call women hostile when they are being firm. Its a form of abuse that is narcissistic. I'm not saying anyone IS narcissistic. I'm pointing out its a tactic used by such abusers and may want to be avoided in the future.
Anger level: 3 (because I'm still having to talk about this) Hostility level: 0 I wish no malice.
This thread is still alive? If you slept with a pet cobra and it bit you and you barely lived, would you try again on the off chance it won’t bite this time? The cobra might not bite again but those that value their life would have donated the cobra to a zoo. Likewise a sex offender might not offend again, but why would you dangle the candy in front of him? You are not a bad human being if you use common sense as a weapon to protect yourself.
It seems like there's a broken record going. No matter how many times it repeats its still messed up. That's a fact.
Anger level: 0 I'm over it. If people want to be disgusting its their own time and breath.
I'm just confused about the way people are reacting but I'm done trying to sort out other people's misunderstanding. Feels like people are arguing with ghosts. I write what I write carefully so that people can read it again more closely if they get lost. It should stand on its own. I guess pmvines thinks that's called "psuedo-intellectual". No, it's just careful, precise writing to minimize confusion. Maybe it's "cool" to write sloppily or emotionally with personal attacks but that leads to far more confusion and animosity. Not interested in such discussions.
If my words somehow reminds someone of something someone else said and triggers some reaction, I'm not responsible for such associations. I'm responsible for MY words not someone else's or imagined words. That should be so obvious that it shouldn't need to be said.
Not the greatest example of grown adults conversing on a message board. I have to say I am disappointed.
@dave31415 then stop hopping in and taking credit. @pmvines never said a word about you. And you're clearly interested in something because you keep coming back but I'm guessing its trolling. And there's nothing about this that is confusing.
Low key predator defending doesn't go unnoticed. Pretending you don't understand the fights you are picking doesn't absolve you.
This thread provokes rubbernecking from readers.
@dave31415 dmed me which was nice of him considering how long this has gone on and the sass level that has been thrown his way. It may be a misunderstanding and I hope we can come to an amicable resolution off the forum in a moment. Hugs.
Statutory rape was defended several times I feel like. It wasn't a really pointed out if we're talking about an 18 year old with a 17 year old. Statutory rape does not belong in the same category as streaking or urinating in public. It is predatory
And this idea that sex offenders should get a second chance is ridiculous. Drug addicts and drug dealers should get a second chance third chance fourth chance 5th chance. Okay shouldn't even be crimes but they are. Breaking and entering should get multiple chances.
Also how do so many people on here no people that are considered sexual offenders because of urinating. I don't think I know or associate in any way with anybody that is on a sex offender list.
There was undoubtedly apologists for sexual assault and rape in this thread.
And PM Vines was right about the pseudo intellectual bullshit. I don't want to put words in his mouth but I also feel like he kind of wanted to say people trying to be edgy as well.
If you people are going to insult people, at least say who you are talking about. If not, multiple people are going to think you are talking about them. That just makes it worse not better.
@dave31415 : why would that make it worse not better? I'm going to go out in the window and say that if you feel insulted the insults were probably targeted towards you from some of the people.
@hugo_stieglitz I have no idea. Stormy seemed to think I was defending someone else but I didn't even know who she meant. So I felt I needed to defend my own comments and maybe I didn't. So throw around vague accusations and you get the wrong people on the defensive and you waste everyone's time. So if you have a problem with someone in particular, be a grownup and address them directly. That's what the @ symbol is for. Otherwise you are just polluting a conversation with noise.
I'm just surprised that there is still so much pontificating about wanting to know if an interwebs stranger you involve yourself in closed quarters close contact activities with is a sex offender. I dont care what somebody's opinion is about sex offenders and how they are treated and viewed on a societal level , and I don't care how much thought and debate is put into splitting all of the hairs in all of the arguments . That has nothing to do with the issue of somebody wanting to feel safe with who they meet and possibly cuddle with.
@dave31415 I did @ you for the record twice on page 5. I asked. Crossed wires. Idk. @hugo_stieglitz sigh. You know?
I’ve got OCD. I admit I don’t let things go easily but GD people seriously… sometimes it’s not the logical technicalities. There’s the human aspect too.
I’m supposed to be in bed so I’m going to try that. We’ll see if it works. Night all.
@dave31415 You seem angry. Stormy said you guys worked this out off the forum. Now you are ranting and it’s not a good reflection on you. There is no battle to be won. Not everyone is going to agree with your opinion every time. Usually you seem levelheaded but this is not one of those times. I am not attacking, just merely saying take a deep breath and that this is not worth getting worked up over.
I had a guy reach out to me for a cuddle. No messages prior, he just booked me without a hello first. No big deal normally. But the red flag was that one of the first things he says, he paid for a BJ from a lady about a half hour away from me. She took the money, and went to put it away, and he says two guys came after him. He also wanted to make sure I lived alone “For my safety so I don’t get beat up…”
It kind of turned me off right away because it came across he’s expecting sex, especially if I live alone. I declined any sessions as I wasn’t comfortable with knowing he paid for sex, and May take advantage of me as a pro since I charge. I’m all for safety for everyone. But sexual misconduct is not something I’m willing to accept
My general stance on background checks is there are good people with a criminal record, and there are bad people who haven't been caught yet. I am not a fan of the criminal justice system and do not trust it to keep me safe. Everyone here should have some basic safety training before meeting people. Do you know what sex offenders don't like? Self-assured people with clear and solid boundaries. I have a multi-layered screening process: my profile is very clear and detailed with a code of conduct, I require all new clients to do a consultation call with me, and I ask for a 50% deposit. Most people who are looking for sexual services or who want to assault someone are going to be deterred 99% of the time. You always have to be vigilant in this world and you cannot rely on others to keep you safe
I just found out today that a best friend of mine met someone from another site to cuddle and when the piece of shit incel poor excuse for a human didnt get his way with her he beat her so badly she landed in the ER . For his safety the police need to get to him before I do because as long as I'm alive he is not safe. All I want is for that piece of trash to lose use of his hands . I dont want to hear a effing thesis about assault stats , recidivism, and hairs being split over dangerous vs non dangerous offenses . None of that matters . I dont believe that site or any are responsible for screening regardless of the real actual risk. However, shut your goddamn mouths. and take seriously the concerns that people on here have . Stop trying to use this topic to argue about nuance and perspective and seeing how you can spin it . You reduce the concerns and fears and reality that some of us face into a effing ego patting debate. Seriously, just shut up .
This thread is closed until further notice. Thank you, and have a nice day.