does rap music explain why whites are so violent?

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
You said you were on your way to buy drugs. Don't try and change the story now. You got busted in a neighborhood, you look out of place in while you were on your why to purchase drugs. If you did nothing wrong you should have took it to court. You didn't because they cut your crackhead a break

I would pay the $1000 to stay out of crooked Camden court again.

You don’t know what you are talking about. And it was mentioned as an example as asked almost a year ago.

Buck and now you keep bringing it up for no reason but to troll and pretend you are somehow superior.

It’s kind of sad dude. Find something positive to do.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I would pay the $1000 to stay out of crooked Camden court again.

You don’t know what you are talking about. And it was mentioned as an example as asked almost a year ago.

Buck and now you keep bringing it up for no reason but to troll and pretend you are somehow superior.

It’s kind of sad dude. Find something positive to do.
why does your story about that event keep changing?

are you a pathological serial liar?
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
I would pay the $1000 to stay out of crooked Camden court again.

You don’t know what you are talking about. And it was mentioned as an example as asked almost a year ago.

Buck and now you keep bringing it up for no reason but to troll and pretend you are somehow superior.

It’s kind of sad dude. Find something positive to do.
Why the fuck you trying to change your story ? You got caught up on your way to purchase drugs. They only arrested the whites not the black. That was your story.
Do I sound superior to you ? You need to stop doing hard drugs dude
 

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
then why didn;t you say "just try visiting someone in the city with white face. they will arrest you and leave the black"?

You asked (a long time ago in a thread far far away) for an example of white profiling. You thought you were being clever. But rounding up the rich white kids driving into the drug areas is common. I just happened to pull up at the wrong time. I wasn’t a street copping junkie. I was wearing a suit and tie from my job and parked legally and locked up the car. They grabbed me right next to a group of black guys selling drugs. They let them go.

You can’t make definitive statements about situations you know nothing about. Well you can but you can’t know you are correct.

Why are you still bringing it up?
 

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
Why the fuck you trying to change your story ? You got caught up on your way to purchase drugs. They only arrested the whites not the black. That was your story.
Do I sound superior to you ? You need to stop doing hard drugs dude

My story hasn’t changed at all. You guys keep wanting more details. Then conveniently forget them to try to “get me” for whatever reason. And I haven’t done drugs for almost twice as long as I did them now.
 

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
why does your story about that event keep changing?

are you a pathological serial liar?

It has not changed at all. I didn’t tell it all last year though. I told you the rest recently. You kept badgering me so I told you more. You just pretend to or really don’t remember.

I haven’t lied about anything junior. And you don’t know enough about life to pretend you are an authority.

How bout you answer any of my comments that pertained to your threads? You avoided every one of them.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
You asked (a long time ago in a thread far far away) for an example of white profiling. You thought you were being clever. But rounding up the rich white kids driving into the drug areas is common. I just happened to pull up at the wrong time. I wasn’t a street copping junkie. I was wearing a suit and tie from my job and parked legally and locked up the car. They grabbed me right next to a group of black guys selling drugs. They let them go.

You can’t make definitive statements about situations you know nothing about. Well you can but you can’t know you are correct.

Why are you still bringing it up?
how did you know the black guys were selling drugs since you claim you weren't looking for drugs?

serial pathological liar
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
is that you, roy moore? you sick fucking pedophile

ted nugent bragged about getting oral sex from a 13 year old. please do not defend pedophilia you sick fuck.

someone should shoot you in your sick fucking kiddy diddling face, asshole
What? I'm not defending pedophilia, and a 13 yearold isn't prepubscent, my point is that there's a difference between a 6 yearold in Catholic school getting raped by their priest, and a teenager with Daddy issues. Any 13 yearold who gives blowjobs to grown men likely suffered abuse early on themselves at the hands of a pedophile, and repeat the experience. I've actually been in therapy groups with women who were groomed by neighbors and trusted family friends, it's not funny, and it's lazy as fuck to just throw around accusations like you do.
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
Oh shit, lmao, so I just googled "Ted Nugent, pedophile", and found out he raped Courtney love when she was 12, ok, that gives much broader context. I thought this was about his current wife who he met when she was 16, I didn't know about this.
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
Dude, in no way does discussing the difference in nomenclature, of one word, like Mammal, and another word, like amphibian; mean I'm at a loss as to why it is wrong to persue someone without the mental/physical faculties to even consent to sex, I'm just saying, pedos fuck young children, and the people who try and fuck teens aren't ''pedophiles", they're ephebophiles, and they still prefer to act in predatory fashion. Ephebophiles will not be found at a honey boo boo fashion show, but a pedophile will, both are sexual predators.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
for the sake of being a pedant, Kid Rock may be, and Nugent was an ephebophile. As in, attracted to teens (generally 14-19), whereas pedophilia is concerning the prepubescent period, not adolescent. The distinction exists, I agree that it's still very likely Ted Nugent had groomed his now wife, after he supposedly met her at a concert of his. Her parents gave permission for them to see each other, so it seems like he went the route of knowing the family rather than a more predatory method like de-foo'ing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophilia
OMFG. another protector of pedophiles.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Dude, in no way does discussing the difference in nomenclature, of one word, like Mammal, and another word, like amphibian; mean I'm at a loss as to why it is wrong to persue someone without the mental/physical faculties to even consent to sex, I'm just saying, pedos fuck young children, and the people who try and fuck teens aren't ''pedophiles", they're ephebophiles, and they still prefer to act in predatory fashion. Ephebophiles will not be found at a honey boo boo fashion show, but a pedophile will, both are sexual predators.
pe·do·phile
[ˈpedəˌfīl]
NOUN
paedophile (noun) · paedophiles (plural noun) · pedophiles (plural noun)
  1. a person who is sexually attracted to children
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
pe·do·phile
[ˈpedəˌfīl]
NOUN
paedophile (noun) · paedophiles (plural noun) · pedophiles (plural noun)
  1. a person who is sexually attracted to children
Classification of pedophilia
Pedophilia is defined as an ongoing sexual attraction toward pre-pubertal children (Freund, 1963, 1967; Seto, 2009). In the new DSM-5, pedophilia is de-pathologized by differentiating between the sexual preference for prepubescent children (i.e., pedophilia) and the disorder in case of additional factors. These factors include experiencing significant distress and impairment by fantasies and urges, or the acting out on behavioral level, including child pornography consumption and/or committing hands-on CSA offenses.

The estimated prevalence leads to questions about the diagnostic validity and reliability of pedophilia as a classification entity. According to the DSM-5, pedophilic sexual preference and the pedophilic disorder must be differentiated. As can be seen in Table Table1,1, the behavioral criterion was not included in the DSM-5 as a specifier, though it holds relevance for researchers and clinicians. From a clinical point of view, both child pornography consumption and/or hands-on CSA offenses would count as preference behaviors (Seto, 2010; First, 2011).

Table 1
Diagnostic criteria of a pedophilic disorder according to DSM-5.

DSM-5 pedophilic disorder
Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger) Specify if:
Sexually attracted to males
Sexually attracted to females
Sexually attracted to both
The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning Specify if:
Limited to Incest
The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A Specify type:
Exclusive type (attracted only to children)
Non-exclusive type
From a clinical perspective, it is necessary to stress that there are pedophilic men who restrict their desire for sexual contact with children to fantasies only, and other men who are at risk to commit an offense because fantasy alone does not satisfy their sexual desire. This second group is potential offenders who wish to reduce their increasingly overwhelming impulses with therapeutic help (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Schaefer et al., 2010; Wakefield, 2012). It is possible for these men to be diagnosed with Pedophilic Disorder – due to experiencing interpersonal distress – without them committing an offense.

The other group of pedophilic men includes those who have committed sexual offenses against children. These individuals may feel remorse (and seek help to avoid a relapse), while others do not. Note that both fulfill criterion B of the DSM-5, as shown in Table Table1,1, means that it has to be diagnosed as Pedophilic Disorder. Furthermore, it is necessary to distinguish between the exclusive type of pedophilia (attracted only to children) and non-exclusive type, and whether the person is attracted to males, attracted to females, or to both.

It is a completely different situation for perpetrators who committed sexual offenses against children, which were not caused by a pedophilic preference. Those are the surrogate types of sex offenders and can be diagnosed within the category of impulse-control disorder, accounting for the lack of a sexual preference for children but the committed act of CSA (DSM-5: 312.89; ICD-10: 63.8). Moreover, most sexual assaults happen in the “Dunkelfeld” for approximately every reported case of CSA; another five are left unreported, suggest some scholars (Hall and Hall, 2007; Seto, 2009). Dunkelfeld is a German word that literally translates to “dark field.”

It is of great importance for clinical diagnosis whether or not an erotic preference for the body scheme of children on the fantasy-level exists. There is a high chance that this information would be given voluntarily by self-referred, self-motivated pedophilic men, but less likely by those who are already involved with the legal system (probation etc.). It is therefore essential for the assessment and a reliable diagnosis to obtain a cooperation/compliance level. In self-motivated pedophiles, this collaboration is highest and makes them a highly interesting target group for research (see Section “Methods for Diagnosing Pedophilia”).

This underlines that pedophilia as a sexual preference must be seen independently from sexual offending against children – otherwise there would be only offending pedophiles. From a research point of view, it is imperative to understand in what way the neurobiological conditions – notwithstanding sexual preference – encourage the sexual behavior. These are possibly the same mechanisms that also encourage offense-like behavior in men with other sexual preferences (for instance in the case of rape on the background of sexual preference for adult women). Additionally, research efforts have to unravel which neurobiological mechanisms determine and regulate sexual preference, and how preference and behavior are interconnected.

In the research domain, pedophilia is currently viewed as a phenotype of sexual preference within the realm of human sexuality, including various different phenotypes (e.g., the sexual orientation toward the same gender), only that it concerns a preferred age in addition to gender (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Schaefer et al., 2010). This is separate from, but in addition to, behavioral manifestations including the use of child pornography and the commitment of child sexual offenses (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Neutze et al., 2011). Consequently, the sexual preference itself cannot be considered a mental disorder similar to how a homosexual orientation was considered in the 1970s in the United States of America (Green, 2002). Separating sexual preference from psychosocial impairment, thus allowing for the practice of various sexual behaviors with consenting partners, has been applied within the new DSM-5 with the other paraphilias as well, including fetishism, bondage/dominance-sadism/masochism, and is therefore not specific to pedophilia (Wright, 2010, 2014).
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
I think there's something about written text that really makes concepts difficult to get across. Any actual clinical psychologist, pediatric psychologist would not describe them as pedophiles, it's like calling a kkk member a nazi, there's a difference between the two, and every single white-nationalist you meet will not be a nazi, in fact many of America's founders would have been considered white nationalists, but not Nazis, see how the difference might be worth noting for future distinctions?
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Classification of pedophilia
Pedophilia is defined as an ongoing sexual attraction toward pre-pubertal children (Freund, 1963, 1967; Seto, 2009). In the new DSM-5, pedophilia is de-pathologized by differentiating between the sexual preference for prepubescent children (i.e., pedophilia) and the disorder in case of additional factors. These factors include experiencing significant distress and impairment by fantasies and urges, or the acting out on behavioral level, including child pornography consumption and/or committing hands-on CSA offenses.

The estimated prevalence leads to questions about the diagnostic validity and reliability of pedophilia as a classification entity. According to the DSM-5, pedophilic sexual preference and the pedophilic disorder must be differentiated. As can be seen in Table Table1,1, the behavioral criterion was not included in the DSM-5 as a specifier, though it holds relevance for researchers and clinicians. From a clinical point of view, both child pornography consumption and/or hands-on CSA offenses would count as preference behaviors (Seto, 2010; First, 2011).

Table 1
Diagnostic criteria of a pedophilic disorder according to DSM-5.

DSM-5 pedophilic disorder
Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger) Specify if:
Sexually attracted to males
Sexually attracted to females
Sexually attracted to both
The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning Specify if:
Limited to Incest
The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A Specify type:
Exclusive type (attracted only to children)
Non-exclusive type
From a clinical perspective, it is necessary to stress that there are pedophilic men who restrict their desire for sexual contact with children to fantasies only, and other men who are at risk to commit an offense because fantasy alone does not satisfy their sexual desire. This second group is potential offenders who wish to reduce their increasingly overwhelming impulses with therapeutic help (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Schaefer et al., 2010; Wakefield, 2012). It is possible for these men to be diagnosed with Pedophilic Disorder – due to experiencing interpersonal distress – without them committing an offense.

The other group of pedophilic men includes those who have committed sexual offenses against children. These individuals may feel remorse (and seek help to avoid a relapse), while others do not. Note that both fulfill criterion B of the DSM-5, as shown in Table Table1,1, means that it has to be diagnosed as Pedophilic Disorder. Furthermore, it is necessary to distinguish between the exclusive type of pedophilia (attracted only to children) and non-exclusive type, and whether the person is attracted to males, attracted to females, or to both.

It is a completely different situation for perpetrators who committed sexual offenses against children, which were not caused by a pedophilic preference. Those are the surrogate types of sex offenders and can be diagnosed within the category of impulse-control disorder, accounting for the lack of a sexual preference for children but the committed act of CSA (DSM-5: 312.89; ICD-10: 63.8). Moreover, most sexual assaults happen in the “Dunkelfeld” for approximately every reported case of CSA; another five are left unreported, suggest some scholars (Hall and Hall, 2007; Seto, 2009). Dunkelfeld is a German word that literally translates to “dark field.”

It is of great importance for clinical diagnosis whether or not an erotic preference for the body scheme of children on the fantasy-level exists. There is a high chance that this information would be given voluntarily by self-referred, self-motivated pedophilic men, but less likely by those who are already involved with the legal system (probation etc.). It is therefore essential for the assessment and a reliable diagnosis to obtain a cooperation/compliance level. In self-motivated pedophiles, this collaboration is highest and makes them a highly interesting target group for research (see Section “Methods for Diagnosing Pedophilia”).

This underlines that pedophilia as a sexual preference must be seen independently from sexual offending against children – otherwise there would be only offending pedophiles. From a research point of view, it is imperative to understand in what way the neurobiological conditions – notwithstanding sexual preference – encourage the sexual behavior. These are possibly the same mechanisms that also encourage offense-like behavior in men with other sexual preferences (for instance in the case of rape on the background of sexual preference for adult women). Additionally, research efforts have to unravel which neurobiological mechanisms determine and regulate sexual preference, and how preference and behavior are interconnected.

In the research domain, pedophilia is currently viewed as a phenotype of sexual preference within the realm of human sexuality, including various different phenotypes (e.g., the sexual orientation toward the same gender), only that it concerns a preferred age in addition to gender (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Schaefer et al., 2010). This is separate from, but in addition to, behavioral manifestations including the use of child pornography and the commitment of child sexual offenses (Beier et al., 2009a,b; Neutze et al., 2011). Consequently, the sexual preference itself cannot be considered a mental disorder similar to how a homosexual orientation was considered in the 1970s in the United States of America (Green, 2002). Separating sexual preference from psychosocial impairment, thus allowing for the practice of various sexual behaviors with consenting partners, has been applied within the new DSM-5 with the other paraphilias as well, including fetishism, bondage/dominance-sadism/masochism, and is therefore not specific to pedophilia (Wright, 2010, 2014).
Please stop looking for excuses and reasoning to fuck a child.
 

Shua1991

Well-Known Member
Please stop looking for excuses and reasoning to fuck a child.
are you being serious? Because that must be some heavy sarcasm you're putting out. I'm trying to give you a new word to add to your repertoire. You're talking this the wrong way.
 
Top