Friday, January 22, 2021

No Todd, not angry

 Nope, I am not angry. I don't think you get out peacekeepers, Todd, and it is ridiculous that you have to feign it.

*I* ACTUALLY DO, and YOU depraved pro-spanking scum should GTFO out of our movement. YOU WILL NOT eject me from CHILDREN'S RIGHTS, and-CR (speaking aside diagonal to Todd)

Just demonstrating how I am, with ALL adults I judge as abusive (including a minority of pedophiles - about 1 out of 4). If I thought you were abusing a child, I would have exposed you already, right on this page. You are with your nephew? How does he feel about it? Does he want to? I don't know anything, and my court judges by pro-social ignorance, with "I don't know" logic. 

With VirPed, I give you the benefit of the doubt, all the way, with superficial suspicion, until I can no more, and then I flame you, with individual guilt. I deem every member of VirPed, by default, non-existent, meaning not standing out as parents, meaning not entitled. Talking about one's sexual disorder as a way to vent is not entitlement, and neither is defending such. Defending your "right" to abuse a child is, and VirPed rules support that logic that I find in the Bible.

An example of any questioning would be, when someone talks about risky behavior such as texting a child, and claiming to "not have any sexual reasons", either ask them "are you sure?". If they admit to it, and then don't back down, then goodbye from me, and everyone else in the thread. Most people at VP agree that online contact is very dangerous.

The board is written in clear literal English, and the words mean as they say, along the lines of any mental health support board. The reason you weren't allowed in is that the founders/admin thought you meant me harm, and I don't think they can be swayed. The parent lobby has an agenda to shut down the board. The children's rights community has a pro-social ignore policy with VirPed, alongside pro-social "lack of resources". That is how we are trained to treat such sites, by official policy. Otherwise, if you test as a victim, it is okay to join VirPed. The atmosphere here is not too different from VirPed...A lot of pro-spank monitors actually think parts of the movement are too cozy with my condition, with poor enforcement in terms of eradicating pro-contact pedophiles, and I'd agree with that stance. I want only anti-contact pedophiles permitted to stay - meaning the age of consent will always exist, and sex with children will always be wrong...Some people here pain themselves trying to praise my condition, knowing I mean no harm, and some just get very angry about it in a mixed way. What I ask is that people listen in a way that admits ignorance, with a sort of lukewarm sort of sensitivity (ex. "I don't get that sort of thing, but whatever - I'm glad you're not molesting children"). If you praise my condition, or feign praise (think forced emphasis on something upsetting), I think you want something. I think we got the wrong advice. My mother's understanding, as others in my personal life, is lukewarm. Due to my gentle parenting/children's rights community, I actually WANT you to indicate very lightly that you feel uncomfortable with the condition. Trying to sit down with me, and pretend to be interested alongside me, shows me that you want something, ESPECIALLY if you can't feign it, meaning the opposite. There are roles on my side of mutual privilege - I am calm, and non-chalant (I simply live with a disorder) and perhaps being able to talk about it like it is nothing, and you be distant and concerned, and there if I need listening and validation. The more distant you are, the less responsibility you have. You don't have to listen at all if you don't want to, but you do have to make sure I am safe, with distant supervision if possible. Those very close to me, namely family and mental health professionals, do have to listen...The condition is remote in terms of necessary support, meaning it is not the job of everyone to be supportive. Some people just exist...("children's rights" intervention - I've said enough, haven't I? Off your high horse from aside, Dr. Cantor).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Any comment that
1. Endorses child abuse (including pornography of such)
2. Imposes want to the point of imposition, meaning entitlement.
3. Contains self-entitled parent rhetoric, to the point of self-victimization

will not be published. Flexible application. Debate is allowed, but only civil arguments that presume the best of intentions in their opponent, on both sides.

Righteous co-sleeping: Why God wants parents to sleep next to their children

Many parents think that co-sleeping is the irresponsible choice for a parent to make. This is a common attitude from American parents. Most ...