Subject: Re: {ASSD} Dirty Stories on Usenet & YahooGroups
From: cmsix <cmsix@storiesonline.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 07:05:49 -0500
Message-ID: <1223899247_5988@pro-front01.com>
References: <n393f4ht7f7ino7qf5f4jv8ajittcjh59n@4ax.com> <onv4f4527t6lp48fv07m0kj2rvdblhjfs2@4ax.com> <_62dnQ5vCb_lrW7VnZ2dnUVZ8jmdnZ2d@posted.plusnet>
Bytes: 8049
Lines: 183
Organization: Pronews.com
Path: not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d
Reply-to: cmsix <cmsix@storiesonline.org>
X-Proxy-User: $$no5i9e52ym9x
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 081012-0, 10/12/2008), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Report: Please report illegal or inappropriate use to <abuse@pronews.com>. Forward a copy of ALL headers INCLUDING the body. (DO NOT SEND ATTACHMENTS)
X-Comments2: IMPORTANT: Pronews.com does not condone,support,nor tolerate spam or any illegal or copyrighted postings.
X-Comments: This message was posted through Pronews.com
===================
"Evil Nigel" <useweb@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_62dnQ5vCb_lrW7VnZ2dnUVZ8jmdnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> PlainBill wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 02:19:23 -0500, Damaeus
>> <no-mail@hotmail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have some questions concerning sexually graphic text posted to
>>>usenet newsgroups and e-mail lists for the public from within the
>>>United States. I hope to get some discussions going about whether
>>>or
>>>not these "dirty stories" contribute to child molestation and/or
>>>rape,
>>>or if they actually relieve the fantasies some pedophiles need to
>>>have, but perhaps need some material to work with from those who
>>>are
>>>skilled with the words of language.
>>>
>>>My thinking is that perhaps if these types of stories were read by
>>>more people, including kids, it might prepare them earlier on to
>>>know
>>>what human nature is really like instead of having it suddenly cast
>>>upon them when they are finally "allowed" into adult bookstores and
>>>video stores to figure out what sex really means.
>>>
>>>If both men and boys wrote out their fantasies in text and posted
>>>them
>>>to usenet newsgroups and mailing lists, it would give both sides of
>>>the aisle a chance to know each others' fantasies from a safe
>>>distance
>>>and environment. It may turn out that some boys already have rape
>>>fantasies like I did when I was a kid, and if enough people from
>>>all
>>>ages shared these things, we'd learn a lot more about each other
>>>and
>>>what approaches to take to get to know each other and play in fun
>>>and
>>>safe ways without just having one side or the other take what they
>>>want and leave the other in the gutter to rot.
>>>
>>>I'm not here to judge any level of deviance as any worse or better
>>>than another. I'm just after information. That said, here are the
>>>questions:
>>>
>>>
>>>Sexually-graphic stories can contain characters of many ages. Are
>>>there any distinctions made in law concerning any character ages or
>>>age difference limitations?
>>>
>>>What if the boy is just doing something by himself in the nude
>>>which
>>>you describe in a way that's anatomically correct, with detailed
>>>descriptions of every curve, line and detail?
>>>
>>>What if the story contains all boys, and they're all aged 6 to 17?
>>>
>>>What if the boys are described in such a way that makes their
>>>bodies
>>>something impossible to be formed by evolution? For example,
>>>suppose
>>>he's a 7-year-old muscleboy with an 8-inch flaccid penis and balls
>>>that hang halfway to his knees who can't be hurt? A story like
>>>that
>>>surely can't lead anyone to believe they would find something like
>>>that walking around any old schoolyard, right? And suppose he's so
>>>super-tough that you could pick him up and throw him down a row of
>>>bleachers without him crying or complaining about it or whining
>>>that
>>>it hurt. He would just feel it and get the fuck up and out of your
>>>way, or get it again! What if the kid is mentally twisted so he
>>>hates
>>>people being nice to him, making all of the above not abuse, but
>>>love?
>>>Suppose he actually likes being treated that way?
>>>
>>>Thanks for the input...
>>
>> Sorry, I haven't bothered to read beyond the first paragraph; more
>> entertaining events have my attention. However, here are a couple
>> of
>> points.
>>
>> This question has been asked repeatedly - or answered with an
>> indictment of sexually explicit literature - for over a century.
>> In
>> the 60's a study was done comparing the prevalence of sex crimes in
>> European countries where sexual material was freely available to
>> the
>> occurance of those same crimes in the US. Rather surprisingly (at
>> the
>> time) was the conclusion that if anything there was a reverse
>> effect.
>> Countries with a more relaxed attitude had a LOWER incidence of
>> criminal sexual conduct.
>>
>> The same question was asked officially in the 70's by the Nixon
>> administration under the auspices of Attorney General Edwin Meese.
>> The Meese Report was so controversial that it was suppressed for
>> months before being finally released. The conclusion was the free
>> availability of erotic literature to ALL ages reduced criminal
>> sexual
>> conduct at all ages. The authors of the report admitted the idea
>> of
>> allowing teenages and pre-teens access to erotic literature was so
>> controversial that they could not endorse it, but the evidence
>> suggested it would be benificial.
>>
>> PlainBill
>
> Frank is an expert on this sort of subject. We had a discussion a
> year or so ago when I made the point that a Swedish study (briefly
> mentioned in the UK press) had shown that free availability of child
> pornography actually reduced the incidence of real-life attacks and
> Frank weighed in with details of a shedload of evidence to the same.
>
> And that's the justification for much of the output of my sock
> puppet has been pedo-fodder. (I also hope it's not completely
> without literary merit.)
Most of you don't seem to be able to come to grips with the real
truth.
"Their minds are made up. Don't confuse them with facts."
If you think the US House of representatives and Senate are filled
with enlightened benevolent wisdom you are simply mistaken. They are
not fighting over the right to lead our wonderful civilization to some
mythical paradise. They don't care about the facts. For God's sake
wake up. Most of the filthy bastards are lawyers in the first place or
at least very talented lay thieves and powergrubbers. What possible
use do they have for sensible conclusions? They have gone to
considerable trouble to gain current and acquire future means to
control the citizens. They will not be denied over some sensible
studies which point out their sacred cows never really give milk.
What is good or right does not concern the government leaders of the
United States, or any other country. They are interested in ways to
pervert and misconstrue which help them gain and hold control and
personal power. Democracy is a farce they put forward and prop up.
We'd be much better off with a real Queen or King. It would cut the
number of thieving masters down to one instead of the current five
hundred and thirty six.
Don't get me completely wrong though. Their is a chance for our
democracy to rise and fulfill its promise. All we need is for our
electorate to choose five hundred and thirty six wise, honest,
altruistic leaders. What kind of a fool bets against those odds?
cmsix
>
> Evil Nigel
>
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups