Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

anyone else hear about the 3 yr old girl who was kidnapped from cardiff and found in a bad way in wiltshire? apparantly, the police have said she was sexually assualted.... yes, she was 3. wat kind of a world do we live in for something as sick as this to happen. i hope they find the people responsible and put them away forever, and i also hope that the poor girl will be able to have a bright and productive future after something as disgusting as this.

also, a girl from cardiff was beaten and again raped in thailand, and she died from the assualt, this person was 21 and a student at reading university.

my thoughts are out to these families, and i hope justice is done.

I didn't hear about those, but I did read something about a little girl who was taken from her bath and then left somewhere in the snow, and they believed she was sexually assaulted, or that the person who took her was going to assault her. It makes me sick

that's awful

This is just too sad....3 years old and never got to enjoy life...3 year old don't even understand what is happening to them....just too sad that there are sick people out there...When youre 3 you are so trusting.

Originally posted by debbiejo
3 years old and never got to enjoy life...3 year old don't even understand what is happening to them.

I'm not quite sure of the logic you are using here. Could you clarify?

It's obvious to me She's saying that children of such a young age don't even comprehend the horrors, not entirely. And to have innocence ripped from you is awful. Or something...

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I'm not quite sure of the logic you are using here. Could you clarify? They don't even understand what sex is or for that matter that people really lie...When they are abused they are really in confusion to what is happening to them. Only that it hurts....They are very trusting....It's really sick....They are so innocent in there thinking.

Dude, that's rough.

i stand firmly against the death penalty.








...but would certainly turn a blind eye to a little vigilante justice in such a case.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I'm not quite sure of the logic you are using here. Could you clarify?


oh jesus, you slowbus. Use your god damn brain, if you have one. what do you think he's saying?

Originally posted by PVS
i stand firmly against the death penalty.








...but would certainly turn a blind eye to a little vigilante justice in such a case.

I like YOUR thinking.

Vigilante thinking goes hand and hand in the North here...People take care of their own. Many times you can't count on the courts...Too many technicalities.

Originally posted by Syren
It's obvious to me She's saying that children of such a young age don't even comprehend the horrors, not entirely. And to have innocence ripped from you is awful. Or something...

Yes, that's what I got. I don't think 'or something' is a suitable ending for something obvious...

To me, the points overlap somewhat. You can't be truly innocent, non-understanding, and still personally feel the full horror. This is an adult reaction.

If you aren't fully aware of how horrific something is, then logically it is only as bad as you can conceive.

I'm not undervaluing the severity of the experience; it's horrible.


The main point I wondered about was the '3 years old and never got to enjoy life'.

She's not dead.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Vigilante thinking goes hand and hand in the North here...People take care of their own. Many times you can't count on the courts...Too many technicalities.

I'm suddenly getting a Grand Theft Auto flashback.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom

The main point I wondered about was the '3 years old and never got to enjoy life'.

She's not dead. Traumatized at such an early age leaves ones life totally changed, especially with people and trust issues. Emotional and physical scars.......The childs life probably will never ever be the same....

For this kind of thing, there should be the death penality IMO.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Traumatized at such an early age leaves ones life totally changed, especially with people and trust issues. Emotional and physical scars.......The childs life probably will never ever be the same....

For this kind of thing, there should be the death penality IMO.

And I would argue that if she doesn't know what has happened, then there is less likelihood of that occurring.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
And I would argue that if she doesn't know what has happened, then there is less likelihood of that occurring. Traumatic events are Traumatic events. And as the child grows she will know exactly what happened.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Traumatic events are Traumatic events. And as the child grows she will know exactly what happened.

Yes, thanks to adults who will convince her that it was much worse than she thought it was.

Originally posted by darth_royke
and i also hope that the poor girl will be able to have a bright and productive future after something as disgusting as this.


This is the view I would share.

Unfortunately.

Debbiejo, try making sense. Hot tip of the day.

The only way the girl will be vastly traumatised is if, as VVD said, the adults surrounding her continually emphasis and exaggerate it's effect.

I nearly died as a child, it doesn't bother me now because my parents chose not to continually remind me of it.

-AC

Hey, VVD changed his last post...

And who are you to say how a tragedy impacts victims in the long run...Everybody is different...This is not a one size fits all.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Hey, VVD changed his last post...



No I didnt, I posted again.

Considering I'm not talking about the impact of tragedy but the impact of over-exaggerating parents, maybe you'd like to answer that.

As said previously, 3 years old is far too young to be having adult emotions (the fact that they aren't adults, but infants might have something to do with this). Your logic, or lack thereof, makes no sense.

-AC

How people around the person who was a victim of a tragedy acts impacts them as well, and at that age the girl is not going to fully understand what happened, nor will she really remember it as she gets older. If the people around her harp on it then it will cause more mental harm to her when she grows up.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Debbiejo, try making sense. Hot tip of the day.

The only way the girl will be vastly traumatised is if, as VVD said, the adults surrounding her continually emphasis and exaggerate it's effect.

I nearly died as a child, it doesn't bother me now because my parents chose not to continually remind me of it.

-AC

many cases of sexual assault are quite different AC.

Originally posted by PVS
many cases of sexual assault are quite different AC.

How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

How likely is it that, in the event of it having a traumatic life, the parents are responsible?

Answer to the first: Not likely.

Answer to second: Much more likely than the latter.

-AC

Originally posted by Lana
How people around the person who was a victim of a tragedy acts impacts them as well, and at that age the girl is not going to fully understand what happened, nor will she really remember it as she gets older. If the people around her harp on it then it will cause more mental harm to her when she grows up. Well lets hope. Though I have read that later issues come up from such tragedies. Fears, phobias.

You're missing the point.

"3 years old and didn't get to enjoy life."

As VVD said, it's 3 and it's not dead. Your reasoning: It'll be affected.

Wanna tell us how? If of course it's not necessarily the case, or the likely outcome, that it'll remember? Considering age.

-AC

I can't understand how you're avoiding the fact she was sexually abused. No matter how old she is, and even if her parents don't decorate it as she gets older, it still remains that she was violated

Yes, and while it's disgusting that it happened, chances are that she doesn't understand exactly what happened, and between that and the fact that she will likely forget as she grows up, it's not going to have as much of a mental impact on her as it would if it happened to someone older.

One of my cousins, who is now 8, was molested when she was four years old, she barely remembers what happened, definitely didn't understand what was happening, and since her family didn't always remind her of it, she's growing up to be fine.

It's my view. It could be tainted..Though at first I read to quickly and thought she died.....OK?

i think the parents will have to be incredibly strong, they have to try and get on with life as normal, and try to act like it never happened. hopefully, the little girl will be able to enjoy the fruits of grwonging up, and never be reminded or told of of this terrible act of perversion.

also pvs, even though sexual assault can be in many different ways, its still a dreadful thing to have gone through, and, if old enough to comphrehend, is a traumatic affair.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

when i was 3 years old i spent many months bedridden after two weeks in the hospital. whether or not my life was in danger was of no concern to me, since i really had no concept of death. however, i remember a good deal of it. some memories quite vivid, however very fleeting. these are memories i retained on my own, with no suggestion. in my case, it was never traumatic in the least, since at the time i had no concept of life/death and not only that, but my operations were successful. so where's the trauma in a happy ending with no psychological torment. good deal

however, if he is cursed with the memory of what happened, sooner or later he will be able to comprehend what happened to him. you cant tell me that in this scenario he would be like "oh well, whats done is done...laadeedaa"

Originally posted by Syren
I can't understand how you're avoiding the fact she was sexually abused. No matter how old she is, and even if her parents don't decorate it as she gets older, it still remains that she was violated

Yeah, nice deduction.

If she doesn't remember, how is it gonna ruin his life? People are missing that point. I can't understand THAT.

Everyone please note that point before being blinded and biased by the words "sexually" and "abused", also "child". Thanks.

Originally posted by debbiejo
It's my view. It could be tainted..Though at first I read to quickly and thought she died.....OK?

So are you going to bless us with your theory on how an infant will retain the experience in memory?

-AC

Originally posted by debbiejo
It's my view. It could be tainted..Though at first I read to quickly and thought she died.....OK?

And that she was a he...

Originally posted by Syren

I can't understand how you're avoiding the fact she was sexually abused.

Cf. Rape thread from a few minutes ago.

Originally posted by PVS
when i was 3 years old i spent many months bedridden after two weeks in the hospital. whether or not my life was in danger was of no concern to me, since i really had no concept of death. however, i remember a good deal of it. some memories quite vivid, however very fleeting. these are memories i retained on my own, with no suggestion. in my case, it was never traumatic in the least, since at the time i had no concept of life/death and not only that, but my operations were successful. so where's the trauma in a happy ending with no psychological torment. good deal

Well in your case it wasn't traumatic. So with the above case, all's for nought isn't it? With relevance to this thread.

Infact you proved my point. If your parents continued to stress it to you, things likely would have been different.

Originally posted by PVS
however, if she is cursed with the memory of what happened, sooner or later she will be able to comprehend what happened to her. you cant tell me that in this scenario she would be like "oh well, whats done is done...laadeedaa"

Yeah, but he's 3. You started with "If". Let's go back to my previous questions:

How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

How likely is it that, in the event of it having a traumatic life, the parents are responsible? Especially considering that there are no feelings connected with memory enough for the baby, now adult, to make connections.

(It's pretty obvious).

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

So are you going to bless us with your theory on how an infant will retain the experience in memory?

-AC 3 years old is not an infant...A person developes most of their personality by age 5 from what I've read...First 5 years are the most important years.

Originally posted by debbiejo
3 years old is not an infant...A person developes most of their personality by age 5 from what I've read...First 5 years are the most important years.

So are you going to bless us with your theory on how an CHILD of 3 years old will retain the experience in memory?

To add: Also explain how you believe he's going to have a traumatic life? Especially seeing as he won't remember most likely.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Well in your case it wasn't traumatic. So with the above case, all's for nought isn't it? With relevance to this thread.

Infact you proved my point. If your parents continued to stress it to you, things likely would have been different.

typical ac response: your post is irrelivant and in fact proves me right...for reasons which i will not state. thats even more annoying than "chill out "
maybe you should give that a rest, ya think?

anyway

its completely relevant because to assume that a 3 year old cant retain memories through to adulthood is ridiculous. sure memories are scattered and fleeting, but they can be retained with NO suggestion. that was my point. now how does that, as always without fail, prove you 100% right? again?

im sure if i had a memory of being raped at 3, it would traumatise the hell out of me once i was able to comprehend. memories and revelations are quite possible without a parent's intervention


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

Yeah, but she's 3. You started with "If". Let's go back to my previous questions:

How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?-AC

your assumption. how are you sure that he wont remember on his own?

Originally posted by PVS
typical ac response: you're post is irrelivant and in fact proves me right...for reasons which i will not state. thats even more annoying than "chill out "

I believe the best is along the lines of:

"...and to think you thought you were right! Okay, try again next time- I win, and I'm done with this thread. Good night, I promise I won't post again 'cause I win!

Oh, one more time for ya - loooooser: "

Originally posted by PVS
typical ac response: you're post is irrelivant and in fact proves me right...for reasons which i will not state. thats even more annoying than "chill out "
maybe you should give that a rest, ya think?

If you won't state the reasons, then there's no reason for me to believe there are any. Nice one.

Originally posted by PVS
anyway

its completely relevant because to assume that a 3 year old cant retain memories through to adulthood is ridiculous. sure memories are scattered and fleeting, but they can be retained with NO suggestion. that was my point.
now how does that, as always without fail, prove you 100% right? again?

Because whilst it MAY retain the memories, it's extremely unlikely that it will have an emotional connection enough to have a traumatic life. You remembered your experience, it didn't damage you though.

If the parents of the baby say something like: "We're so glad to have you with us. You got abducted and sexually abused by a man at 3 years old! It's all alright now though, cos we've got you back." What effect will it have? Negative, most likely. If they shut up about it, the obvious opposite.

Originally posted by PVS
im sure if i had a memory of being raped at 3, it would traumatise the hell out of me once i was able to comprehend. memories and revelations are quite possible without a parent's intervention

Yeah, but that is not only a hypothetical assumption, it's one that solely applies to you. There couldn't be anything more irrelevant to say. We SHOULD be talking in general. Referencing personal experience is fine, applying it to everything else isn't.

Originally posted by PVS
your assumption. how are you sure that he wont remember on his own?

I'm not sure he won't. I'm pretty sure that without parental intervention, he won't be traumatised.

Could I be wrong? Yes. Am I right in saying that parental emphasis makes things worse? Yes.

Be right back, left my case open. Needs closing.

-AC

I almost died when I was younger, but I don't remember much of it... posttraumatic stress varies on factors directly linked to the environment around the person, AND the person themselves.

I was in a wreck last march and my car was totalled, I was nervous around the spot of my accident, but got over it after a few drives on that spot. My mother was in a wreck, with me and my brother, and she had been nervous for years, my brother for months, and I for about 2 or 3 weeks.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You remembered your experience, it didn't damage you though.

because it wasnt traumatic. even if i experienced it today, however i would want to forget it, the conclusion would be joy that it was over and i was ok. there was no element of violation and victimisation. big difference. the only reason i brought it up was for the point that children 3 years old can remember significant moments in their life.

even though the kid couldnt comprehend rape, things were certainly f***ed up from his perspective, enough to take a prominent space in his memory, as opposed to everyday experiences.
in fact, the separation from his family, the pain he must have felt...you honestly believe he wasnt terrified? i doubt he has to know what rape means to already feel trauma.

That's all based on major assumption.

Let's look at my original point. Babies don't like to be away from their parents, no matter what. I'm willing to bet for sure that the kid was upset to be away from his parents purely because...he was away from his parents. Not because he sat there and thought "Oh god, I'm getting sexually abused and have been abducted!". Kids get abducted by strangers for the same reason. "Hi Kid, your mother sent me to get you." The baby doesn't think "Hmm...well no she didn't. You may be attempting to lure me into an otherwise dangerous situation." does it? Let's be real.

My point is, whether he retains the memories or not, it's not a dead certain fact that he will have a traumatised life. He's 3. What debbiejo said was a huge over-reaction. The point made in connection with that by both VVD and myself is how parental intervention can make or break. If parents shut up about it, it drastically lowers the chance of traumatisation than if they force their kid to remember, which he may very well not.

Comprende? Swell. That's all I was saying. I'm sure you know that parental intervention can reduce or increase trauma.

If a kid hurts himself, there's nothing worse than to exacerbate the situation by running over there screaming "OH MY GOD! OH MY GOD HE'S BLEEDING!". Same applies.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So are you going to bless us with your theory on how an CHILD of 3 years old will retain the experience in memory?

To add: Also explain how you believe he's going to have a traumatic life? Especially seeing as he won't remember most likely.

-AC
you implied that she was 100% wrong
then you cut back the absolute thinking a tad with 'most likely'
so quit acting like you mean 'some' all along, rather than a child's
memory of such an event to be some rare case.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
My point is, whether he retains the memories or not, it's not a dead certain fact that he will have a traumatised life. He's 3. What debbiejo said was a huge over-reaction. The point made in connection with that by both VVD and myself is how parental intervention can make or break. If parents shut up about it, it drastically lowers the chance of traumatisation than if they force their kid to remember, which he may very well not.

right, nothing is dead certain. its possible for the kid to not remember, and even hopeful. either way, the parents should not remind the kid and instill trauma where there (in such a case) would be none.

however, the same could be damaging if the kid WAS traumatised and the parents chose the method of not addressing the problem and getting therapy for the kid.

so no, its not always ok for the parent to just "shut up" but rather not be destructive in their handling of the situation.


Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Comprende? Swell.

-AC

just had to end it on a condicending childish note again huh?
fine i'll bite:

chill out

Originally posted by PVS
you implied that she was 100% wrong
then you cut back the absolute thinking a tad with 'most likely'

I do love all this.

Did I imply that, or are you infering? Did I cut back or did I elaborate on my point that you are misconstruing? Yes exactly, don't dive in. Though you do like to do this. Misunderstand then when explanations are offered, claim that it's excuses being made.

Originally posted by PVS
so quit acting like you mean 'some' all along, rather than a child's
memory of such an event to be some rare case.

See above.

Originally posted by PVS
right, nothing is dead certain. its possible for the kid to not remember, and even hopeful. either way, the parents should not remind the kid and instill trauma where there (in such a case) would be none.

Which was my original point. Funny that.

Originally posted by PVS
however, the same could be damaging if the kid WAS traumatised and the parents chose the method of not addressing the problem and getting therapy for the kid.

Not the case though is it? The kid was traumatised. We're not talking about what could happen oppositely, just in this case and similar cases. So what you said was irrelevant. You highlighted a completely different scenario.

Let's recap. My point: Parental intervention can increase or even cause traumatisation. Right? Yes. Done.

Originally posted by PVS
so no, its not always ok for the parent to just "shut up" but rather not be destructive in their handling of the situation.

Did I say shut up entirely and not help? Or did I say shut up ABOUT the trauma? Let's see:

Me: "If the parents of the baby say something like: "We're so glad to have you with us. You got abducted and sexually abused by a man at 3 years old! It's all alright now though, cos we've got you back." What effect will it have? Negative, most likely. If they shut up about it, the obvious opposite."

There we go . Delightful.

Originally posted by PVS
just had to end it on a condicending childish note again huh?
fine i'll bite:

chill out

I end on a true, relevant and apparantly condescending note, you end on a hypocritical one. I certainly am not coming off looking a tad silly here. Your bites are all gum, ironically in a thread about babies. What a funny old game this is.

Anyway, we've established that we agree on the parental intervention. So you delving into opposite scenarios which were neither relevant or denied, isn't needed. Anything else to add?

-AC

look ac, i know you get hot and bothered at the idea of fulfilling your role as 'tireless rebutter' again, but it will have to be with someone else.

so ill just point out your blind assumptions of what is likely and what is not likely>>>>as opposed to what is simply POSSIBLE. surely you can see the difference between....

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

How likely is it that, in the event of it having a traumatic life, the parents are responsible?

Answer to the first: Not likely.

Answer to second: Much more likely than the latter.

-AC

based on what? do you have figures to back up your claim that it is unlikely that the kid will remember? and while your at it, please present whatever studies you have read into that state the obvious tilt in the ratio of parents who contribute to a child's trauma to parents who do not.

FACT: your statements are NOT of mere posibility, but rather an assumption that your stated example is far more frequent. again: based on what?

im not twisting your words here, but rather you are being very shifty in an attempt to 'win' once again. once the possibility for your case is acknowledged you go on to assume that your assumption is most likely the case...of coarse you add the obligatory disclaimer that its not certain. well thank you for that, but once again, how is it that you feel you can then go beyond the bounds of acknowledging possibility and blindly assume the frequency of circumstance unchecked?

i only quoted a single example, as i dont feel like flooding the page with your dodgy assumptions

Originally posted by PVS
look ac, i know you get hot and bothered at the idea of fulfilling your role as 'tireless rebutter' again, but it will have to be with someone else.

And the hypocricy flies. It really does puzzle me how someone with such zest for striking down hypocrites is, infact, one of the biggest on this site.

Originally posted by PVS
so ill just point out your blind assumptions of what is likely and what is not likely>>>>as opposed to what is simply POSSIBLE. surely you can see the difference between....

Oh look, kids. PVS missed a part again:

How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

It's not a common occurance for adults to retain mass details of things that occur at such a young age. Fair enough, I should have indeed noted that it wasn't likely as opposed to not possible. But what's this!

There are these things called past, present and future tense. I used some in my post, see if you can figure out where and then use that to see where you went wrong in pulling that out. Sweet.

Originally posted by PVS
based on what? do you have figures to back up your claim that it is unlikely that the kid will remember?

Stats are like a lamp post to a drunk man. More for leaning on than actual illumination. I've said it before and I'm saying it again.

How many adults do YOU know who can tirelessly and effectively remember details so graphically, that it disturbs them? From age 3 or circa that time. When it's speculation all you can do is say likely or unlikely, which is what I did. I said likely. See? Read the quote.

Moreover, you've done the exact same thing no more than a couple posts ago.

Originally posted by PVS
and while your at it, please present whatever studies you have read into that state the obvious tilt in the ratio of parents who contribute to a child's trauma to parents who do not.

When did this become about the amount of parents who contribute to trauma and the amount who don't? It's the effect who those who do compared to those who don't, that I have proposed YOU look into. Come back and join the topic, PVS.

So the little recap didn't work. Cool, we'll go over it again (which I'm surpised at since you already agreed with me):

A parental unit who intervene with their children and continually remind them OF the trauma, will have more of a negative effect than those who do not. Simple logic. It's like on South Park (hopefully not too offensive for you) when Cartman is trying to convince Butters to vote for his side. He emphasises that his side is better and emphasises that Kyle's side is worse. Therefore, Butters is immediately influenced to pick Cartman's one.

Point? If a parent drills it into you that you were sexually abused, throughout your life, then it will quite obviously have a more negative effect that parents who don't emphasise or raise the issue.

I'll let that sink in.

Originally posted by PVS
FACT: your statements are NOT of mere posibility, but rather an assumption that your case is far more frequent and the opposing case to be rare. again: based on what?

P...PVS? I'm over here. Where are you going? Here, this is my point:

Parental intervention involving the constant reminder of childhood abuse will result in negative outcomes more likely than parents who do not raise the issue all the time. Confirm or deny? (You've already confirmed it, but let's do it for a laugh).

Originally posted by PVS
im not twisting your words here, but rather you are being very shifty in an attempt to 'win' once again. once the possibility for your case is acknowledged you go on to assume that your assumption is most likely the case...of coarse you add the obligatory disclaimer that its not certain. well thank you for that, but once again, how is it that you feel you can then go beyond the bounds of acknowledging possibility and blindly assume the frequency of circumstance unchecked?

The only one winning is you, and that's for KMC most hypocritical member. Don't foolishly try the age old tactic of trying to underpin some kind of "You're trying to win" schtick against me for the millionth time, PVS. You're better than that surely. I'm just discussing, no winning or losing to me.

So come on, you're not a stupid idiot. It's quite obvious what is the more likely of occurances isn't it? Parents constantly reminding the kid that he was abused will more likely result in trauma than parents who don't continually remind the kid. You don't need to be Stephen Hawking to work it out.

Originally posted by PVS
i only quoted a single example, as i dont feel like flooding the page with your dodgy assumptions

N-not that many was there? Nah. Never mind.

-AC

yawn

debbiejo gave a false absolute statement. she committed a logical fallacy and was called on it. yet you in turn rebutted with your own fallacy of assumed likelyhood.

but whatever dude. avoid the point all you wish. maybe if you flood the page with some more nonsensical yet humorous ad hominem jabs the truth will somehow become moot and you shall remain the victor once again.

Purpose of that was? We know you're online, yes. Hello Syren.

Contribute or don't bother please. I do understand your self-admitted love of attention but I am having a discussion with PVS here. Do you wish to contribute to the thread?

-AC

He's always victorious, PVS. It has to be that way. KMC would likely fall apart at the seams if Alpha Centauri relinquished his crown.

Originally posted by PVS
debbie joe gave a false absolute statement. she committed a logical fallacy and was called on it. yet you in turn rebutted with your own fallacy of assumed likelyhood.

but whatever dude. avoid the point all you wish. maybe if you flood the page with some more nonsensical yet humorous ad hominem jabs the truth will somehow become moot and you shall remain the victor once again.

Haha, I'm not trying to win anything. Continually claiming so just makes you look foolish.

If you don't wish to discuss with me, then admit that you're backing out of your own free will. Don't be so cowardly as to try and pin it on me. It's tired. Your choice and yours alone. I never forced you to back out. Your inability to be bothered with a discussion against someone who won't immediately lay down isn't my problem. Sorry. Shame, we could have discussed further.

Syren, yes hello. Do you want something? What's the problem or curiousity you seem to have?

-AC

Not really. I simply came along to take a peek at this thread, just to see if it had progressed. But alas, no progression. Just AC feeding his insatiable ego once again. Hence the yawn

Says Ms. I have to enter every thread regardless of if I'm wrong or right, just so people give me attention.

Self-proclaimed attention whores shouldn't throw stones. Ironyyyy.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you don't wish to discuss with me, then admit that you're backing out of your own free will

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Don't be so cowardly as to try and pin it on me.

i abreviated my point in the very post you quoted. you chose to glaze over and disacknowledge it entirely...which i find to be cowardly, since you brought it up... so since you refuse to address the point, what else is there to discuss? the weather?

Interesting.

Originally posted by PVS
but whatever dude. avoid the point all you wish. maybe if you flood the page with some more nonsensical yet humorous ad hominem jabs the truth will somehow become moot and you shall remain the victor once again.

Avoid the point, then? I'm not the one choosing to end this discussion. You're the one who got a little too offended by me saying "Comprende?". As always is the case, one word can spark a tantrum for you. It's harder to be INoffensive than it is to be offensive around you.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Says Ms. I have to enter every thread regardless of if I'm wrong or right, just so people give me attention.

Self-proclaimed attention whores shouldn't throw stones. Ironyyyy.

-AC

I don't enter every thread, just the ones which interest me.

I like attention, but I do not crave it. I don't need to resort to making another person look like an absolute fool to sate my own egotistical urges. I don't feel it necessary to quote someone's post, shred it and then proceed to spout unintelligible responses to ensure almost no one understands me and practically everyone is impressed by the gaudy exterior of my statements.

These, AC, are just a few examples of your actions on a daily basis. I may very well be guilty of being a little too provocative. But I am harmless.

You're nothing but a spiteful, sadistic person with one hell of a superiority complex.

Originally posted by Syren
I don't enter every thread, just the ones which interest me.

I like attention, but I do not crave it. I don't need to resort to making another person look like an absolute fool to sate my own egotistical urges. I don't feel it necessary to quote someone's post, shred it and then proceed to spout unintelligible responses to ensure almost no one understands me and practically everyone is impressed by the gaudy exterior of my statements.

These, AC, are just a few examples of your actions on a daily basis. I may very well be guilty of being a little too provocative. But I am harmless.

You're nothing but a spiteful, sadistic person with one hell of a superiority complex.

I can't make anyone look anymore of a fool than they might be anyway. You're giving me abilities I don't have so it looks like you have a superiority complex of your own. Albeit indirectly.

Unintelligible posts? It took you about 5 posts to get a single point in the rape thread, only for you to misunderstand the exact same point about ten minutes later in this one. Nothing I write is unintelligible. If you don't get it, my sympathies. I personally feel that you're not as able to be involved in these discussions as you would like to think you are. Resultantly leading in your interruption of threads with pointless smilies.

Typical Syren. Wants all the attention, gets it and then moans.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Interesting.



Avoid the point, then? I'm not the one choosing to end this discussion. You're the one who got a little too offended by me saying "Comprende?". As always is the case, one word can spark a tantrum for you. It's harder to be INoffensive than it is to be offensive around you.

-AC

wow dude, i have never seen you slip this far into dilerium

this is what you quoted:

"debbie joe gave a false absolute statement. she committed a logical fallacy and was called on it. yet you in turn rebutted with your own fallacy of assumed likelyhood."

that is my point, and you ignored it.

ignore that and there is nothing at all to discuss...barring the weather...or what we did over the holiday season...or what recipes we could exchange...

(Delirium)

Debbie Jo claimed matter of factly that his life was ruined.

I was speaking purely from assumption since that's all that can be done isn't it? Unless you have some ability to see the future that I do not have. So it wasn't an equal fallacy, I made an assumption. Assumptions in a topic that can be nothing but speculatory....? Are they wrong? No. Is claiming that his life is actually ruined, factually, wrong? Yes.

There.

-AC

Originally posted by Syren


You're nothing but a person with one hell of a superiority complex.

Truer words have never been spoken I dont even bother to respond anymore.

Still popping shots at me from having me on your ignore list, JP? Or have you decided to not do that anymore?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I made an assumption. Assumptions in a topic that can be nothing but speculatory....? Are they wrong? No. Is claiming that his life is actually ruined, factually, wrong? Yes.

There.

-AC

claiming that he will more than likely not be traumatised is also a fallacy.

there are no degrees to a fallacy AC. a statement either is or isnt one.

Sure would be great if this man slipped while taking a shower, broke his neck, and then had to lay there as the water creeped up over his face and caused him to drown.

I was humble enough to admit that it was "In many or most cases." And not absolute.

Originally posted by PVS
claiming that he will more than likely not be traumatised is also a fallacy.

there are no degrees to a fallacy AC. a statement either is or isnt one.

Let's not overlook the fact that I corrected myself in a REPLY to you, which you pointed out. In which I said that it was fair enough of you to raise that point and that I should have said likely instead of not being clear with my assumption.

Debbiejo posted with intent, mine was assumption with a point (that we agreed on, no less). I didn't put it across as clearly as I should have, but even upon correction you chose to find something ELSE to whine about.

I can't cater to the over-sensitive. Sorry.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I was humble enough to admit that it was "In many or most cases." And not absolute.

As was I. PVS choosing to ignore this it seems.

-AC

Originally posted by BackFire
Should would be great if this man slipped while taking a shower, broke his neck, and then had to lay there as the water creeped up over his face and caused him to drown.

thumbsup

Originally posted by BackFire
Should would be great if this man slipped while taking a shower, broke his neck, and then had to lay there as the water creeped up over his face and caused him to drown.

too kind imho.

Originally posted by debbiejo
This is just too sad....3 years old and never got to enjoy life...3 year old don't even understand what is happening to them....just too sad that there are sick people out there...When youre 3 you are so trusting.


From my understanding she's not dead, so she can still enjoy life

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I can't make anyone look anymore of a fool than they might be anyway. You're giving me abilities I don't have so it looks like you have a superiority complex of your own. Albeit indirectly.

Unintelligible posts? It took you about 5 posts to get a single point in the rape thread, only for you to misunderstand the exact same point about ten minutes later in this one. Nothing I write is unintelligible. If you don't get it, my sympathies. I personally feel that you're not as able to be involved in these discussions as you would like to think you are. Resultantly leading in your interruption of threads with pointless smilies.

Typical Syren. Wants all the attention, gets it and then moans.

-AC

At least give yourself the credit for that, AC. As much as it pains me to admit it, you've made me feel worthless on many occasions. Although I may not be as intellectual a person as you prefer to associate with, I do consider myself pretty intelligent. I can guarantee there are many members here who are as capable as you are at participating in the discussions here in the GDF, the difference between them and you is the simple fact that you enjoy humiliating people. You thrive on the embarrassment and discomfort of others. Have you ever taken a good look at yourself? You're highly intelligent, and yet you're constantly on the lookout for others less knowledgeable than yourself just so that you can provoke them into a discussion, in order to ride them until they have to resort to underhand retaliation just to get you off their backs. You're one of the nastiest people I've ever had the displeasure of speaking to. And to think I really admired you when we first met.

As for missing points, we're all guilty of that. Maybe I misread a post or two, maybe I get a little over-enthusiastic and skip a post entirely, consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist. So what? Am I a criminal? I grasp most concepts given enough time, but that's not good enough for you is it? My mistakes are your ammunition, and that's just sad.

I don't want all the attention, I'd be quite happy to give it all to you. Take the spotlight, you're welcome to it. The glare makes you look almost alive.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
As was I. PVS choosing to ignore this it seems.

-AC

you admitted no fault.
however, i will accept this quote as your addmittance, since i know thats the best you can do

Syren I have to give you credit for being able to not lose your cool, and state your view in such a manner. I was not so successful in the past. hug

Originally posted by silver_tears
From my understanding she's not dead, so she can still enjoy life This was already addressed.

at least at that young age when she grows up she might not even remeber, ergo not scared away from dicks

Well then, my apologies, I'm just too lazy sometimes to scroll through pages of irrelevent posts to find one that fits.

Originally posted by Syren
At least give yourself the credit for that, AC. As much as it pains me to admit it, you've made me feel worthless on many occasions. Although I may not be as intellectual a person as you prefer to associate with, I do consider myself pretty intelligent. I can guarantee there are many members here who are as capable as you are at participating in the discussions here in the GDF, the difference between them and you is the simple fact that you enjoy humiliating people. You thrive on the embarrassment and discomfort of others. Have you ever taken a good look at yourself? You're highly intelligent, and yet you're constantly on the lookout for others less knowledgeable than yourself just so that you can provoke them into a discussion, in order to ride them until they have to resort to underhand retaliation just to get you off their backs. You're one of the nastiest people I've ever had the displeasure of speaking to. And to think I really admired you when we first met.

I'm not responsible for your lack of self-esteem in debates. It's unfortunate, but it's not my doing. Sorry. Don't like it? Steer clear of me. You've chosen not to avoid me many times due to the attention seeker that you admit you are.

I never said there weren't any members as or more capable than me. There are, I'd never deny this. What's your point? The fact that you AREN'T so isn't my fault. Admitting it too.

Me humiliating people is quite often this: We enter a debate, they don't tend to do very well and end up humiliated. It's not a matter of enjoyment, it's a matter of what actually happens. You've even admitted that yourself. So stop being so damn hypocritical. You can't self-diss and then moan when people agree. It's also not a fact that I look for people less smarter than I. A contradiction also, seeing as we both know I don't like to mingle with idiots (you said this in the very post I quoted, ironically).

Originally posted by Syren
As for missing points, we're all guilty of that. Maybe I misread a post or two, maybe I get a little over-enthusiastic and skip a post entirely, consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist. So what? Am I a criminal? I grasp most concepts given enough time, but that's not good enough for you is it? My mistakes are your ammunition, and that's just sad.

"Consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist."

I made this point and got called a bully for it. You make it about yourself and it's ok? I see. Lovely stuff.

You grasp concepts given time, yes. I never stated otherwise.

Originally posted by Syren
I don't want all the attention, I'd be quite happy to give it all to you. Take the spotlight, you're welcome to it. The glare makes you look almost alive.

Ironically an overly dramatic ending. I can hear the violins.

-AC

SHAME ON YOU IRENE!!!

But you know it was good, AC. You would have been proud of yourself if you'd thunk it up.

Originally posted by Syren
But you know it was good, AC. You would have been proud of yourself if you'd thunk it up.

Is this where you slide out of the thread?

To PVS:

I admitted no wrong? What's this?:

"Fair enough, I should have indeed noted that it wasn't likely as opposed to not possible."

And you called me out for glazing over posts without reading.

As for Syren not losing her cool, I'm sure that even she isn't too proud to admit that doesn't apply to her.

-AC

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
Syren I have to give you credit for being able to not lose your cool, and state your view in such a manner. I was not so successful in the past. hug

I have no cool to lose, I'm always this highly strung hug

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

As for Syren not losing her cool, I'm sure that even she isn't too proud to admit that doesn't apply to her.

-AC

Sometimes, just sometimes, I think our lengths of wave collide a little.

Originally posted by manjaro
at least at that young age when she grows up she might not even remeber, ergo not scared away from dicks

Firstly how crude, good job
Secondly it most likely will damage her somewhat for the future and she'll most likely need counselling or some other type of help in the future, something like this because she is so young will most likely be repressed and then can come up unexpectedly who knows when.

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
SHAME ON YOU IRENE!!!



Forgive me madam ninja2

Originally posted by silver_tears
Firstly how crude, good job
Secondly it most likely will damage her somewhat for the future and she'll most likely need counselling or some other type of help in the future, something like this because she is so young will most likely be repressed and then can come up unexpectedly who knows when.


clapping

Thank you!! Many people have been trying to point this out, in defence of Debbie's statements regarding the child's potential trauma in years to come. Apparently she's too young to be able to remember anything in the future. But I agree with you, who's to say the demons won't suddenly appear?

Originally posted by Syren
clapping

Thank you!! Many people have been trying to point this out, in defence of Debbie's statements regarding the child's potential trauma in years to come. Apparently she's too young to be able to remember anything in the future. But I agree with you, who's to say the demons won't suddenly appear?

Nobody, at least anymore, is saying they won't. Just that it's also not definite that they will, as debbiejo originally implied and since has changed.

-AC

thats why she doesnt need counseling,, cuz that means she's gonna remeber then, when those highschool years roll around she's gonna treat dicks like the plague, and we dont want that to happen now do we?......no seriously do we?

Originally posted by Syren
clapping

Thank you!! Many people have been trying to point this out, in defence of Debbie's statements regarding the child's potential trauma in years to come. Apparently she's too young to be able to remember anything in the future. But I agree with you, who's to say the demons won't suddenly appear?

Three years old is definitely not too young imo. I think they have the ability to tell that they've been violated, and especially if it's a violent assault for example, you don't forget things like that. They're just glazed over for a time.

And from personal experience, I remember things from when I was about 3.

May I just ask, how do we know this was done by a male?
Is that somewhere in the thread?

I remember things from three also, even 2. They came around at first in Nightmares.

Originally posted by silver_tears
Three years old is definitely not too young imo. I think they have the ability to tell that they've been violated, and especially if it's a violent assault for example, you don't forget things like that. They're just glazed over for a time.

And from personal experience, I remember things from when I was about 3.

Imagine you had been victimised or experiences something equally as traumatic as sexual assault at the age of 3.

Are you of the belief that you would be better off if your parents didn't continually remind you, throughout your life, that you had been abused?

Just curious.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I remember things from three also, even 2. They came around at first in Nightmares.

You're claiming you remember things from when you were just two years old, from nightmares?

-AC

As someone who was adopted prior to the age of 3 after being removed from my true parents. I would say you get on with life, my abuse was physical not sexual. I do however have scars. My adoptive parents are to me my real parents.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You're claiming you remember things from when you were just two years old, from nightmares?

-AC The events don't come back in a way that would make since, but were more as frights from experiences...Not sexual abuse though in my life....Distorted fears that took years to understand and did change as years went by...Dreams are only shown mostly in symbolic language to events in ones subconsciousness.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Imagine you had been victimised or experiences something equally as traumatic as sexual assault at the age of 3.

Are you of the belief that you would be better off if your parents didn't continually remind you, throughout your life, that you had been abused?

Just curious.


I think it's important that the problem be dealt with, even if it means bringing it to light throughout her life.
I don't think that the parents should continually remind me for example, but I think they should seek the child some type of counselling and not just hope for the best that the child would simply forget it, because that could turn into a more serious problem later on.

Originally posted by debbiejo
The events don't come back in a way that would make since, but were more as frights from experiences...Not sexual abuse though in my life....Distorted fears that took years to understand and did change as years went by...Dreams are only shown mostly in symbolic language to events in ones subconsciousness.

So...you're claiming you remember things from two years old?

Irene:

I agree in that sense but my question way, do you think you would be better or worse off if your parents continually emphasised to you, the trauma? Akin to a parent being overly worried about their kid scraping their knee, making the situation worse.

-AC

Originally posted by silver_tears
I think it's important that the problem be dealt with, even if it means bringing it to light throughout her life.
I don't think that the parents should continually remind me for example, but I think they should seek the child some type of counselling and not just hope for the best that the child would simply forget it, because that could turn into a more serious problem later on. True parents or others should not try to pull thing to the forefront, but should be educated on how to deal with the childs questions, acting out, which is sooooooo important, cause they could, and fears, but not try to be too into making them relive it cause children don't really know why they feel as they do...Parents need to get the ques from their kids and work carefully.

Originally posted by manjaro
thats why she doesnt need counseling,, cuz that means she's gonna remeber then, when those highschool years roll around she's gonna treat dicks like the plague, and we dont want that to happen now do we?......no seriously do we?

Apparently someone has seen through to the true problem here.

Well spotted.


Some other points, which I don't have the patience to quote-

Syren: no disrespect to AC (which is probably a shock to him), but if you often don't understand his posts, that's a reflection on you. They aren't pitched particularly high.


To various people: yes, we do know that the perpetrators were male, and the victim was actually a girl, so let's exorcise the masculine pronouns.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Fair enough, I should have indeed noted that it wasn't likely as opposed to not possible."

please quote the entire post, because i looked over the thread and found no such post. not that im calling you a liar, but i cant find this quote anywhere.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So...you're claiming you remember things from two years old?

Irene:

I agree in that sense but my question way, do you think you would be better or worse off if your parents continually emphasised to you, the trauma? Akin to a parent being overly worried about their kid scraping their knee, making the situation worse.

-AC

Worse off if they continually emphasized it without a reason, I think we all have coping mechanisms in us, and the girl although young will be able to live a regular life if the problem is properly dealt with. Not swept under the rug but not needlessly thrown in her face.



And back to my more important question, do we actually know if the attacker was male?

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom

To various people: yes, we do know that the perpetrators were male, and the victim was actually a girl, so let's exorcise the masculine pronouns.

Ah missed this post...
How do we know? Like is there a link or something I'm missing?

VVD, I do understand his posts. I usually applaud his train of thought. But I absolutely detest the fact that when he's having a 'discussion' with someone he always attempts to get the upper hand, by any means necessary. We can all state our thoughts and opinions maturely and in a formal manner, why go one step further and portray ourselves as obnoxious to boot?

isay just leave it alone man.. if i was sanked up at 3, i wouldnt want some damn counseler drumming it into my freaking ear all the time.. take it from somenone who has been to cousneling b4(me) all they do is ask you to relive it over and over. what the experience was like, and how it felt as it was happening... questions along those lines. i dont think a little girl would find that tooo pleasnt, even if its ten years down the line. if I were the girls parents i would tell her thats its her distant cousin June bug, and he was just playing a little rough with her thats all...no harm no foul, nothing to have nightmares about.

Originally posted by Syren
VVD, I do understand his posts. I usually applaud his train of thought. But I absolutely detest the fact that when he's having a 'discussion' with someone he always attempts to get the upper hand, by any means necessary. We can all state our thoughts and opinions maturely and in a formal manner, why go one step further and portray ourselves as obnoxious to boot?

Beyond the first sentence isn't really relevant to my post, but regarding your reply- you did state that you do not. That is the reason I said it; I wasn't merely accusing you of lacking understanding.

Originally posted by silver_tears
Ah missed this post...
How do we know? Like is there a link or something I'm missing?

I know personally because I read the story earlier today. I can't explain why anyone else does or does not know, though.

Syren, either you understand my posts or you don't. You've claimed both now, make up your mind. VVD is right. I don't see the point on coming on a forum to discuss with people if you're gonna just make everything unable to be understood. My posts are easy to get and nobody else has as many problems with them as you do. Grasping them at least.

You just don't get my posts for other reasons that you aren't willing to admit yet, clearly. You think of yourself as quite intelligent, but you don't get my posts. So you're either not as smart as you think, or you give me more credit for my posts that I want or need, only to blame it on me later.

For PVS:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not a common occurance for adults to retain mass details of things that occur at such a young age. Fair enough, I should have indeed noted that it wasn't likely as opposed to not possible. But what's this!

There are these things called past, present and future tense. I used some in my post, see if you can figure out where and then use that to see where you went wrong in pulling that out. Sweet.

-AC

Ah I see, because that first post doesn't give the sex and it seemed presumptuous to assume the assaulter was male

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Beyond the first sentence isn't really relevant to my post, but regarding your reply- you did state that you do not. That is the reason I said it; I wasn't merely accusing you of lacking understanding.

I believe I said I 'misread' some posts. I read quickly, that's probably my worst sin. In being eager to respond to a thread, but wanting to ensure I don't simply repeat what someone else has already said, I scan the thread from start to finish. Forgive me if I don't absorb every word.

Originally posted by Syren
As for missing points, we're all guilty of that. Maybe I misread a post or two, maybe I get a little over-enthusiastic and skip a post entirely, consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist. So what? Am I a criminal? I grasp most concepts given enough time, but that's not good enough for you is it? My mistakes are your ammunition, and that's just sad.

Originally posted by manjaro
isay just leave it alone man.. if i was sanked up at 3, i wouldnt want some damn counseler drumming it into my freaking ear all the time.. take it from somenone who has been to cousneling b4(me) all they do is ask you to relive it over and over. what the experience was like, and how it felt as it was happening... questions along those lines. i dont think a little girl would find that tooo pleasnt, even if its ten years down the line. if I were the girls parents i would tell her thats its her distant cousin June bug, and he was just playing a little rough with her thats all...no harm no foul, nothing to have nightmares about.

No, lying about it would be a very bad idea. This story's in the news...imagine the parents lied about it and later she found out what really happened.

It'd be worse if she had nightmares and such and never knew why because her parents had lied.

I have to go, but I really don't want anyone to accuse me of running out on a discussion. I'm probably fighting a losing battle here, reason enough for me to make a sharp exit, but that's not the case. I need sleep

Originally posted by Syren
I believe I said I 'misread' some posts. I read quickly, that's probably my worst sin. In being eager to respond to a thread, but wanting to ensure I don't simply repeat what someone else has already said, I scan the thread from start to finish. Forgive me if I don't absorb every word.

You can't scan threads, yet claim to have a desire for being informed and involved on the topic. It leads to not understanding points or posts. Which you do, and have confirmed/denied this multiple times.

"consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist."

Come on. Furthermore, don't cite being obnoxious as a negative. You recently praised yourself for having such an attitude in the OTF today.

-AC

AC,

"Maybe I misread a post or two, maybe I get a little over-enthusiastic and skip a post entirely, consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist."

The whole sentence, if you don't mind.

Originally posted by silver_tears
It'd be worse if she had nightmares and such and never knew why because her parents had lied. True which many parent just want to sweep it under the rug which leaves children despondent, wondering and acting out. What's wrong with me they wonder...It has to be tempered with caution and reality.

oh, no wonder, since it was lost in a turbulant sea of belittling excrement:

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And the hypocricy flies. It really does puzzle me how someone with such zest for striking down hypocrites is, infact, one of the biggest on this site.



Oh look, kids. PVS missed a part again:

How likely is it that a 3 year old is going to grow up and have a traumatic life as a result of something she/he isn't even old enough to remember or connect feelings to?

It's not a common occurance for adults to retain mass details of things that occur at such a young age. Fair enough, I should have indeed noted that it wasn't likely as opposed to not possible. But what's this!

There are these things called past, present and future tense. I used some in my post, see if you can figure out where and then use that to see where you went wrong in pulling that out. Sweet.



Stats are like a lamp post to a drunk man. More for leaning on than actual illumination. I've said it before and I'm saying it again.

How many adults do YOU know who can tirelessly and effectively remember details so graphically, that it disturbs them? From age 3 or circa that time. When it's speculation all you can do is say likely or unlikely, which is what I did. I said likely. See? Read the quote.

Moreover, you've done the exact same thing no more than a couple posts ago.



When did this become about the amount of parents who contribute to trauma and the amount who don't? It's the effect who those who do compared to those who don't, that I have proposed YOU look into. Come back and join the topic, PVS.

So the little recap didn't work. Cool, we'll go over it again (which I'm surpised at since you already agreed with me):

A parental unit who intervene with their children and continually remind them OF the trauma, will have more of a negative effect than those who do not. Simple logic. It's like on South Park (hopefully not too offensive for you) when Cartman is trying to convince Butters to vote for his side. He emphasises that his side is better and emphasises that Kyle's side is worse. Therefore, Butters is immediately influenced to pick Cartman's one.

Point? If a parent drills it into you that you were sexually abused, throughout your life, then it will quite obviously have a more negative effect that parents who don't emphasise or raise the issue.

I'll let that sink in.



P...PVS? I'm over here. Where are you going? Here, this is my point:

Parental intervention involving the constant reminder of childhood abuse will result in negative outcomes more likely than parents who do not raise the issue all the time. Confirm or deny? (You've already confirmed it, but let's do it for a laugh).



The only one winning is you, and that's for KMC most hypocritical member. Don't foolishly try the age old tactic of trying to underpin some kind of "You're trying to win" schtick against me for the millionth time, PVS. You're better than that surely. I'm just discussing, no winning or losing to me.

So come on, you're not a stupid idiot. It's quite obvious what is the more likely of occurances isn't it? Parents constantly reminding the kid that he was abused will more likely result in trauma than parents who don't continually remind the kid. You don't need to be Stephen Hawking to work it out.



N-not that many was there? Nah. Never mind.

-AC

you admitted no fault, but rather used an unrelated point to 'win' again. and look how far back you had to dig to still avoid the point.
how desperate can one get


oh did i spell that all correctly? i hope so

Originally posted by PVS
oh, no wonder, since it was lost in a turbulant sea of belittling excrement:



you admitted no fault, but rather used an unrelated point to 'win' again. and look how far back you had to dig to still avoid the point.
how desperate can one get


oh did i spell that all correctly? i hope so

I admitted the fault I committed. Sorry if it's not one that you'd like me to admit to. I'd like you to admit to being an oversensitive hypocrite, which this and many other threads have exposed you as. You won't though. As for avoiding the point, you were the one who took it upon yourself to drop the discussion. I made a point, a point you agreed with. So before you churn on about excrement, maybe you should notch up a point on your hypocricy licence.

Either way, I admitted I shouldn't have said what I did. Like it or leave it. You've chosen the third, unlisted option of "Ignore, but continue being on my period." Can't help you there.

Originally posted by Syren
AC,

"Maybe I misread a post or two, maybe I get a little over-enthusiastic and skip a post entirely, consequently making myself look a little silly when I comment and it's obvious I don't quite understand the gist."

The whole sentence, if you don't mind.

Yes exactly.

You don't quite understand some posts. Mine included, and they aren't - as VVD stated - pitched that high. Which was the point. If you understand my posts, then say so. Don't retort with "but sometimes I don't for this reason." You either do, or you don't. It's quite evident from this thread and multiple threads that you don't.

-AC

jesus H christ you ****ers just take all the fun out of rape stories with all this bickering

Originally posted by manjaro
jesus H christ you ****ers just take all the fun out of rape stories with all this bickering

You sir are an idiot

Originally posted by silver_tears
You sir are an idiot

Originally posted by manjaro
jesus H christ you ****ers just take all the fun out of rape stories with all this bickering

Probably a bit less appropriate in this thread than the other, I'm thinking.

Are PVS and AC butting heads again - Come on lads settle down

Whirly the "unofficial" peacekeeper of KMC in action.

ok, well you came close to addressing my point, although you admitted that you shouldnt speak in absolutes...however you went on to falsly assume the frequency of toddlers traumatised by such events and the rate of effects of parents' clumsy and panicy handling of the situation....which is the point you still refuse to address.

so in other words you thought you were wrong...but really you were right.

point killed

and by default:

AC WINS!!!!!!!!

AC WINS!!!!!!!!

*cue the marching band*

Originally posted by Syren
I believe I said I 'misread' some posts. I read quickly, that's probably my worst sin. In being eager to respond to a thread, but wanting to ensure I don't simply repeat what someone else has already said, I scan the thread from start to finish. Forgive me if I don't absorb every word.

Actually, I was referring to this quote:

Originally posted by Syren

I don't feel it necessary to quote someone's post, shred it and then proceed to spout unintelligible responses to ensure almost no one understands me and practically everyone is impressed by the gaudy exterior of my statements.

Originally posted by PVS
however you went on to falsly assume the frequency of toddlers traumatised by such events and the rate of effects of parents' clumsy and panicy handling of the situation....which is the point you still refuse to address.

so in other words you thought you were wrong...but really you were right.

point killed

I didn't go on to assume that, actually. I merely made two independent points that you, once again, have falsely connected. I said that parents panic orientated nature make things worse for the person/kid IN the situation than it might otherwise be.

The only connection I made to the thread was how parents continually informing the kid of the trauma will have a similar effect, most likely.

This is what you fail to accept. The fact that you made an assumption that led to YOU misunderstanding my post and YOU getting so uppity in this thread. Never, ever will you admit that. Instead, you'll choose to pass it off as me making excuses in hopes that people watching will agree with you.

Hence this:

Originally posted by PVS
and by default:

AC WINS!!!!!!!!

AC WINS!!!!!!!!

*cue the marching band*




You realise the hypocricy, correct? This is all your own doing. You always seem to have an affinity for claiming I win things, when I don't even do that.

-AC

ok, im not going to post the same quote again, nor am i going to dig up the countless other posts where you proceed to falsy assume.

ill just give you your trophy and we can let the topic survive

or is that 'cowardly' of me?

AC, that was pretty funny, true or not.

Disclaimer: I don't care if this is cheerleading or adding anything useful to this conversation, whatsoever.

Originally posted by PVS
ok, im not going to post the same quote again, nor am i going to dig up the countless other posts where you proceed to falsy assume.

ill just give you your trophy and we can let the topic survive

or is that 'cowardly' of me?

Look, you know as well as I do that the last thing we want is the closure of the topic, regardless of "our" difference.

I want no trophy, no win, no anything. So instead of continually (and ironically) trying to have the last word, I do agree the topic should move on.

-AC

tsk "you two boys",

Originally posted by darth_royke
anyone else hear about the 3 yr old girl who was kidnapped from cardiff and found in a bad way in wiltshire? apparantly, the police have said she was sexually assualted.... yes, she was 3. wat kind of a world do we live in for something as sick as this to happen. i hope they find the people responsible and put them away forever, and i also hope that the poor girl will be able to have a bright and productive future after something as disgusting as this.

also, a girl from cardiff was beaten and again raped in thailand, and she died from the assualt, this person was 21 and a student at reading university.

my thoughts are out to these families, and i hope justice is done.
It happens everyday, pretty much, but what can we do? I mean there are so many...f**ked up people in this world that cant get a life, so they go onto raping/killing/robbing/etc and it's stupid as hell.
What next, raping a 4 month old child?

That even possible?

where there is a strong enuff will and a vivid enuff imagination

I know AC will probably rag all over me, but this was funny.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Look, you know as well as I do that the last thing we want is the closure of the topic, regardless of "our" difference.

I want no trophy, no win, no anything. So instead of continually (and ironically) trying to have the last word, I do agree the topic should move on.

-AC

Isn't that basically just what PVS said?

Originally posted by PVS
ok, im not going to post the same quote again, nor am i going to dig up the countless other posts where you proceed to falsy assume.

ill just give you your trophy and we can let the topic survive smile

Sorry, I just thought it kinda funny that one KMC member said that they will drop it, and that the other KMC member said that instead of continually (and ironically) trying to have the last word, I do agree the topic should move on . So basically you went for the last word even though PVS already agreed to drop it.

Kinda funny actually.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I know AC will probably rag all over me, but this was funny.



Isn't that basically just what PVS said?



Sorry, I just thought it kinda funny that one KMC member said that they will drop it, and that the other KMC member said that instead of continually (and ironically) trying to have the last word, I do agree the topic should move on . So basically you went for the last word even though PVS already agreed to drop it.

Kinda funny actually.

Of course not, no reason to "rag" all over you. Just posting what you find to be funny, as everyone does. I actually did just say to someone that I knew you were going to post here, to me, as soon as I saw you browsing. So I agree, it is quite funny. The predictability of it all, haha.

I wasn't trying to have the last word, per se, I just think it's somewhat silly that he couldn't just say "We want the topic to move on, so let's stop." He had to add the little trophy bit. Which IS irony considering he always considers me a last word kind of guy.

Whatever, things happen.

-AC

"I actually did just say to someone that I knew you were going to post here, to me, as soon as I saw you browsing. So I agree, it is quite funny. The predictability of it all, haha." It was fairly predictable you'd post a reply of some sort to him... haha?

All three of you like me love the last word imo.

Originally posted by KidX
"I actually did just say to someone that I knew you were going to post here, to me, as soon as I saw you browsing. So I agree, it is quite funny. The predictability of it all, haha." It was fairly predictable you'd post a retort of some sort to him... haha?

Wasn't a retort, I'm not disputing him. Just replying to. So if you mean reply, then yes. Haha.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

I wasn't trying to have the last word, per se, I just think it's somewhat silly that he couldn't just say "We want the topic to move on, so let's stop." He had to add the little trophy bit. Which IS irony considering he always considers me a last word kind of guy.

still haven't dropped it? had to have the last jab at me?....AFTER your 'last' jab at me?

oh shit...now i just had the last word didnt i? D'OH!!!!

well, im sure you'll rectify that dilemma shortly....

Yeah, Reply, thanks AC.

I'm going to have the last word in this thread, when it's dead and you all have forgotten about it I will post.............. A word!

Originally posted by PVS
still haven't dropped it? had to have the last jab at me?....AFTER your 'last' jab at me?

oh shit...now i just had the last word didnt i? D'OH!!!!

well, im sure you'll rectify that dilemma shortly....

What the hell? I'm not jabbing at you. How do you seriously find SOMETHING in a post as passive as my last? Seriously. You're a really negative dude. I think YOU need a visit from Tony Robbins and his "Edge" program.

-AC

Why not me......It seems I started it all.

No, I started it all. I said "Comprende." .

(Disclaimer: It's a joke.)

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, I started it all. I said "Comprende." .

-AC

Just want to get the last word in.......But most of the thead was about me.....I'm sooooooo special indeed. Thanks to you AC.

so i guess you have to have 2 concecutive last jabs for the issue to die?

oh shit i did it again. ok, i guess now you need two more concecutive jabs. sorry i screwed up the rotation again


proceed....

Originally posted by Sir Whirlysplat
I'm going to have the last word in this thread, when it's dead and you all have forgotten about it I will post.............. A word!

thats actually 2 words there...

peeps, i started this thread to help show awareness to this heinous act, not so a group of you can use it to start slagging each other off. if you wanna go on about whether or not the young girl will go through life traumatised or not start another thread, but dont let it get petty.

its a sad thing to have happened, lets just hope she gets through it fine as she had serious injuries too.

Originally posted by darth_royke
peeps, i started this thread to help show awareness to this heinous act, not so a group of you can use it to start slagging each other off. if you wanna go on about whether or not the young girl will go through life traumatised or not start another thread

It's all part of the same thing (the trauma issue, not the personal arguments), otherwise what's the point of the thread?

It's not a news forum, it's discussion. Otherwise, people will reply saying 'that's bad isn't it', or 'let's hang him', and that's the end of the thread.

the dude probaly told her b4 he gave her "the old in out".<-----(old school movie refernce)

"they call me McMapee....Rapee, McMapee

I spent like 3 hours coming up with that one

now you can do the world a favor and spend the next three hours holding your breath