The Truth About Cyntoia Brown

[Islam Imamate]

Jesus, Kafir.



I might not object very strongly to putting that label on myself even at that age though tbh; was already doing all kinds of "stuff" albeit with other kids of the same age.

I never said that though, he's just a dishonest hack who likes to misrepresent my positions because he can't adequately defend his own. Like I said earlier, a snake in the grass if you will.

 

[Amerikuracana]

On here? I highly doubt it.

If you switched up a couple factors, there would be a horde of apologists. Anybody defending Milo when that broke was doing so strictly because of politics and/or some concern over right-wing censorship. There are few principles anymore, and he was a useful little clown for a couple years.

As an aside: two years can make a tremendous difference depending, for reasons already stated above. As it is, the contemporary age of consent laws set at 14-16 throughout the western world are probably inappropriate and extremely sketchy at best even taking sexual maturity into consideration.

Do you really think marriage to a 16-year-old would be fulfilling, @Amerikuracana? I'm not passing judgment given a lot of girls that age are as developed as they'll be at 26, but it's so disproportionate on an intellectual and emotional level. Teenagers tend to be a massive turn off for that reason alone.

In most cases no. Nobody over 30 should be seeking it out, imo. But could love happen there? If you start having sex, and enjoy it enough to do it every day, well maybe you should just marry her. I have a 16 year old daughter. If she fell in love with a 30 year old guy and they started having sex, and it was legal, and he had a decent career/life, I would much prefer them get married. Life is short, so starting a few years earlier than average isn't the end of the world. My 16 year old is less developed than my 15 year old, so it would be weird, but do I really like the "American way" of being a total whore through college and getting to the point where sex means nothing and she could never love her husband? Because that's where the fk we are at. Women get their souls banged out and can't love their husbands in the way they are supposed to. I'd rather my daughters get married before 20 than go through the BS modern way.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

I have trouble making sense of the way some people on this forum see children. I mean, there will be a thread in which an 11-year old drag queen is dancing on a stage and people are rightfully disgusted because of the age inappropriateness of it all. But then in the next thread, people will defend a man who thinks that 2 years from now adults might have a helpful sexual relationship with that same exact boy.

So, watching an 11 year old dancing is disgusting. But having sex with a 13 year old could be a great coming of age experience? Wow, what a difference 2 years in the life of a child makes on Sherdog.

wait, what? I don't think anyone is arguing this.

Desmond is Amazing is sexual exploitation of a minor and is fu*king disgusting. and before any leftist c*nts attempt to deflect and say, "oh yea, what about teen beauty pageants?!?!" I find those abhorrent as well.

and fu*king 13 year olds is disgusting as well.

 

[nac386]

wait, what? I don't think anyone is arguing this.

Desmond is Amazing is sexual exploitation of a minor and is fu*king disgusting. and before any leftist c*nts attempt to deflect and say, "oh yea, what about teen beauty pageants?!?!" I find those abhorrent as well.

and fu*king 13 year olds is disgusting as well.

But that's what Milo said, and how many posters have defended him and continue to do so? "Oh it wasn't that bad." He said that the age of consent is oppressive, said that a 13 year old is sexually mature and not a child, and that those kids often have great life affirming experiences with adults.

If you defend that statement, then you are defending that statement. People are pathetically wishy-washy on this very clear situation.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

But that's what Milo said, and how many posters have defended him and continue to do so? "Oh it wasn't that bad." He said that the age of consent is oppressive, said that a 13 year old is sexually mature and not a child, and that those kids often have great life affirming experiences with adults.

If you defend that statement, then you are defending that statement. People are pathetically wishy-washy on this very clear situation.

I take 90 percent of Milo's comments to be trolling or fishing for a reaction.

in regards to age of consent, I know many countries have it at 14. Personally, I would distance myself far from anyone under 19. (assuming I was single)

However, I do admit, as a young teenager, if a hot teacher would have hit on me I would have been a willing "victim".

 

[Mendacious]

I never said that though, he's just a dishonest hack who likes to misrepresent my positions because he can't adequately defend his own. Like I said earlier, a snake in the grass if you will.

It’s rather odd how people have taken him to be an honest poster who is just asking questions when it’s clear his mind is almost always made up.

 

[nac386]

On here? I highly doubt it.

If you switched up a couple factors, there would be a horde of apologists. Anybody defending Milo when that broke was doing so strictly because of politics and/or some concern over right-wing censorship. There are few principles anymore, and he was a useful little clown for a couple years.

If someone is willing to bypass their principles on child sex for the sake of politics, that person is absolutely deranged. The fact is, people defended Milo's comments about having sex with kids. Whatever their motivation was for supporting advocacy of child sex does not really matter in this case.

I take 90 percent of Milo's comments to be trolling or fishing for a reaction.

in regards to age of consent, I know many countries have it at 14. Personally, I would distance myself far from anyone under 19. (assuming I was single)

However, I do admit, as a young teenager, if a hot teacher would have hit on me I would have been a willing "victim".

I don't see how anything he said could be taken as anything less than sincere. He was speaking fairly passionately about it, and gave no indication that he was joking around.

If we can excuse that as trolling, then we can excuse literally anything as trolling and nobody would ever be held remotely accountable for anything they said.

 

[Islam Imamate]

It’s rather odd how people have taken him to be an honest poster who is just asking questions when it’s clear his mind is almost always made up.

Feels like a third of his posts are him unironically posting some variation of "he should not have done that, that was the wrong thing to do" and then feeling smug about it.

 

[nac386]

It’s rather odd how people have taken him to be an honest poster who is just asking questions when it’s clear his mind is almost always made up.

There are some things my mind is made up on. Adults having sexual interactions with young people is one of those things, adults taking young prostitutes home alone for sleepovers is another one of those things, etc.

I'm bland in that way. Those people shouldn't do that, it's the wrong thing to do.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

If someone is willing to bypass their principles on child sex for the sake of politics, that person is absolutely deranged. The fact is, people defended Milo's comments about having sex with kids. Whatever their motivation was for supporting advocacy of child sex does not really matter in this case.



I don't see how anything he said could be taken as anything less than sincere. He was speaking fairly passionately about it, and gave no indication that he was joking around.

If we can excuse that as trolling, then we can excuse literally anything as trolling and nobody would ever be held remotely accountable for anything they said.

Either way, I disagree with the premise of what Milo is saying.

not sure how we got here.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

A good samaritan does not pick up teenage prostitutes and take them home alone for a sleepover. Anybody who thinks that there is nothing wrong with that, other than it being naive, makes me uncomfortable and I would not trust around kids.

You absolutely defended Milo's comments. Just so that everybody knows that you are lying, here it is.

Here is Milo's quote where he says the age of consent is oppressive and advocates for the potential benefit of sex with 13 year olds:


And here if you very directly, without question, defending it.


On what planet is that not a defense? That is as clear as day. Milo advocates for underage sex and attacks consent laws, and you say, "Milo said nothing wrong."

So, uh, following the link to your exchange with @Kafir-kun , he expands on his stance, directly to you, a couple pages later. His position is far more nuanced, and his underlying point seems to be that people overreacted to Milo's statement and that Milo himself makes a couple of, if not good, then at least thought-provoking points; ones worth thinking about, if nothing else.
You might not agree with him, but you are massively misrepresenting him.

And I have to ask, why is it impossible to fathom that anyone could possibly see a young woman in clear distress and choose to offer assistance?
It seems that your inability to even consider the possibility of such a charitable (if horribly misguided) act says more about you than the people you're trying to slander or "catch out" in this thread.

 

[HereticBD]

I don't see how anything he said could be taken as anything less than sincere.

In fairness, that is kind of his schtick. He says outrageous things in a very sincere manner to spark a reaction. That goes with the territory of being a "professional provocateur". If you let it be known that you were insincere, the jig is up and you will be less likely to spark the reaction you want..

I think both scenarios are possible, in that he went too far and flew too close to the sun with his schtick, or he was trying to rationalize a very repugnant position he believes in, or perhaps was even trying to make light of the abuse he allegedly suffered.

 

[nac386]

So, uh, following the link to your exchange with @Kafir-kun , he expands on his stance, directly to you, a couple pages later. His position is far more nuanced, and his underlying point seems to be that people overreacted to Milo's statement and that Milo himself makes a couple of, if not good, then at least thought-provoking points; ones worth thinking about, if nothing else.
You might not agree with him, but you are massively misrepresenting him.

He's been consistent on it from thread to thread. But we can just ask him to settle it for us so we can move on. If he's been wishy-washy intentionally to stir debate, he can clarify that now.

@Kafir-kun is it 100% immoral and wrong in all cases for an adult to have sex with a young teenager, say 13 or 14?

And I have to ask, why is it impossible to fathom that anyone could possibly see a young woman in clear distress and choose to offer assistance?
It seems that your inability to even consider the possibility of such a charitable (if horribly misguided) act says more about you than the people you're trying to slander or "catch out" in this thread.

I already said that if that was the case then he is the creepiest "good samaritan" I've ever heard of, and is likely breaking multiple laws in the process. I would think that an adult is not allowed to pick somebody's child up at a Sonic and take her home with him for the night. I don't think that it's entirely impossible, but I think that it's unlikely enough that it sounds ridiculous to me. I also find that explanation pretty immoral itself. Men should not take other people's children to their house for sleepovers to "help" them. Take the girl to a shelter.

If you want to help there are ways to do it that are not dangerous for kids. Partner with a women's shelter, work on the clock with other adults, and help connect kids in need to services that are there to really help them. He would obviously know these things is he actually works with disadvantaged kids.

 

[MVelsor]

If someone is willing to bypass their principles on child sex for the sake of politics, that person is absolutely deranged.

Undoubtedly, but it's the reason nonetheless. You don't find it curious that many of the same who would come to his defense will, in the next breath or post, be going off about the destruction of western civilization (on a computing device, no less) and how "civil society doesn't exist, family doesn't exist, friendship doesn't exist..." in regards to gay people?

not sure how we got here.

http://forums.sherdog.com/posts/157875611/

I take 90 percent of Milo's comments to be trolling or fishing for a reaction.

Milo's into BBC, not kids. I'm skeptical about him trolling, but I also remember being 13 and knowing damn well what I was doing. The game changes once you're old enough to bust nuts and by definition it isn't pedophilia, but that doesn't make it right or appropriate. I guess the critical difference is that I wasn't into nor messing around with dudes older than me. The attraction has always run pretty much proportional to my own age group.

in regards to age of consent, I know many countries have it at 14. Personally, I would distance myself far from anyone under 19. (assuming I was single)

He keeps brushing that off, along with some very direct anecdotal and academic insight being provided. Contrary to WR doctrine, it isn't early experiences that somehow make people gay. The early experiences happen because people already are. I'm 30 and get regularly propped and solicited by teenagers, some of whom I'm pretty certain are violating platform TOS by being on there. It's uncomfortable AF; I see them more as little brothers, not desirable fuck buddies.

However, I do admit, as a young teenager, if a hot teacher would have hit on me I would have been a willing "victim".

Yeah, always interesting to check the cheers compared to jeers when stories of the high school kid getting blow jobs from one of his female instructors break. It's by and large laughed about, if not applauded and full of "wish I'd had a teacher like that" commentary.

 

[milkmandanl]

I have strong belief in capital punishment, especially when there is undeniable evidence and facts like in this case.

I just don’t understand how people think a cold blooded murderer should continue to live amongst society.

 

[deadshot138]

https://fox6now.com/2018/03/09/brit...nced-in-fatal-shooting-death-of-her-boyfrMale.

A white woman got life in prison for shooting her abusive boyfriend in his sleep and no ones batted an eye. Little Cyntoia "executes" a sleeping man who took her in off the streets and she's a hero. Best believe this was racially motivated to an extent especially with the victim being a Christian white male.

 

[nac386]

Undoubtedly, but it's the reason nonetheless. You don't find it curious that many of the same who would come to his defense will, in the next breath or post, be going off about the destruction of western civilization (on a computing device, no less) and how "civil society doesn't exist, family doesn't exist, friendship doesn't exist..." in regards to gay people?

The hypocrisy is transparent, that's why I point it out.

He keeps brushing that off, along with some very direct anecdotal and academic insight being provided. Contrary to WR doctrine, it isn't early experiences that somehow make people gay. The early experiences happen because people already are. I'm 30 and get regularly propped and solicited by teenagers, some of whom I'm pretty certain are violating platform TOS by being on there. It's uncomfortable AF; I see them more as little brothers, not desirable fuck buddies.

Were you referring to me here? What did I brush off? Must have missed something. I certainly never claimed early sexual experiences turn someone gay, that's absolutely ridiculous. Lol.

People keep bringing up the fact that a lot of young kids have crushes on adults as if that is somehow relevant. It's not, at all. Every middle school old girl has a crush on her male teachers, that is just something kids do. If that adult actually takes advantage of that, he's a criminal and should be locked away from society.

Young kids seeking attention from older men/women is not evidence that it is okay for adults to allow that to happen. It's one of the sickest things an adult can do, in my opinion.

Yeah, always interesting to check the cheers compared to jeers when stories of the high school kid getting blow jobs from one of his female instructors break. It's by and large laughed about, if not applauded and full of "wish I'd had a teacher like that" commentary.

I've already had that conversation with @LogicalInsanity in previous conversations. He is at least completely open about the fact that he responds entirely differently to hearing that an adult woman had sex with a young male student than he does when he hears that an adult male had sex with a young female student.

 

[nac386]

https://fox6now.com/2018/03/09/brit...nced-in-fatal-shooting-death-of-her-boyfrMale.

A white woman got life in prison for shooting her abusive boyfriend in his sleep and no ones batted an eye. Little Cyntoia "executes" a sleeping man who took her in off the streets and she's a hero. Best believe this was racially motivated to an extent especially with the victim being a Christian white male.

That woman is 29 years old, not 16, and she has an opportunity for parole after 25 years, not 51.

That sentence would have been reasonable for Cyntoia Brown.

 

[milkmandanl]

That woman is 29 years old, not 16, and she has an opportunity for parole after 25 years, not 51.

That sentence would have been reasonable for Cyntoia Brown.

another key difference is that the “victim” was actually abusing the woman...if true...then she got a much harsher sentence than the cold blooded murderer.

 

[nac386]

another key difference is that the “victim” was actually abusing the woman...if true...then she got a much harsher sentence than the cold blooded murderer.

Right, "If true."

Depends on if you choose to believe their testimonies. If you believe their testimonies, you have a 16 year old prostitute being sexually abused by a 43 year old John, and a 29 year old being physically abused by her boyfriend. The result, the 16 year old getting at least 51 years in prison and the 29 year old getting at least 25.

I think it's a pretty bad comparison to make. I think it actually highlights why people had an issue with the Cyntoia Brown case.