Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#1025 Apr 30, 2013
Phili wrote:
<quoted text>
The issue was never about the ownership or legitimacy of the links.
The issue is you claiming they were child porn.
I have proved you are a pervert.
I have established you are a liar.
You have now shown yourself to be stupid beyond help.
A poor idiotic reply to hide your evident interest and perversion. What does one expect a sex education film to be about if not about sex? Even other posters acknowledged that you are a pervert, including the double-faced Molly.
Nobody else mentioned sex education films for children, including pornographic descriptions, and nobody else posted multiple links to them as you did.
Go on making an idiot of yourself with your denialisms when it is clearly there for all to see.
Phili

UK

#1026 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
A poor idiotic reply to hide your evident interest and perversion. What does one expect a sex education film to be about if not about sex? Even other posters acknowledged that you are a pervert, including the double-faced Molly.
Nobody else mentioned sex education films for children, including pornographic descriptions, and nobody else posted multiple links to them as you did.
Go on making an idiot of yourself with your denialisms when it is clearly there for all to see.
You really are incredibly stupid.
Lets establish the facts.
You stated that the links I had posted months ago which were links to tv series broadcast on primetime nattional television were child pornography and that they contained sexual acts in front of children.
They are not and they didn't.
The comment about the sex education film which would have been seen by children and no doubt many sensible adults all over Europe has got nothing to do with my links that you reposted (badly).
Note your words.
Child porn.
Sex acts.
Not nudity. There is a difference but with your comments about tampons you are probably still a virgin or gay, or both.
Still waiting for evidence to back up your claim.
The fact you rely on the opinion of someone else just shows how desperate (and stupid) you are.
You are scrabbling around in the mud, throwing as much as you can and hoping some will stick.
It won't.
Phili

UK

#1027 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
A poor idiotic reply to hide your evident interest and perversion. What does one expect a sex education film to be about if not about sex? Even other posters acknowledged that you are a pervert, including the double-faced Molly.
Nobody else mentioned sex education films for children, including pornographic descriptions, and nobody else posted multiple links to them ias you did.
Go on making an idiot of yourself with your denialisms when it is clearly there for all to see.
If you think my descriptions were pornographic and with your comment about tampons you have obviously led a very shelteted life.
MaltaMon

Oaklyn, NJ

#1028 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Shut up, Molly, your ridiculous claims and usual BS to defend Phil after YOU called him a sexual pervert puts you on zero credibility, to put it politely.
There you go again. How is my (accurate) statement that you and DJW are the same individual a "defense" of ANYBODY? You're paranoid, Zuiko/DJW. Time for me to sit back and enjoy the show.
Phili

UK

#1029 Apr 30, 2013
Phili wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think my descriptions were pornographic and with your comment about tampons you have obviously led a very shelteted life.
Sheltered.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#1030 Apr 30, 2013
Phili wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are incredibly stupid.
Lets establish the facts.
You stated that the links I had posted months ago which were links to tv series broadcast on primetime nattional television were child pornography and that they contained sexual acts in front of children.
They are not and they didn't.
The comment about the sex education film which would have been seen by children and no doubt many sensible adults all over Europe has got nothing to do with my links that you reposted (badly).
Note your words.
Child porn.
Sex acts.
Not nudity. There is a difference but with your comments about tampons you are probably still a virgin or gay, or both.
Still waiting for evidence to back up your claim.
The fact you rely on the opinion of someone else just shows how desperate (and stupid) you are.
You are scrabbling around in the mud, throwing as much as you can and hoping some will stick.
It won't.
Idiotic comments again to avoid facing the proven facts that you are a sexual pervert. I repeat again that even an idiot won't know that a sexual education film is about sex, so you think you can make us believe that your links to such films contain no sexual content.
Also your comment about "the film was very explicit, involving not only the adults having graphic sex but also showing the children's physical development in a way that would probable be unthinkable now" further shows your perversion. You may not have been referring to the two links you posted, but to another film, which further confirms your enthusiastic interest in this subject of children's sexuality.
The fact which you are trying to avoid is the solid proof that you are obsessed with naked children. This is further shown by the fact that the two longest running topics on this forum, this one about school showers, and the other about boys swimming nude at school, both of which have over 1,000 posts, are FULL of your posts on every page that I have read so far, including your multiple links, on both topics. I could produce even more proof, but I don't have time to go through all your posts.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#1031 Apr 30, 2013
Phili wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think my descriptions were pornographic and with your comment about tampons you have obviously led a very shelteted life.
Your denialism is really thick, here again is your pornographic description "the film was very explicit, involving not only the adults having graphic sex but also showing the children's physical development."
Your lies are also thick, what are you talking about my "comment about tampons"? What comment? Are you trying to play Molly's game saying I am another poster?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#1032 Apr 30, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> There you go again. How is my (accurate) statement that you and DJW are the same individual a "defense" of ANYBODY? You're paranoid, Zuiko/DJW. Time for me to sit back and enjoy the show.
Your (inaccurate) statement that I am DJW is another of your ridiculous inventions, which you cannot even remotely prove. First you said I am Fortysomething and now DJW. Who next?
Yes, it is better to sit back and enjoy the show because defending someone whom you said is a sexual pervert makes you look even more ridiculous.
Phil

Manchester, UK

#1033 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiotic comments again to avoid facing the proven facts that you are a sexual pervert. I repeat again that even an idiot won't know that a sexual education film is about sex, so you think you can make us believe that your links to such films contain no sexual content.
Also your comment about "the film was very explicit, involving not only the adults having graphic sex but also showing the children's physical development in a way that would probable be unthinkable now" further shows your perversion. You may not have been referring to the two links you posted, but to another film, which further confirms your enthusiastic interest in this subject of children's sexuality.
The fact which you are trying to avoid is the solid proof that you are obsessed with naked children. This is further shown by the fact that the two longest running topics on this forum, this one about school showers, and the other about boys swimming nude at school, both of which have over 1,000 posts, are FULL of your posts on every page that I have read so far, including your multiple links, on both topics. I could produce even more proof, but I don't have time to go through all your posts.
Dear shit-for-brains, let me help you out here.
You have real issues, not least with the English language.
You have stated categorically that I posted child porn.
You also stated very clearly that I posted links to sex education films that featured or contained sex acts in front of children.
Once again, I have not and did not.
There is no evidence whatsoever to support your claim.
You can twist words and situations as much as you like to support your strange agenda but the fact (that word you have problems with) is that you are a liar.
If you lied about this then all your posts and protestations as to your innocence of the charge of being a pervert are pointless.
You have no credibility.
Once more, for the benefit of the stupid.
The links I provided were for a series of programmes broadcast on national television in the UK.
Not child porn.
No sex acts involved.
Get it?
However, if by providing such links and referring to the content of a legitimate sex education film is considered on planet Zuiko to be child porn then it follows that your link to images of nude boys in the shower is also child porn.
You can't have it both ways.
MaltaMon

Merchantville, NJ

#1034 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Your (inaccurate) statement that I am DJW is another of your ridiculous inventions, which you cannot even remotely prove. First you said I am Fortysomething and now DJW. Who next?
Yes, it is better to sit back and enjoy the show because defending someone whom you said is a sexual pervert makes you look even more ridiculous.
Lol. I knew you'd say that, DJ. You are what you would call a "denialist"
Phil

Manchester, UK

#1035 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiotic comments again to avoid facing the proven facts that you are a sexual pervert. I repeat again that even an idiot won't know that a sexual education film is about sex, so you think you can make us believe that your links to such films contain no sexual content.
Also your comment about "the film was very explicit, involving not only the adults having graphic sex but also showing the children's physical development in a way that would probable be unthinkable now" further shows your perversion. You may not have been referring to the two links you posted, but to another film, which further confirms your enthusiastic interest in this subject of children's sexuality.
The fact which you are trying to avoid is the solid proof that you are obsessed with naked children. This is further shown by the fact that the two longest running topics on this forum, this one about school showers, and the other about boys swimming nude at school, both of which have over 1,000 posts, are FULL of your posts on every page that I have read so far, including your multiple links, on both topics. I could produce even more proof, but I don't have time to go through all your posts.
I am sure there are plenty of my posts in these threads but as has been explained before, and which would be borne out by simply checking, very few are on-topic and many more are my exchanges with Censored, Maltamon and now you, you thick prick.

"you think you can make us believe that your links to such films contain no sexual content"

I never said they didn't but you claimed, explicitly, that I had posted links to films that contained sex acts (your words) in front of children.
Once more, I did not.
In your desperation not to look stupid or to appear not to be the undoubted liar that you are you attempt to move the goalposts, so to speak after you have been shown, yet again, to be wrong.

The television programmes that you never saw but which you profess to have an intimate knowledge of (which by itself makes you look stupid) were aimed at and involved teenage children (and at the time my sons were teenagers, hence my interest as a responsible parent in them and in the other film) and also involved some parents and a qualified doctor.
As such they provided an invaluable service to ill-informed children and adults and I will say again, without embarrassment they should be required viewing for all children of a certain age, if not their parents who may one day be asked 'awkward' questions by their children.
Phil

Manchester, UK

#1036 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiotic comments again to avoid facing the proven facts that you are a sexual pervert. I repeat again that even an idiot won't know that a sexual education film is about sex, so you think you can make us believe that your links to such films contain no sexual content.
Also your comment about "the film was very explicit, involving not only the adults having graphic sex but also showing the children's physical development in a way that would probable be unthinkable now" further shows your perversion. You may not have been referring to the two links you posted, but to another film, which further confirms your enthusiastic interest in this subject of children's sexuality.
The fact which you are trying to avoid is the solid proof that you are obsessed with naked children. This is further shown by the fact that the two longest running topics on this forum, this one about school showers, and the other about boys swimming nude at school, both of which have over 1,000 posts, are FULL of your posts on every page that I have read so far, including your multiple links, on both topics. I could produce even more proof, but I don't have time to go through all your posts.
"proven facts"

You wouldn't know a fact if it slapped you in the face.
You haven't proven a thing.
Nothing.
d-j-w

Newton Abbot, UK

#1037 Apr 30, 2013
MaltaMon wrote:
<quoted text> Lol. I knew you'd say that, DJ. You are what you would call a "denialist"
No MM you deny the humiliation caused by forced nude showers and pupils being forced to change into swim wear or new underwear under their shorts for pe.

Not to mention czech kindergartens who force kids to strip naked in the park for paddling pools or russian scout groups that make naked skinny dipping part of their itinerary.

You refuse to leave your trailer park in Pennsylvania and realise what is still going on in the world.

Like Obama you think everything can be resolved with a drone strike
Phil

Manchester, UK

#1038 Apr 30, 2013
"Not to mention czech kindergartens who force kids to strip naked in the park for paddling pools or russian scout groups that make naked skinny dipping part of their itinerary"

How would you know so much if you were not obsessed?

Get a life.
MaltaMon

Thorofare, NJ

#1039 Apr 30, 2013
d-j-w wrote:
<quoted text>
No MM you deny the humiliation caused by forced nude showers and pupils being forced to change into swim wear or new underwear under their shorts for pe.
Not to mention czech kindergartens who force kids to strip naked in the park for paddling pools or russian scout groups that make naked skinny dipping part of their itinerary.
You refuse to leave your trailer park in Pennsylvania and realise what is still going on in the world.
Like Obama you think everything can be resolved with a drone strike
Hey, Zuiko, you screwed up again. You forgot that D-J-W ALWAYS POSTS HIS SCREEN NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS. First you forget to keep his statements within character--even referring to me as "Molly" on Saturday, and now this. You were too angry to maintain his persona, and now, by forgetting to hit the upper-case key because Phil has you all upset, you misrepresent his name. You truly are an idiot.
MaltaMon

Oaklyn, NJ

#1040 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko/DJW, Abandon your lame-ass charade. Nobody believes that D-J-W is anyone other than you. Give up the nonsense, for Christ's sake! It's a colossal waste of time. And very, very childish.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#1041 Apr 30, 2013
Phil wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear shit-for-brains, let me help you out here.
You have real issues, not least with the English language.
You have stated categorically that I posted child porn.
You also stated very clearly that I posted links to sex education films that featured or contained sex acts in front of children.
Once again, I have not and did not.
There is no evidence whatsoever to support your claim.
You can twist words and situations as much as you like to support your strange agenda but the fact (that word you have problems with) is that you are a liar.
If you lied about this then all your posts and protestations as to your innocence of the charge of being a pervert are pointless.
You have no credibility.
Once more, for the benefit of the stupid.
The links I provided were for a series of programmes broadcast on national television in the UK.
Not child porn.
No sex acts involved.
Get it?
However, if by providing such links and referring to the content of a legitimate sex education film is considered on planet Zuiko to be child porn then it follows that your link to images of nude boys in the shower is also child porn.
You can't have it both ways.
Bla bla bla...you don't realize what an idiot you are making of yourself with your denialism in front of the overwhelming evidence...from your own posts...that you are a sexual pervert. This is not just my opinion, but several other posters have also said the same about you, including your darling Molly, and these are not just opnions but facts based on your innumerable posts.
No amount of name calling or banal excuses are going to change the facts.
MaltaMon

Oaklyn, NJ

#1042 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Bla bla bla...you don't realize what an idiot you are making of yourself with your denialism in front of the overwhelming evidence...from your own posts...that you are a sexual pervert. This is not just my opinion, but several other posters have also said the same about you, including your darling Molly, and these are not just opnions but facts based on your innumerable posts.
No amount of name calling or banal ex cuses are going to change the facts.
.. "your denialism" Lol.
Phili

Manchester, UK

#1043 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Bla bla bla...you don't realize what an idiot you are making of yourself with your denialism in front of the overwhelming evidence...from your own posts...that you are a sexual pervert. This is not just my opinion, but several other posters have also said the same about you, including your darling Molly, and these are not just opnions but facts based on your innumerable posts.
No amount of name calling or banal excuses are going to change the facts.
Your comments are irrelevant.
By your criteria, by the 'rules' you have applied to me and my posts you have posted child pornography.
Phili

Manchester, UK

#1044 Apr 30, 2013
Zuiko wrote:
<quoted text>
Bla bla bla...you don't realize what an idiot you are making of yourself with your denialism in front of the overwhelming evidence...from your own posts...that you are a sexual pervert. This is not just my opinion, but several other posters have also said the same about you, including your darling Molly, and these are not just opnions but facts based on your innumerable posts.
No amount of name calling or banal excuses are going to change the facts.
Opinions.
You said it.
That is all you've got.
Facts?
You don't know the meaning of the word.
I posted links to legitimate television programmes.
You posted links to a photo of boys in the shower.
I posted links to reputable media organisations.
You asked for a link to a book about men being examined naked.
Notice any difference?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Education Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Does Your School Still Have A Mandated Shower R... (Apr '14) 3 hr MohammaMon 60
Bob: Were Boys Forced to Attend School Swim Les... (Sep '12) 3 hr John Bull 2,181
Opt-out: Parents push back against kids' many s... Sun NoneOfTheAbove 1
PARCC tests - NJ parents, students worry about ... Sun NoneOfTheAbove 1
Carlsbad students protest PARCC test Sun LOL 1
There are others with similar questions. Let's ... Sun KabNights 1
Punishment Sun Phil 44
More from around the web