Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Letzgo hunting paedos

That's it - you're barred, son. No relaxing cloth-based reclining structures or corny comestibles for you til you learn to respect your elders. :mad:

OK, I'll provide my own seating and nutrition resources. Some people will stop at nothing to commodify even the most basic pleasures :p
 

Very good.

But let me ask you some serious questions. You strike me as a fairly reasonable person. What do you make of the responses Stinson Hunter evokes in people? Does he not legitimize their darkest, most authoritarian and unabashedly sadistic impulses? Does he not do this for his own profit?
 
...He is building his career on the misery of others. He is exploiting vice and tragedy for his own benefit. What could be more despicable than that?...

What about attempting to build your reputation as an iconoclastic internet warrior on the back of someone you declare to be building his career on the misery of others, exploiting vice and tragedy for his own benefit? That certainly seems pretty cuntish, if not despicable.

Seriously phil, do you really think you're adding anything worthwhile to this discussion in comparison, for instance, to elbows' thoughtful and nuanced post immediately before you burst in?
 
I simply don't believe that you can think of no worse crime than what Stinson does.

Well then I shall explain my position to you.

It is not so much what he does that I find repugnant (although I do find it extremely repugnant). It is more why he does it. He evinces an unthinking self-righteousness that, in my experience, is the exclusive preserve of the truly evil. And his naked hunger for fame and glory is beneath contempt.

But worst of all are the consequences of his behavior: what his behavior causes others to think and do. He personifies everything that is brutal and degraded in modern Western society.
 
Very good.

But let me ask you some serious questions. You strike me as a fairly reasonable person. What do you make of the responses Stinson Hunter evokes in people? Does he not legitimize their darkest, most authoritarian and unabashedly sadistic impulses? Does he not do this for his own profit?

I think some of the comments are deeply disturbing. But then so is some of the behaviour I see from people at football, or after they've had a drink - I don't blame the FA or brewers, though. I get the impression that he's motivated by something other than profit.
 
What about attempting to build your reputation as an iconoclastic internet warrior on the back of someone you declare to be building his career on the misery of others, exploiting vice and tragedy for his own benefit? That certainly seems pretty cuntish, if not despicable.

Seriously phil, do you really think you're adding anything worthwhile to this discussion in comparison, for instance, to elbows' thoughtful and nuanced post immediately before you burst in?

Stop grovelling you creep.
 
What about attempting to build your reputation as an iconoclastic internet warrior on the back of someone you declare to be building his career on the misery of others, exploiting vice and tragedy for his own benefit? That certainly seems pretty cuntish, if not despicable.

Phil is basically shooting the shit on a site where he is a known controversialist. Apples and oranges seems too mild an expression to use when comparing that to someone who ruins people's lives (regardless of whether that is justifiable or with good intentions).
 
It is not so much what he does that I find repugnant (although I do find it extremely repugnant). It is more why he does it. He evinces an unthinking self-righteousness that, in my experience, is the exclusive preserve of the truly evil. And his naked hunger for fame and glory is beneath contempt.

I didn't get that impression about his motivation from the programme.
 
I think some of the comments are deeply disturbing. But then so is some of the behaviour I see from people at football, or after they've had a drink - I don't blame the FA or brewers, though. I get the impression that he's motivated by something other than profit.

So do I: psychosis.

What he does is different from the FA and the brewers. The responses he evokes aren't a side-effect of what he does. They are the whole point of what he does. They are his aim.
 
So do I: psychosis.

What he does is different from the FA and the brewers. The responses he evokes aren't a side-effect of what he does. They are the whole point of what he does. They are his aim.

How do you know what motivates him, Phil? It appeared to that what moved him the most was the conviction of one of his targets, not the comments on social media about his work.
 
Really? You think he's motivated by... what... altruism?

FFS. There are plenty of people working to stop child abuse in a non-self-aggrandizing fashion. He ain't one of them.

No, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I suspect he's motivated by past trauma.
 
Phil is basically shooting the shit on a site where he is a known controversialist. Apples and oranges seems too mild an expression to use when comparing that to someone who ruins people's lives (regardless of whether that is justifiable or with good intentions).

A known controversialist, troll, and preventer of anybody else having a halfway decent conversation, IMO.

Ironic that he's now throwing around words like psychosis, some might think his repeated behaviour here bears many of the signs of mental illness.
 
Because he promotes himself like he was a brand of soap powder. He wants to be famous, the poor sap.

Rather a simplistic analysis. It might be true that he enjoys the fame, but I didn't get the feeling that was his main driver. And there are other reasons for publicity than to seek adulation e.g. for funding, as a deterrent for the sort of people he targets, to feel validated as he exorcises his own demons etc. etc.
 
It's clearly part of the wider spectrum of human sexuality. Can't be much fun being wired that way I wouldn't have thought. Not in our society anyway.

The same kind of people who get their rocks off on hating nonces today would have been queerbashers in the 70s.
 
Rather a simplistic analysis. It might be true that he enjoys the fame, but I didn't get the feeling that was his main driver. And there are other reasons for publicity than to seek adulation e.g. for funding, as a deterrent for the sort of people he targets, to feel validated as he exorcises his own demons etc. etc.

Alright, I'll accept that he's mentally ill, and that his behavior is in part caused by his illness. But to me that can't be an excuse--mainly because he's so blatantly exploiting the sicknesses of other people.
 
Back
Top Bottom