[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

whataboutwhatabout

I think its a very good question to ask to see if YOutube have the balls for it

middle aged white bloke = low hanging fruit

lets see them get the step-ladder out

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

A YouTube channel that I watch called SomeOrdinaryGamers has spoke about Animal Abuse videos on YouTube in the past, you'd probably like his content because he does try to report these sick cases to the YouTube Moderators.

He also tries to deal with Paedophilia as well.

You Tube need to STOP these videos being shown Mocky ,they can obviously do it as proved by the Brand banning, how perverse do these videos have to be for the You Tube moderators to do something ? I believe some are just vile.

[Crimson Dynamo]

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

So the B stands for Benzodiazepines.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

You Tube need to STOP these videos being shown Mocky ,they can obviously do it as proved by the Brand banning, how perverse do these videos have to be for the You Tube moderators to do something ? I believe some are just vile.

I think that YouTube doesn't bother unfortunately unless people mass report the crime happening on the website, or is a high profile case like Russell Brand.

I do agree with you though.

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://music.youtube.com/channel/UC...bvUAULNbIy7qPg

R Kelly YOuTube music channel

[Crimson Dynamo]

yeah, did you know this sh1t goes on ?

[Crimson Dynamo]

get them telt

[arista]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sing-room.html

[Crimson Dynamo]

deffo not a hit job...

Spoiler:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Spoiler:

[Cherie]

Tbf they do seem to be going in on him, given he has not been charged with anything .....

[user104658]

As before and as always; it can be both.

I find it difficult to believe it's a "hit job" because he's so influential and saying things that are so new (it's just not the case... he's just another of a thousand Social Media influencers trotting out the same Truther shyte).

I am MORE WILLING to believe that the story is being overblown as a distraction tactic: it does seem to be being turned into something far bigger than the myriad of other celebrity sex scandals, for no real reason that I can think of. It's not surprising and not shocking news about Brand. I saw a clip of a comedian on TikkyTok last night about this that really made me laugh (for it's truth) ... he said that the weirdest thing about the Brand stuff is that we're supposed to be surprised, as "Brand looked like what you'd get if you handed a child a bunch of crayons and asked them to draw a Bad Man" ... and it's true. When it comes down to it, we all bloody knew what he was and that there would be skeletons.


However as I said it can be both. All of the above can be true, with the allegations against him still being true. Rather than saying that it's all made up (just highly unlikely given how much would need to be soordinated to make that happen) - I find it more believable to suggest that the allegations are real, but that these journalists have known about Brand for a decade or longer, and that they've not considered it particularly important to bother really pursuing.

So in short; It can be the case that it's a media "hit job", but that it's rooted in things that he actually did (that have been swept under the rug for many years).

[arista]

[bots]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

As before and as always; it can be both.

I find it difficult to believe it's a "hit job" because he's so influential and saying things that are so new (it's just not the case... he's just another of a thousand Social Media influencers trotting out the same Truther shyte).

I am MORE WILLING to believe that the story is being overblown as a distraction tactic: it does seem to be being turned into something far bigger than the myriad of other celebrity sex scandals, for no real reason that I can think of. It's not surprising and not shocking news about Brand. I saw a clip of a comedian on TikkyTok last night about this that really made me laugh (for it's truth) ... he said that the weirdest thing about the Brand stuff is that we're supposed to be surprised, as "Brand looked like what you'd get if you handed a child a bunch of crayons and asked them to draw a Bad Man" ... and it's true. When it comes down to it, we all bloody knew what he was and that there would be skeletons.


However as I said it can be both. All of the above can be true, with the allegations against him still being true. Rather than saying that it's all made up (just highly unlikely given how much would need to be soordinated to make that happen) - I find it more believable to suggest that the allegations are real, but that these journalists have known about Brand for a decade or longer, and that they've not considered it particularly important to bother really pursuing.

So in short; It can be the case that it's a media "hit job", but that it's rooted in things that he actually did (that have been swept under the rug for many years).

it reminds me of a teacher we had at school. Every kid in the school knew that he liked to fiddle with little boys, so when you got the line "would you like to come to me place after school for some extra lessons" everyone was ready with the **** off!! However, in that case it took at least 7 years until anything was done about him and the number of back cases was probably very large

[user104658]

I've been advocating for a staggered age of consent for more than a decade; would very much welcome this as a change to the law.

I don't think it needs to be raised - if anything I'd lower the age for decriminalisation for same-age teens (I don't think it's a good idea for 14 year olds to be sexually active, but it happens and shouldn't be a crime if it's with someone the same age or close in age) - but there needs to be a mechanism in place that puts a stop to large age gaps under the age of 21. The possibility (in fact likelihood) of manipulation of vulnerable young adults is just far too high.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I've been advocating for a staggered age of consent for more than a decade; would very much welcome this as a change to the law.

I don't think it needs to be raised - if anything I'd lower the age for decriminalisation for same-age teens (I don't think it's a good idea for 14 year olds to be sexually active, but it happens and shouldn't be a crime if it's with someone the same age or close in age) - but there needs to be a mechanism in place that puts a stop to large age gaps under the age of 21. The possibility (in fact likelihood) of manipulation of vulnerable young adults is just far too high.

Definitely a good idea

[arista]

USA debate Brand
but most USA media say take it to the court,
before the press

[Crimson Dynamo]

The Conservative Government actively leading the way to cancel a celebrity based on some allegations made on a TV programme

you could not make it up



and Piers agrees

[bots]

it's not much different to what the bank did to farage in reality

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I've been advocating for a staggered age of consent for more than a decade; would very much welcome this as a change to the law.

I don't think it needs to be raised - if anything I'd lower the age for decriminalisation for same-age teens (I don't think it's a good idea for 14 year olds to be sexually active, but it happens and shouldn't be a crime if it's with someone the same age or close in age) - but there needs to be a mechanism in place that puts a stop to large age gaps under the age of 21. The possibility (in fact likelihood) of manipulation of vulnerable young adults is just far too high.

I think you have a case between 16-18, but once someone is paying full taxes, and is deemed by the state to be a "full adult", then it gets very purity police real quick.

[Oliver_W]

I'd rather it just be raised to 18 with no caveats, but that would never fly.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I'd rather it just be raised to 18 with no caveats, but that would never fly.

it actually boils down to money at the end of the day. It puts more pressure on the state to treat people as children past the age of 16, so it will never fly

[user104658]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I think you have a case between 16-18, but once someone is paying full taxes, and is deemed by the state to be a "full adult", then it gets very purity police real quick.

Maybe, in terms of actual legality, but I reserve the right to state that anyone aged 25 or over pursuing 18 year olds is either dodgy or immature themselves, and anyone 30 or over pursuing 18 year olds is just a plain old nonce.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it actually boils down to money at the end of the day. It puts more pressure on the state to treat people as children past the age of 16, so it will never fly

People under 18 can't vote, die for their country, smoke or drink, get married without parental permission, or even leave education now.

Adding another couple of years of protection from perves has no extra infantilisation or cost.