Suspended sentence for sexual assault of four cousins

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

? Iona Family Planning Unit? What’s that got to do with 14 year old boys sexually abusing small girls? If it’s an attempt to deflect the attention away from the fact that over 90% of child sex abuse victims are abused by family members and not “outsiders” then you really should be ashamed of yourself.

Your are hilarious.

I know you have to make yourself feel valid in today's world by insisting how necessary is to be stay at home parent. It was your decision and nobody is criticizing you for it but different parents make different arrangements and their kids don't end up being sexually abused. In the same way as overbearing parents who allow no independence to their kids can damage their kids.

You don't agree with letting other people mind your kids and that's fine but don't start implying that that's neglectful parenting.

meeeeh

eagle eye wrote: »

Meeah I think you posted in the wrong thread.

Oh no it's the right thread and is pure entertainment.

Boggles

splinter65 wrote: »

I was 32 when my only child was born. I’d already had a great social life and plenty of leisure time for 14 years, say, since

Throwing in the "social life" towel at 32 is quite sad really.

Even sadder because you did it because you think your young nephews are rapists.

eagle eye

meeeeh wrote:

Oh no it's the right thread and is pure entertainment.

If you consider a thread discussing kids being sexually assaulted as entertainment then maybe you need to go see a head doctor and have a chat.

eagle eye

Boggles wrote:

Throwing in the "social life" towel at 32 is quite sad really.

No it's not, it just means he matured quicker than you did obviously.

Boggles

eagle eye wrote: »

No it's not, it just means he matured quicker than you did obviously.

Firstly he is a she, do keep up.

Secondly having a social life has fúck all to do with maturity.

Thirdly you know fúck all about me so your use of "obviously" is a little creepy.

eagle eye

Boggles wrote:

Thirdly you know fúck all about me so your use of "obviously" is a little creepy.

I know plenty about you based on your posting on this site. You've been acting the same way for a long, long time going back to your soccer forum days.

Boggles

eagle eye wrote: »

I know plenty about you based on your posting on this site. You've been acting the same way for a long, long time going back to your soccer forum days.

Beyond creepy.

eagle eye

Boggles wrote:

Secondly having a social life has fúck all to do with maturity.

Well it does because things change as you get older. Your friends get married and have kids, you get married and have kids and you have to look after all these things so you have less time for a social life.
I remember realising when my child got sick at 3 months old that if I had been out on the town that I'd have been no use when this happened at 3am in the morning. As a result my social life got cut out a lot as alcohol could not be a part of it. I had already cut out a lot of social activities by then which allowed me hop in my car and drive my child to hospital along with my wife instead of sitting at home waiting for an ambulance and risking my child's health deteriorate even more.

eagle eye

Boggles wrote:

Beyond creepy.

Like something a teenager would say.

Boggles

eagle eye wrote: »

Like something a teenager would say.

If they were a having a conversation with you, I imagine so.

eagle eye

Boggles wrote:

If they were a having a conversation with you, I imagine so.

Yes, exactly what they'd say to an adult.

meeeeh

eagle eye wrote: »

If you consider a thread discussing kids being sexually assaulted as entertainment then maybe you need to go see a head doctor and have a chat.

Oh no I'm laughing at you and your friends not at the victims. Not that this is about victims or even about perpetrator, it about frustrated judgemental people who are directing all their frustrations into a situation they know nothing about and presenting all their little prejudices as fact. It's entertaining anthropological experiment.

eagle eye

meeeeh wrote:

Oh no I'm laughing at you and your friends not at the victims. Not that this is about victims or even about perpetrator, it about frustrated judgemental people who are directing all their frustrations into a situation they know nothing about and presenting all their little prejudices as fact.

I am not frustrated in any way. I'm a parent and my work involved seeing a lot of what's being discussed here.
It's not just relatives but teachers, priests, sports coaches who do thing like this.
You should never leave your kids alone with anybody unless you are 100% certain about the person you are leaving them with.
I have a babysitter who I trust 100%.

meeeeh

eagle eye wrote: »

I am not frustrated in any way. I'm a parent and my work involved seeing a lot of what's being discussed here.
It's not just relatives but teachers, priests, sports coaches who do thing like this.
You should never leave your kids alone with anybody unless you are 100% certain about the person you are leaving them with.
I have a babysitter who I trust 100%.

Nothing is 100%. Just because you think someone is safe it doesn't mean they are. Like any other parent you are hoping for the best and criticising people for doing exactly the same except they were unlucky.

This thread is about smug parents being smug because their kids were not victms of sexual abuse. (And people without kids who are just judgemental about parents).

eagle eye

meeeeh wrote:

Nothing is 100%. Just because you think someone is safe it doesn't mean they are. Like any other parent you are hoping for the best and criticising people for doing exactly the same except they were unlucky.
This thread is about smug parents being smug because their kids were not victms of sexual abuse.

I am 100% trusting of my babysitter. There is zero chance that she would ever do something wrong. She is 24 btw.

You are seeing things here that are not here. There is no smugness, there is criticism, and rightly so, of kids being left in unsafe situations.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

Your are hilarious.

I know you have to make yourself feel valid in today's world by insisting how necessary is to be stay at home parent. It was your decision and nobody is criticizing you for it but different parents make different arrangements and their kids don't end up being sexually abused. In the same way as overbearing parents who allow no independence to their kids can damage their kids.

You don't agree with letting other people mind your kids and that's fine but don't start implying that that's neglectful parenting.

But kids are sexually abused by family members. That’s what this thread is about. You can’t explain still how you managed to bring the Iona Institute into a thread about a 14 year old boy sexually abusing his cousins? And I’m hilarious and trying to validate myself?!?

Boggles

eagle eye wrote: »

I am 100% trusting of my babysitter. There is zero chance that she would ever do something wrong. She is 24 btw.

Who Babysits at 24?

Red Flag!

splinter65

Boggles wrote: »

Throwing in the "social life" towel at 32 is quite sad really.

Even sadder because you did it because you think your young nephews are rapists.

What an utterly disgusting perverted post. Only a pervert could post that to be honest. You have conflated my post to meet the dregs of your own mind and I’m reporting you now and I never report anyone. Get help for yourself.

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

But kids are sexually abused by family members. That’s what this thread is about. You can’t explain still how you managed to bring the Iona Institute into a thread about a 14 year old boy sexually abusing his cousins? And I’m hilarious and trying to validate myself?!?

Look somewhere you decided that I don't believe kids are abused by family members. I don't know why or where you got that idea but you did. Unlike you I just don't believe every family member is potential abuser.

The rest of the posts is just you telling everyone how they should constantly mind their own kids because nobody else can be trusted. As an ideal of Iona institute happy families where mummy stays at home to take care of kids because that's what families should be. Bonus points if you home educated your kids too.

Boggles

splinter65 wrote: »

What an utterly disgusting perverted post. Only a pervert could post that to be honest. You have conflated my post to meet the dregs of your own mind and I’m reporting you now and I never report anyone. Get help for yourself.

Are you a pervert?

I was paraphrasing you.

splinter65 wrote: »

50 years ago incest wasn’t mentioned above a very private whisper and mostly raised eyebrows and winks and nudges. Now we all know (or at least we should know) that we don’t put our children in the way of possible danger.
Your child needs to know from very small without question or hesitation that their little body is very very precious and nobody NOBODY should touch them in anyway that makes them feel sad or scared.
That it doesn’t matter what ANYONE says to them that if they feel sad or scared by someone it doesn’t matter who it is they must immediately find mammy and tell her and she will make it better.
As a parent it is your duty to know where your child is who they are with and what they are doing. This is not very hard. It just requires your child to be your absolutely no 1 priority all of the time relentlessly.
14 year old male cousins if behaving completely naturally do not want nor should not want to mind younger female cousins.
Nor should they be asked.
If the 14 year old male cousin or any other male relative is the only babysitter you can find then don’t bother going out.
Use the information we have now wisely.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

Look somewhere you decided that I don't believe kids are abused by family members. I don't know why or where you got that idea but you did. Unlike you I just don't believe every family member is potential abuser.

The rest of the posts is just you telling everyone how they should constantly mind their own kids because nobody else can be trusted. As an ideal of Iona institute happy families where mummy stays at home to take care of kids because that's what families should be. Bonus points if you home educated your kids too.

62% of parents would like to stay at home and mind their own kids.
https://m.independent.ie/life/family/parenting/have-your-say-most-irish-mothers-want-to-be-at-home-not-at-work-36154697.html
Why are you sneering at the Iona Institute for just repeating that?

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

62% of parents would like to stay at home and mind their own kids.
https://m.independent.ie/life/family/parenting/have-your-say-most-irish-mothers-want-to-be-at-home-not-at-work-36154697.html
Why are you sneering at the Iona Institute for just repeating that?

And? Btw it's research commissioned by Sudocream and without any information on number of participates, how sample was chosen and so on. I don't object the numbers but neither I'm taking them seriously. Not every PR exercise should be taken as a serious research and I would advise more critical reading of news in future.

I'm sneering at you for thinking that's the only way you can parent responsibly, I don't care what people decide what optimal solution is for them.

ldy4mxonucwsq6

splinter65 wrote: »

I was 32 when my only child was born. I’d already had a great social life and plenty of leisure time for 14 years, say, since I left school.
So I was well ready to mind my own child myself and not bother with babysitters or anything like that.
I see very young parents who are going it alone spending a lot of time trying to find someone to leave their kids with because they quite naturally want to go out with all their friends.
Some are determined that they’re not going to miss out on anything despite having become a parent.

I see small kids being brought to house parties when they should be tucked up in bed.
It’s not wickedness it’s just extreme immaturity and for a lot of them now it’s the way they were reared themselves so it’s second nature.

I've asked it twice here already but where does it mention that he was babysitting them??

Are you assuming this is what happened or does it actually state that?

As for your standard of never letting kids out of your sight, you say your child was never left with anybody other than two other relatives, utter nonsense.

School, hobbies, sports, friends birthday parties, play dates, youth clubs etc all normal educational and social activities for children where you possibly would not have eyes on them at all times or where they might be with another person responsible for them.

splinter65

meeeeh wrote: »

And? Btw it's research commissioned by Sudocream and without any information on number of participates, how sample was chosen and so on. I don't object the numbers but neither I'm taking them seriously. Not every PR exercise should be taken as a serious research and I would advise more critical reading of news in future.

I'm sneering at you for thinking that's the only way you can parent responsibly, I don't care what people decide what optimal solution is for them.

Of course. Your right and I’m wrong. The kids in Hyde and Seek Crèche are much better off being minded there than at home being minded by their own parents.
Please accept my humble apology. You’re dead right to sneer.
Please continue trying to blame RCC for children being abused by family members. Your argument is water tight.

Westernyelp

Boggles wrote:

Beyond creepy.

It's not creepy. But it does illustrate the disconnect people have between what they post online. You build up a personality and profile here just IRL. I have no idea about your posting history. But don't take offence when someone calls you out on it.

This thread is depressing to read. Especially the attitudes expressed by Mrs. O B. etc. Absolutely nonsense being spouted around a very serious issue.

Boggles

Westernyelp wrote: »

I have no idea about your posting history. But don't take offence when someone calls you out on it.

I didn't take offence.

Roger Hassenforder

splinter65 wrote: »

I see small kids being brought to house parties when they should be tucked up in bed.
It’s not wickedness it’s just extreme immaturity and for a lot of them now it’s the way they were reared themselves so it’s second nature.

TBF, theres a word other than immaturity for that.

meeeeh

splinter65 wrote: »

Of course. Your right and I’m wrong. The kids in Hyde and Seek Crèche are much better off being minded there than at home being minded by their own parents.
Please accept my humble apology. You’re dead right to sneer.
Please continue trying to blame RCC for children being abused by family members. Your argument is water tight.

Apology accepted.

eagle eye

meeeeh wrote:

Apology accepted.

You need to understand that was not an apology.
I'm sure you do and just have nothing else to say so decided to act dumb and let on you didn't.

meeeeh

eagle eye wrote: »

You need to understand that was not an apology.
I'm sure you do and just have nothing else to say so decided to act dumb and let on you didn't.

There is option C there too.

But thanks for explanation, I'm sure nobody else has your gift of perception.

Justin Credible Darts

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Actually it would.

A male who is unable to get his needs met by same-age peers is likely to look for sexual action with younger more vulnerable children.

I have read some rubbish on here, but your post is something else. and the words of a misandrist

JP Liz V1

I can't understand our justice system sometimes