Anybody here live in Dublin and between 14 and 16?

damien

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

It just crossed my mind browsing elsewhere; that might it not be possible for some 14- 16 just scanning the forums would see the thread title, but NOT bother reading every post. In the few he did scan through see also this post, with an adult suggesting an "understanding " some young people feel frustratingly lacking in "most adults" ... but could maybe the thread title be amended to suggest a caution / content?

You might as well just delete the bloody thread if you are going to come up with such conjecture.

Hmm_Messiah

damien.m wrote:

You might as well just delete the bloody thread if you are going to come up with such conjecture.

Your knowledge/experience of 14- 16 yr olds, and their attention span must differ from mine ( I used tutor that age group).
Looking through a newspaper any day i'd find enough reason to err on the side of caution regarding young people. (I have personal & family experience of the consequence of "letting your guard down" and how those consequences invade every aspect of a person's life)

Sorry, don't see how giving an opinion ,or suggesting a possibility should cause any one such a big problem. Damn cerebral function!

Stark

Hmmm Messiah wrote:

Your knowledge/experience of 14- 16 yr olds, and their attention span must differ from mine ( I used tutor that age group).

In that case we should delete every thread on the board. Just in case they skip words and read something else entirely from some of the threads.

Hmm_Messiah

Stark wrote:

In that case we should delete every thread on the board. Just in case they skip words and read something else entirely from some of the threads.

That doesn't follow from anything I said. Misreading a joke,or pc advice,or a comment on a movie etc is, I'd of thought, far removed from perhaps happening on something which every one accepts is written by a dangerous person and the content (out of context of the complete thread) of which is "dangerous".

However, it seems the thread is moving far away from the original point, or what followed for UnReg Boy Fan's post. I didn't see a problem with some people feeling degree's of unease about his post remaining. I understood that any reader could post his opinion, the "regulation" of the thread being then left to the moderators.

damien

Hmm_Messiah wrote:

Sorry, don't see how giving an opinion ,or suggesting a possibility should cause any one such a big problem. Damn cerebral function!

Thinking too little or too much can both lead to stupidity. I have a problem with stupidity and allowing stupidity to override common sense and the belief that others even 14-16year olds (who you indirectly claimed to know more about than me) can't be trusted to use their judgement after intelligent arguments were presented to them. The Over-enthusiastic wrapping of a kid in cotton wool will just lead to asphyxiation.

Hmm_Messiah

damien.m wrote:

Thinking too little or too much can both lead to stupidity. I___________that others even 14-16year olds (who you indirectly claimed to know more about than me) can't be trusted to use their judgement after intelligent arguments were presented to them.

Stupidity is unrelated to the amount a person "thinks". And I said my knowledge differed from yours. Maybe a professional actually dealing with at risk kids could determine what level of precaution is warranted.

Like I said though, moving way off the point. you've succeeded in calling me stupid ("indirectly").well done. moving on.............

swiss

Any chance of getting back on topic?

Regardless of the contentious post, this thread is ostensibly about how to help a teenager get in contact with either other LGB youths or a safe organisation that can facilitate that contact.

As the unregistered "boy fan" post has amply demonstrated, it would be naive at best to trust the intentions of someone on the internet. It also demonstrates how certain people are willing to twist the intention of the original poster into some sort of desire for sexual exploration.

That leaves the intermediary organisation option, which in this case is the youth group belongto. I would still caution the original poster to be very wary, but that for the contact he seeks, it really would be better to do so in a relatively safe environment than in a potentially unsafe environment.

Edit: Also, enough bickering.

baggins

Wow, what a can of worms. I'll bet Edgehead didnt see this comin.

Just a wee note on an experience of mine.

I'm 21, and i give maths grinds to secondary school "kids" to keep myself goin in college. Over the last two years of doing this, i have encountered sexual advances from two of my students, one a girl aged 15 and the other a boy aged 14.

Before anyone decides to execute me on the spot, i didnt respond to these advances, because i honestly think it would be wrong and would really **** up something in their heads (gotta love autocensors) and i dont think i would be able to live with that.

The only course of action i could think of at the time was to stop teaching them, which was a big decision, because it put me down €80 a week, but it had to be done.

Just because feelings are there, it doesnt mean much in the hormone-infested body of a 14-year-old.

I agree with the belongto idea. they'll sort you out easily enough.

Victor

baggins wrote:

i didnt respond to these advances

Well there is an appropriate response - to decline politely and to say such behavior isn't appropriate between teacher-student and between people with such a [strike]great[/strike] substantial* variance in age and life experience. For a 15 year old to learn that certain behaviors are unacceptable is just as important for a 3 or 30 year old to learn that they are unacceptable.

Of course it is the behavior (whether physical, verbal or otherwise) that is to be rejected, not the student. Separately, but importantly, the ability to continue the teacher-student relationship needs to be examined, for the protection of both parties.

* I'm not 100% sure what word to use here, but I think most people will understand that while 15 year olds have some adult experience(s), a 21 year old will have a lot more.

ChRoMe

Michael Jackson jokes arnt allowed on humour but you let this thread run its course?

Should have been deleletd the minute it appeared imho

ChRoMe

Boston

thats the rules of humor, and these are the rules of LGB. This is why we have moderators as apposed to automated scripts.

padser

I must say the 'boy fan' post earlier on vindicates everything iv been saying for years about homosexuality and paedophilia being interconnected. And in fairness does anyone seriously beleive the original post was truely written by a 14 yr old??/?

Boston

padser wrote:

I must say the 'boy fan' post earlier on vindicates everything iv been saying for years about homosexuality and paedophilia being interconnected. And in fairness does anyone seriously beleive the original post was truely written by a 14 yr old??/?

Absolute evidence that people will believe whatever people want to believe, and will twist the facts the suite that aim. I see a thread full of LGB men and women condemning this guy, you clearly don't. As for the original poster, while all benefit of the doubt must be given, all precautions must be taken as well.

ixoy

padser wrote:

I must say the 'boy fan' post earlier on vindicates everything iv been saying for years about homosexuality and paedophilia being interconnected.

How precisely? Because of one suspect post, your connection is validated? By your dire logic I posit this: Sean O'Callaghan was a member of IRA. Sean is Irish. Therefore all Irish are members of the IRA. Do you see the flaw? Incidentally, did you bother to read the many many posts after that one whereby all the many other gay men of boards attacked the original post? Or are you only capable of blindly seeing what you want to see?

rsynnott

padser wrote:

I must say the 'boy fan' post earlier on vindicates everything iv been saying for years about homosexuality and paedophilia being interconnected. And in fairness does anyone seriously beleive the original post was truely written by a 14 yr old??/?

Erm, you know most paedophiles go for little girls, right? You're obviously not the sharpest pencil in the box...

Note that although homosexuality is intrinsically interconnected with paedophilia in this boy's excuse for a brain, it also doesn't exist: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2720678#post2720678

Boston

rsynnott wrote:

You're obviously not the sharpest pencil in the box...

Hey, lets not get personal.

rsynnott

LiouVille wrote:

Hey, lets not get personal.

He'll hardly be winning the Nobel Prize with his great insights into homosexuality, tbh... :rolleyes:

Boston

I really couldn't care what he'll be winning. you may find his opinions insulting, as do I, but he hasn't broken any rules or personally attacked any member.Now please, less of the cheep digs.

rsynnott

Yeh, possibly that was a bit much; just a jerk reaction to surreal, illogical claims. Sorry....