Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Watchful Yeoman on October 18, 2010, 04:27:26 PM
-
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
-
Apparently they will not hesitate to ridicule abuse survivors in order to promote their agenda. So if Whooter calls rape just "unprotected sex" then my question would be: What does he call program abuse? The answer: legitimate treatment.
I have to say that Whooters comments to Anne in that thread reminded me of the way Straight staff would mock girls in group. Not very nice Whooter!
-
Why is everything have to be just filth with you? Your a sick man, DJ.
How about this type of post? With your references to having sex with little boys and dogs? This is just one of many he has posted:
Man, TheWho is really pushing the gay slurs, but also letting us know he fantasies of being gay. He seems very conflicted over his sexuality. On one hand he deameans the idea of homosexuality and on the other he puts out there his desire for anal sex with people (and dogs) and to lick boys' bottoms. How very weird. No wonder his kid was so screwed up and his wife left him flat!
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=335422#p335422)
...
-
Who says that TrollControl/Watchful yeoman is actually DJ ? Whooter you have probably made more than one enemy during your posting history here. Could be anybody.
-
Apparently they will not hesitate to ridicule abuse survivors in order to promote their agenda. So if Whooter calls rape just "unprotected sex" then my question would be: What does he call program abuse? The answer: legitimate treatment.
I have to say that Whooters comments to Anne in that thread reminded me of the way Straight staff would mock girls in group. Not very nice Whooter!
Cry me a river, Shaggys. The only one who brought "rape" into this was your friend DJ, AKA Watchful Yeoman. Also the ridicule on this board is not contained to pro-program people. It is probably a 90/10 balance with the anti-program group doing most of the ridiculing.
...
-
Why did you post demeaning things about a then-pubescent girl who was already a victim of a terrible sex crime, Whooter? We just want to know why you post things like this. Explain yourself.
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
-
Why did you post demeaning things about a then-pubescent girl who was already a victim of a terrible sex crime, Whooter? We just want to know why you post things like this. Explain yourself.
Why do you post demeaning things about other people? What drives you to pretend to be a survivor who was abused? or a parent who placed a child into a program? Why do you always talk about pedophile relations? sex with dogs? Why do you delve into the sexual in posts when you can?
When a woman came to fornits to share her story about her son she was met with this post from anti-program group:
OMG I was there with your kid, what a small world. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but your son is gay and had the time of his life sucking off all of us for extra rice. That's the real reason he gained weight.. well.. and he swallows. Extra nutrients!
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=344472#p344472)
Why do you find this acceptable?
...
-
You did this, Whooter. Nobody else. Now we just want to know WHY YOU DID IT. Nobody cares to hear your deflections or excuses. Just tell us why you treated a rape victim this way. It appears you did it to destroy her credibility and therefore invalidate her personal story of abuse. If that's not the reason, just tell us why you did this.
Please save your "other people have done it" excuse for someone who cares. Would it be OK for you to rape someone because other peole have raped before? That's your logic and it's abhorrent, frankly.
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
-
Apparently they will not hesitate to ridicule abuse survivors in order to promote their agenda. So if Whooter calls rape just "unprotected sex" then my question would be: What does he call program abuse? The answer: legitimate treatment.
I have to say that Whooters comments to Anne in that thread reminded me of the way Straight staff would mock girls in group.
Yup, that's pretty much how it felt.
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff.
Straight not only blamed me for the rape that occurred when I was 15, they also blamed me for the sexual abuse I suffered at the age of 7. Some fucking "therapy" huh?
Beyond what Whooter has revealed here about himself by posting what he did, the larger issue is what programs do to kids in the name of "therapy". I can't even begin explain how what they did to me regarding the rape and sexual abuse effected me long term. Talk about fucking with someone's psyche and soul......jeeeezus christ!
-
How Far Will Program pushers Go to Invalidate Abuse? Well, lie and taunt, fabricate blackmail claims (admitted by the guilty)... poke fun at abuse for kicks...
but how far? well, as far as their computer goes... starting to think Whoot has a computer attached to his pisspot with the time he spends here.
How far is really about time. How much time someone is willing to spend taunting and invalidating people. And that time is endless. In fact, I no longer think it is about disrupting a survivor site. Any normal person who disagreed with the main thrust of this site would not reside at it for the length and breadth of time as Whooter. No. At this point, it is some sick power trip. He enjoys hurting people. It's really about sadism. He enjoys it all. Our responses to his insults and cruelty and our threads dedicated to his pissantry. He loves being the King Cockroach.
-
How Far Will Program pushers Go to Invalidate Abuse? Well, lie and taunt, fabricate blackmail claims (admitted by the guilty)... poke fun at abuse for kicks...
but how far? well, as far as their computer goes... starting to think Whoot has a computer attached to his pisspot with the time he spends here.
How far is really about time. How much time someone is willing to spend taunting and invalidating people. And that time is endless. In fact, I no longer think it is about disrupting a survivor site. Any normal person who disagreed with the main thrust of this site would not reside at it for the length and breadth of time as Whooter. No. At this point, it is some sick power trip. He enjoys hurting people. It's really about sadism. He enjoys it all. Our responses to his insults and cruelty and our threads dedicated to his pissantry. He loves being the King Cockroach.
:nods: :nods:
It's that same 'guru complex' that most program leaders have. Notice how he always has to have the "last word" in threads? I'm surprised he hasn't started a program of his own yet. :eek:
-
Straight not only blamed me for the rape that occurred when I was 15, they also blamed me for the sexual abuse I suffered at the age of 7. Some fucking "therapy" huh?
Oh, Anne. It's just awful. Inhuman. A sick power trip, and outright malpractice. I'm so sorry this happened to you.
Auntie Em
-
Straight not only blamed me for the rape that occurred when I was 15, they also blamed me for the sexual abuse I suffered at the age of 7. Some fucking "therapy" huh?
Oh, Anne. It's just awful. Inhuman. A sick power trip, and outright malpractice. I'm so sorry this happened to you.
Auntie Em
Thanks. It screwed me up pretty badly for quite a while. I'd never told anyone about the sexual abuse and when I did they called an "executive conference" with Newton's wife (and Asst Director) Ruth Ann Newton. She was the one who did it. And she was a real bitch about it too.....her whole attitude. We were taught that all the family problems were our fault and a result of our "drug abuse" and that nothing else mattered. She really seemed pissed off that I brought up something that was a legitimate source of pain that I had nothing to do with causing, so she just flipped it right around. She told me that I needed to look at where my responsibility for the abuse lay. MY responsibility??? At 7 years old??? What really sent me over the top though was that my father did nothing. He had been so washed by then and so conditioned to "trust the process" and the staff that he just sat there and let her talk to me like that. It killed me inside. Things like that are why I refer to what they did to us as a 'soul murder' of sorts.
-
"Soul murder." That's a powerful image. It has seemed that way to me, too, from the outside looking in. And what legitimate therapist would blame the victim? That's soooo 1880's.
Dr. Phillip Zimbardo, known for the Stanford Prison Experiment of the 70's and author more recently of The Lucifer Effect, observes that all abuse is the misappropriation/misuse of power. Staff in most programs have SO much power over teens that it is a recipe for abuse--just as was found in the Stanford Prison Experiment http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment.
Em
-
"Soul murder." That's a powerful image. It has seemed that way to me, too, from the outside looking in. And what legitimate therapist would blame the victim? That's soooo 1880's.
Dr. Phillip Zimbardo, known for the Stanford Prison Experiment of the 70's and author more recently of The Lucifer Effect, observes that all abuse is the misappropriation/misuse of power. Staff in most programs have SO much power over teens that it is a recipe for abuse--just as was found in the Stanford Prison Experiment http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment.
Em
Yup....someone introduced me to that years ago and it was one of those 'dots' that really helped me (in connecting the dots to figure out what the fuck happened to me in there). Absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's why I think people like "Dr." "Fr." Virgil Miller Cassian Newton are so drawn to shit like this (he's still trying to run a program out of his fake church on his property. Thankfully he only has a handful of vacant eyed followers now). It appeals to their Malignant Narcissism.
-
Straight not only blamed me for the rape that occurred when I was 15, they also blamed me for the sexual abuse I suffered at the age of 7. Some fucking "therapy" huh?
Oh, Anne. It's just awful. Inhuman. A sick power trip, and outright malpractice. I'm so sorry this happened to you.
Auntie Em
Thanks. It screwed me up pretty badly for quite a while. I'd never told anyone about the sexual abuse and when I did they called an "executive conference" with Newton's wife (and Asst Director) Ruth Ann Newton. She was the one who did it. And she was a real bitch about it too.....her whole attitude. We were taught that all the family problems were our fault and a result of our "drug abuse" and that nothing else mattered. She really seemed pissed off that I brought up something that was a legitimate source of pain that I had nothing to do with causing, so she just flipped it right around. She told me that I needed to look at where my responsibility for the abuse lay. MY responsibility??? At 7 years old??? What really sent me over the top though was that my father did nothing. He had been so washed by then and so conditioned to "trust the process" and the staff that he just sat there and let her talk to me like that. It killed me inside. Things like that are why I refer to what they did to us as a 'soul murder' of sorts.
That was her version of "damage control". The last thing they want is for the parents to see the children as deserving of any kind of compassion or pity, lest their little scheme unravel. These people are the scum of the earth.
-
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
-
Straight not only blamed me for the rape that occurred when I was 15, they also blamed me for the sexual abuse I suffered at the age of 7. Some fucking "therapy" huh?
Oh, Anne. It's just awful. Inhuman. A sick power trip, and outright malpractice. I'm so sorry this happened to you.
Auntie Em
Thanks. It screwed me up pretty badly for quite a while. I'd never told anyone about the sexual abuse and when I did they called an "executive conference" with Newton's wife (and Asst Director) Ruth Ann Newton. She was the one who did it. And she was a real bitch about it too.....her whole attitude. We were taught that all the family problems were our fault and a result of our "drug abuse" and that nothing else mattered. She really seemed pissed off that I brought up something that was a legitimate source of pain that I had nothing to do with causing, so she just flipped it right around. She told me that I needed to look at where my responsibility for the abuse lay. MY responsibility??? At 7 years old??? What really sent me over the top though was that my father did nothing. He had been so washed by then and so conditioned to "trust the process" and the staff that he just sat there and let her talk to me like that. It killed me inside. Things like that are why I refer to what they did to us as a 'soul murder' of sorts.
That was her version of "damage control". The last thing they want is for the parents to see the children as deserving of any kind of compassion or pity, lest their little scheme unravel. These people are the scum of the earth.
Yup.....most of us really were just pretty normal teenagers, but for a kid who truly had some issues, this is what happened to them. Some fucking "help", huh?
-
How Far Will Program pushers Go to Invalidate Abuse? Well, lie and taunt, fabricate blackmail claims (admitted by the guilty)... poke fun at abuse for kicks...
but how far? well, as far as their computer goes... starting to think Whoot has a computer attached to his pisspot with the time he spends here.
How far is really about time. How much time someone is willing to spend taunting and invalidating people. And that time is endless. In fact, I no longer think it is about disrupting a survivor site. Any normal person who disagreed with the main thrust of this site would not reside at it for the length and breadth of time as Whooter. No. At this point, it is some sick power trip. He enjoys hurting people. It's really about sadism. He enjoys it all. Our responses to his insults and cruelty and our threads dedicated to his pissantry. He loves being the King Cockroach.
Watchful Yeoman/ DJ is not a program pusher by any stretch of the imagination, Samara. Personally I thought it was wrong of Watchful Yeoman/Dysfunction junction to bring up Annes rape on the open forum like that. This is a subject that should have been brought up for conversation by Anne herself at a time of her chosing to talk about it.
I never mentioned Anne was raped nor (like many others here) did not know that she was. I am sorry to hear that this happened to you, Anne, and I am sorry that the subject had to be forced out into the open forum like that without your control.
I think the moderators should rethink the policy of revealing personal violent acts on the forum by other people besides the victim themselves. We see this all too often here on fornits.
Another Point while we are on the subject:
Many stood by while a fellow survivor was emailed about his brothers suicide (we all remember by RobertBruce) and invited the brother of the suicide victim onto fornits where many here were making fun of and attacking the boys family. Many people, including you Samara, stood on the side lines and watched silently hoping the brother would come to fornits to witness his family and brother being ridiculed. These are not things that I endorse.
Anne has attacked me many times calling me everything from a parent who shipped several kids away to abusive facilities, to an industry person who profits from the TTI (neither of which are true), and many other personal names. I have in return called her many things also. We have had this back and forth for many years.
I think it is unfortunate that my comments ended up with someone revealing a violent act of another poster here on fornits (without their consent) and he should rethink his actions in the future. I don’t think banning Dysfunction junction/Watchful Yeoman would be appropriate but I am sure the moderators are addressing the issue and we should move forward and allow Anne to discuss this at her own discretion.
...
-
There is no justification for Whooter's sick machinations. He cannot blame his own disgusting posts on others. This is his legacy on Fornits.
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
-
Not sure why Whooter inferred that my post was directed at WY or DJ. We all know it was directed to him, for his passive aggressive cruelty toward Anne. But all in a day's work, for Whoots. One of his tactics is to deflect a statement geared toward him to someone else.
-
Not sure why Whooter inferred that my post was directed at WY or DJ. We all know it was directed to him, for his passive aggressive cruelty toward Anne. But all in a day's work, for Whoots. One of his tactics is to deflect a statement geared toward him to someone else.
Yup..... He does it soooooo often.
-
Not sure why Whooter inferred that my post was directed at WY or DJ. We all know it was directed to him, for his passive aggressive cruelty toward Anne. But all in a day's work, for Whoots. One of his tactics is to deflect a statement geared toward him to someone else.
I read your post quickly, Samara, and it seemed like you were referring to the person who brought Anne's rape into the spotlight and also the individuals who were blackmailing me.
...
-
Not sure why Whooter inferred that my post was directed at WY or DJ. We all know it was directed to him, for his passive aggressive cruelty toward Anne. But all in a day's work, for Whoots. One of his tactics is to deflect a statement geared toward him to someone else.
Annes attack
There he goes again.
-
Life is so much better since I put Whooter on "bans." I recommend putting him on your "Ignore" list.
-
Not sure why Whooter inferred that my post was directed at WY or DJ. We all know it was directed to him, for his passive aggressive cruelty toward Anne. But all in a day's work, for Whoots. One of his tactics is to deflect a statement geared toward him to someone else.
Annes attack
There he goes again.
I meant the attack "on" you. I went back and changed it. You misrepresent things that I say all the time Anne.
...
-
Personally I thought it was wrong of Watchful Yeoman/Dysfunction junction to bring up Annes rape on the open forum like that. This is a subject that should have been brought up for conversation by Anne herself at a time of her chosing to talk about it.
I've talked about it here several times.
I never mentioned Anne was raped nor (like many others here) did not know that she was. I am sorry to hear that this happened to you, Anne, and I am sorry that the subject had to be forced out into the open forum like that without your control.
It wasn't forced out in the open. I've spoken about it here several times, as you already know. It was brought up because of your cheap shot towards me about my time before Straight, which you know nothing about.
I think the moderators should rethink the policy of revealing personal violent acts on the forum by other people besides the victim themselves. We see this all too often here on fornits.
Stop trying to insinuate that WY or whoever else brought it up to hurt me. It was brought up to show your insensitivity towards survivors, as evidenced by your cheap shot.
I think it is unfortunate that my comments ended up with someone revealing a violent act of another poster here on fornits (without their consent) and he should rethink his actions in the future.
Stop trying to insinuate that WY or whoever else brought it up to hurt me. It was brought up to show your insensitivity towards survivors, as evidenced by your cheap shot.
I don’t think banning Dysfunction junction/Watchful Yeoman would be appropriate but I am sure the moderators are addressing the issue and we should move forward and allow Anne to discuss this at her own discretion.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
I meant the attack "on" you. I went back and changed it. You misrepresent things that I say all the time Anne.
The only attack on me that I saw was yours.
-
Life is so much better since I put Whooter on "bans." I recommend putting him on your "Ignore" list.
I like it because it collapses all those really long posts and gives you the option to read them or not. It makes reading through a thread much easier (without the trolls and attacks). I have "3" people on it so far. I think Che has 5 or 6. Its a great feature.
...
-
Agreed, Auntie Em. I put three on bans, but there is no escaping the Who.
-
I've talked about it here several times.
I never read it before. At least I dont recall ever have read it. Maybe it was in the straight threads, I rarely read or post over there.
Stop trying to insinuate that WY or whoever else brought it up to hurt me. It was brought up to show your insensitivity towards survivors, as evidenced by your cheap shot.
I am not saying Dysfunction junction/Watchful Yeoman posted this to hurt you. But I think it is insensitive to bring it up about another person even if it has been spoken of before. This is just my personal opinion. I think violent attacks like rape and suicide should not be brought into a conversation by people other than the victim or the family themselves just out of respect for their feelings.
...
-
I am not saying Dysfunction junction/Watchful Yeoman posted this to hurt you. But I think it is insensitive to bring it up about another person even if it has been spoken of before.
I think it's a bit more than insensitive for you to make judgments about what I was like as a kid before entering Straight. Especially your speculation about my sexual activities. I don't recall posting much, if anything about my sexual activities before entering Straight, but your assumption and posting about it says a lot about you and the lengths you'll go to to deflect attention away from your well documented lies and impersonations (see WY or DJ's listings of them).
This is just my personal opinion. I think violent attacks like rape and suicide should not be brought into a conversation by people other than the victim or the family themselves just out of respect for their feelings.
And you have no idea whether or not WY had my permission to post about it, yet you're fine with judging him for coming to my defense of your attack on me as a child and your bringing my sexual activities into the discussion. You are such a hypocrite.
-
I think it's a bit more than insensitive for you to make judgments about what I was like as a kid before entering Straight. Especially your speculation about my sexual activities. I don't recall posting much, if anything about my sexual activities before entering Straight, but your assumption and posting about it says a lot about you and the lengths you'll go to to deflect attention away from your well documented lies and impersonations (see WY or DJ's listings of them).
You had spoken about your wild times in past posts, Anne, I recall that. I don’t recall you ever talking about being raped. You on the other hand assume a lot about my personal life and past. You post openly about who you think I am, and bring up personal issues like suicide in the family etc.
I would never do this to another person and I think you know this.
And you have no idea whether or not WY had my permission to post about it, yet you're fine with judging him for coming to my defense of your attack on me as a child and your bringing my sexual activities into the discussion. You are such a hypocrite.
You have no idea what I do for a living. You sit by and watch posters here ridicule a family who lost a child (which you think is mine) to suicide and even join in yourself. You don’t seem to mind when the attack is directed at other people. I find it interesting that you brought the word hypocrite into the conversation.
...
-
Let's revisit his original post, shall we?
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education.
Well, that's pretty much the truth. I was extremely timid and wouldn't dream of ever questioning or standing up to any authority figure, which is why I made and easy target for people like Virgil Newton and his klan.
You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
What have I changed?
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
Now THAT'S an attack. My opinion? He's feeling the heat as of late and lashed out at me.
I have no problem discussing the rape or the sexual abuse. No doubt it did some real damage, but what was more damaging by far, was what Straight did to me regarding the abuse and assault. That's the real tragedy. Whooter can come after me all he wants. All it does is show his true colors.
-
You had spoken about your wild times in past posts, Anne, I recall that.
Like what? And was it about "wild times" before or after Straight. That makes a big difference.
I don’t recall you ever talking about being raped.
How convenient.
You on the other hand assume a lot about my personal life and past. You post openly about who you think I am, and bring up personal issues like suicide in the family etc.
Yes. It's my opinion and I've stated it that way and I post about it because I think whomever is running STICC is doing great damage to kids by being involved with the TTI.
I would never do this to another person and I think you know this.
:rofl: Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
You have no idea what I do for a living.
Which is why I've stated it as my opinion and an opinion gained by reading things you've written and by the sheer amount of time and effort you devote to this site and defending programs.
You sit by and watch posters here ridicule a family who lost a child (which you think is mine) to suicide and even join in yourself.
Because I think it's deplorable to try and profit from the death of one's own child. Whether it's you or the man in the moon. You said, paraphrasing....that the first thing you do in a bad situation is to think of how you can profit from it and you wrote that in a thread that we were discussing STICC. So I responded and posted my opinion of that. And I've also said that I believe that John Reuben, whether it's you or not, does this in part to deny and/or justify the guilt he must feel for sending a "troubled" child into the hands of programs. I've stated before that, in some ways, I actually feel sorry for him. I can't imagine carrying around that kind of guilt.
You don’t seem to mind when the attack is directed at other people. I find it interesting that you brought the word hypocrite into the conversation.
Well, good for you. You've got a new "interest". ::)
-
Why, Whooter? Why do you call people pedophiles and accuse them of bestiality? Read your own words below and tell us again how you never did this. Why do you accuse others of doing this when the record is clear that it was you who did it?
And as far as Anne is concerned you have been involved in several threads where she told her personal story. You were and are aware of her sexual assault. Then you ridiculed her by calling her rape "unprotected sex." WHY DID YOU DO THIS?
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
-
Now THAT'S an attack. My opinion? He's feeling the heat as of late and lashed out at me.
I have no problem discussing the rape or the sexual abuse. No doubt it did some real damage, but what was more damaging by far, was what Straight did to me regarding the abuse and assault. That's the real tragedy. Whooter can come after me all he wants. All it does is show his true colors.
If you consider that an attack then you routinely attack me by calling me an industry shill who profits from it. When you are feeling the heat from our conversations you turn and attack me personally. I think we can both agree that I sustain 100 times more attacks in a day than you do on average.
look, Anne, I didnt bring up the rape, watchful Yeoman/dysfunction Junction did. Go fight with him. I am not going to argue with you all day on this.
...
-
Anne illustrates an excellent point. Sexual assault and sexual abuse are horrible and inexcusable, but at least when you tell someone about it they generally feel sympathy for you, unless they are sick. Behavior Modification bears many similarities to rape, it just isn't (usually) sexual. And it usually lasts a whole lot longer, and there is an assumption that if you were in one of these places then there must be something wrong with you, so you can't be a credible witness.
-
Now THAT'S an attack. My opinion? He's feeling the heat as of late and lashed out at me.
I have no problem discussing the rape or the sexual abuse. No doubt it did some real damage, but what was more damaging by far, was what Straight did to me regarding the abuse and assault. That's the real tragedy. Whooter can come after me all he wants. All it does is show his true colors.
If you consider that an attack then you routinely attack me by calling me an industry shill who profits from it.
I haven't used that word in quite a while. I reserve the right to post my opinion and from things you've posted here and the sheer volume of time and effort you spend here, that's my belief. It was also in response to your defending John Reuben for starting a business around the death of his child. Sorry, but I do find that deplorable.
When you are feeling the heat from our conversations you turn and attack me personally. I think we can both agree that I sustain 100 times more attacks in a day than you do on average.
I don't dispute that but you sure do bring it on yourself with how passive-aggressive you are here. And remember.....you're on a site mainly populated by survivors of programs that you endorse, so one would expect that you might be viewed a little differently than I am. That's pretty much common sense.
look, Anne, I didnt bring up the rape
No, you just brought up your assumptions about my sexual activity as a child.
watchful Yeoman/dysfunction Junction did. Go fight with him.
Why? I'm not upset that he brought it up.
I am not going to argue with you all day on this.
::)
-
That's the real tragedy. Whooter can come after me all he wants. All it does is show his true colors.
I think we can both agree that I sustain 100 times more attacks in a day than you do on average.
...
And almost everyone here can agree that you deserve most of them, at least, and Anne is only ever attacked by you and your little helper, which she does not deserve.
-
That's the real tragedy. Whooter can come after me all he wants. All it does is show his true colors.
I think we can both agree that I sustain 100 times more attacks in a day than you do on average.
...
And almost everyone here can agree that you deserve most of them, at least, and Anne is only ever attacked by you and your little helper, which she does not deserve.
Thanks.
The ONLY thing I can say in defense of Whooter (can't believe I just typed that ;) ) is that he's never physically threatened me, as his little sidekick has.
-
I haven't used that word in quite a while. I reserve the right to post my opinion and from things you've posted here and the sheer volume of time and effort you spend here, that's my belief. It was also in response to your defending John Reuben for starting a business around the death of his child. Sorry, but I do find that deplorable.
I havent brought up your activities prior to straight in ages. I reserve the right to post what I feel is the truth based on your past posts the same as you do.
There is nothing wrong with starting a business around the death of a child in my opinion. We have a family in town that lost a child to bone cancer and they started a non profit to raise money to send less fortunate kids for treatment in Arizona. America is built on starting charitable organizations and non-profits. Some of these grow into huge cancer research firms others stay as mom and pop startups. But many have a death of a loved one which inspired the first steps to help others. Believe it or not there are many people out there who feel they can make a difference for others.
...
-
I havent brought up your activities prior to straight in ages.
You did it yesterday. What planet do you live on?
Not only did you bring it up yesterday ("ages ago"), you told a bunch of lies whilst doing it. What makes you feel like you can comment on the "sex life" of girl 15 years of age? Were you there? Do you know her personally? No, you weren't and you don't, but you felt free to make one up and post it, even though it was full of ugly lies and the sum total of Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15 was being molested and raped, which you callously and disgustingly referred to as "unprotected sex."
I'm sorry, but you said these ugly words out of anger and frustration that you had lost yet another argument on the merits. You got pissed and you lashed out in the most hurtful way possible, as you normally do (accusing people of beastiality and molesting their children are your common attacks).
Only a severly disturbed person would behave this way. That's the damnable fact of the matter. Whooter has dredged the bottom of an all-time low here on Fornits.
-
I havent brought up your activities prior to straight in ages.
You did it yesterday. What planet do you live on?
Not only did you bring it up yesterday ("ages ago"), you told a bunch of lies whilst doing it. What makes you feel like you can comment on the "sex life" of girl 15 years of age? Were you there? Do you know her personally? No, you weren't and you don't, but you felt free to make one up and post it, even though it was full of ugly lies and the sum total of Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15 was being molested and raped, which you callously and disgustingly referred to as "unprotected sex."
I'm sorry, but you said these ugly words out of anger and frustration that you had lost yet another argument on the merits. You got pissed and you lashed out in the most hurtful way possible, as you normally do (accusing people of beastiality and molesting their children are your common attacks).
Only a severly disturbed person would behave this way. That's the damnable fact of the matter. Whooter has dredged the bottom of an all-time low here on Fornits.
I just think it is wrong to bring up that someone was raped on the internet and open it up for discussion. I know that you are trying to deflect the focus from yourself and that is fine, we all understand that and can tolerate it for awhile, but eventually you should give it some thought and in the future let the victim bring up these sensitive issues themselves when they are ready to talk about it. I am not saying that you should be banned for it but it should give pause to all of us as to what is crossing the line and what isnt.
What you did was wrong, DJ.
...
...
-
Oh my goodness. What passive aggressive BS we have here, Whoot. You know Anne has no issues with DJ. She has already discussed the matter to illustrate how programs re-traumatize people. YOU however, made sneaky, shitty dig at her and were called on it. Now, you are blaming someone else. And you're not even doing it out of misplaced righteousness. You're purposely provoking in passive aggressive style. You know we all know it. That's what's mind-boggling.
-
Oh my goodness. What passive aggressive BS we have here, Whoot. You know Anne has no issues with DJ. She has already discussed the matter to illustrate how programs re-traumatize people. YOU however, made sneaky, shitty dig at her and were called on it. Now, you are blaming someone else. And you're not even doing it out of misplaced righteousness. You're purposely provoking in passive aggressive style. You know we all know it. That's what's mind-boggling.
No, Samara, I have issue with bringing in the rape issue. I didnt think it was right for someone to bring this subject up on the open internet and in a forum about someone else. Regardless of whether Anne is upset or not, I am upset over it. This seems to be a theme here of acceptance of bringing to light other peoples rape or suicide in the family.
I understand that Watchful Yeoman may feel bad about what he did that is why I am not asking for him to be banned over it. Plus he and Anne are friends so I am sure he didnt mean any harm towards her or as an attack. I think his intent was to attack me and he said things he should not have, so I understand.
We should just be careful about bringing up memories of people victimization bt talking about the events. This goes for the Reuben Family also and the loss that they endured with their mother and son.
...
-
I havent brought up your activities prior to straight in ages.
You did it yesterday. What planet do you live on?
Not only did you bring it up yesterday ("ages ago"), you told a bunch of lies whilst doing it. What makes you feel like you can comment on the "sex life" of girl 15 years of age? Were you there? Do you know her personally? No, you weren't and you don't, but you felt free to make one up and post it, even though it was full of ugly lies and the sum total of Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15 was being molested and raped, which you callously and disgustingly referred to as "unprotected sex."
I'm sorry, but you said these ugly words out of anger and frustration that you had lost yet another argument on the merits. You got pissed and you lashed out in the most hurtful way possible, as you normally do (accusing people of beastiality and molesting their children are your common attacks).
Only a severly disturbed person would behave this way. That's the damnable fact of the matter. Whooter has dredged the bottom of an all-time low here on Fornits.
I just think it is wrong to bring up that someone was raped on the internet and open it up for discussion. I know that you are trying to deflect the focus from yourself and that is fine, we all understand that and can tolerate it for awhile, but eventually you should give it some thought and in the future let the victim bring up these sensitive issues themselves when they are ready to talk about it. I am not saying that you should be banned for it but it should give pause to all of us as to what is crossing the line and what isnt.
What you did was wrong, DJ.
...
...
Whooter, who do you imagine you are fooling? You are on the hotseat now, not DJ. The above post is representative of your lack of respect or compassion for the people abused by the programs you advocate. Anne has already made clear to you that it was you that she was offended by, not DJ or WY. This is a sadly transparent attempt to shift the focus to someone else, yet again.
:blabla:
-
Whooter, who do you imagine you are fooling? You are on the hotseat now, not DJ. The above post is representative of your lack of respect or compassion for the people abused by the programs you advocate. Anne has already made clear to you that it was you that she was offended by, not DJ or WY. This is a sadly transparent attempt to shift the focus to someone else, yet again.
:blabla:
It doesnt matter to me if Anne thinks it is okay or not, Shady, I am the one that believes it is wrong. I dont think we should allow people to bring up the rape of another person or the suicide of a loved one unless they consent to speaking about it.
Would you like it if you had someone who was raped and that person brought the rape up on an open forum without asking that person. Have you ever been raped or a victim? If you have been victim of a personal assault or a crime then I might accept your opinion on this, but I can tell by your lack of understanding that you have never been victimized in this way.
I stand behind my posts, I always have. I dont run away and change my name edit my posts and try to blame others for my own actions. I dont ridicule survivors who have lost loved ones to suicide and email their family members to make fun of them. These are the things I stand up against whether they are pro-program or anti-program. I dont take sides with this like others do. I think we all know who I am talking about.
If you feel I am on the hot seat then that is your view point and I stand behind what I posted. I dont run and hide, never have.
...
-
Whooter, who do you imagine you are fooling? You are on the hotseat now, not DJ. The above post is representative of your lack of respect or compassion for the people abused by the programs you advocate. Anne has already made clear to you that it was you that she was offended by, not DJ or WY. This is a sadly transparent attempt to shift the focus to someone else, yet again.
:blabla:
It doesnt matter to me if Anne thinks it is okay or not, Shady, I am the one that believes it is wrong. I dont think we should allow people to bring up the rape of another person or the suicide of a loved one unless they consent to speaking about it.
Anne herself has been very open about this, I have read it in her posts, it is part of her story. Even so, if she was offended she would have said so and we would all have respected that, except you, who would only pretend to.
Would you like it if you had someone who was raped and that person brought the rape up on an open forum without asking that person. Have you ever been raped or a victim? If you have been victim of a personal assault or a crime then I might accept your opinion on this, but I can tell by your lack of understanding that you have never been victimized in this way.
Wrong again Carnac.
I stand behind my posts, I always have. I dont run away and change my name edit my posts and try to blame others for my own actions. I dont ridicule survivors who have lost loved ones to suicide and email their family members to make fun of them. These are the things I stand up against whether they are pro-program or anti-program. I dont take sides with this like others do. I think we all know who I am talking about.
If you feel I am on the hot seat then that is your view point and I stand behind what I posted. I dont run and hide, never have.
...
So it is insensitive to refer to a story, written by Anne in the first person, that most of us here have read (and I find it hard to believe that you have not), yet it is perfectly acceptable to accuse her of promiscuity as a teenager? When you (obviously) have no way of knowing this. This is exactly the same artificial concern frequently found in the programs you like so much. You made ugly accusations about Anne, then tried to shift focus from this by feigning concern for her feelings.
-
So it is insensitive to refer to a story, written by Anne in the first person, that most of us here have read (and I find it hard to believe that you have not), yet it is perfectly acceptable to accuse her of promiscuity as a teenager? When you (obviously) have no way of knowing this. This is exactly the same artificial concern frequently found in the programs you like so much. You made ugly accusations about Anne, then tried to shift focus from this by feigning concern for her feelings.
It wasnt just referring to her story, Shady, it was inappropriate to mention the rape of another person. Why cant you understand that? If you had a friend who had a son who committed suicide would you bring it up in mixed company just because she has spoken openly about it before? Tragic events bring up memories that can be unsettling to many people and bringing up the subject could make the person suddenly sad or cause her pain in other ways. The same as bringing up the fact that Anne was Raped. why make her think about it or defend it? Why expose her to the memory of this when she didnt ask for it?
I think you are wrong that everyone has the right to talk about this just because Anne has brought it up in the past. You have very little insight into how victims can be affected by the recall of a horrific event.
You people just defend each other blindly, it is absolutely amazing the double standard you hold. If this had been me who brought up Annes Rape you would have been looking for me to be banned.
...
-
Whooter this in no way justifies your actions. You fabricated a series of lies about Anne, a person you know nothing about. Yet when people hold you accountable for your actions, you claim they're in the wrong?
-
Well, now we all know how far Whooter will go: he'll go at least as far as derailing a thread about invalidating abuse victims. ..suprised his little :shamrock: hasn't jumped in to his defense yet.
-
So, out of concern, Whooter repeats it over and over, capitalized no less. Whooter are you TRYING to answer the question posed by the title of this thread? It is very hard to find something to say to you now that is not an insult, but I am trying. Your sickness is becoming clearer and clearer.
-
So, out of concern, Whooter repeats it over and over, capitalized no less. Whooter are you TRYING to answer the question posed by the title of this thread? It is very hard to find something to say to you now that is not an insult, but I am trying. Your sickness is becoming clearer and clearer.
You are probably thinking of DJ/Watchful Yeomans posts, ShadyAcres, he typically uses the large capitalized letters and repeats his posts over and over again. I didnt use caps like you just did in "TRYING". Its not my style of writing, although I do use it on occasion to make a point, I dont see that I used it in any of my previous posts here.
...
-
I've talked about it here several times.
I never read it before.
...
Of course, you are a liar doing what you do most often - lying.
Many kids grow and suffer at home. Trying to get thru the teenage years is difficult at beast and their ican much pain involved as they grow.
That's the natural process that is supposed to happen. You guys take that away when you ship these kids off.
The pain and suffering may not be the result of the school but may be natural maturation. I think we can all point to many kids we knew who grew and matured at home and it wasnt considered a joyous occasion.
I've used this analogy before but it fits. I was raped when I was 15. It made me stronger eventually. I sure would go back in time and remove that night from my life if I could though. Whatever growth comes from abuse isn't worth it.
I was referring to the pain and suffering of growing up at home naturally, not kids that were beaten or raped.[/size] I believe pain and suffering can be a natural process of getting thru the teen years for most kids.
Not only have you read it many times, you responded to it several times as well. Drop this onto the "Lie Pile" Whooter is building.
He knew it and intentionally made the most hurtful comment he could (calling rape "unprotected sex") for the express purpose of punching Anne in the gut and shutting her down. It's deplorable that anyone would do this. But we've come to expect this behavior from Whooter.
-
It would be helpful if you provided links for the posts, DJ, when you post them. That conversation could have been written years ago for all we know.
...
-
You just got caught in a lie. It's nothing new. Nobody cares about your excuses. What you did to Anne is absolutely shameful and you are shameless in your behavior. You've told so many lies you no longer can keep track of them. Not my problem.
-
So it is insensitive to refer to a story, written by Anne in the first person, that most of us here have read (and I find it hard to believe that you have not), yet it is perfectly acceptable to accuse her of promiscuity as a teenager? When you (obviously) have no way of knowing this. This is exactly the same artificial concern frequently found in the programs you like so much. You made ugly accusations about Anne, then tried to shift focus from this by feigning concern for her feelings.
It wasnt just referring to her story, Shady, it was inappropriate to mention the rape of another person. Why cant you understand that?
Because I've said, numerous times now, that I'm fine with it!! In fact, it's an integral part of my story relating to the TTI and it's important to discuss. Shady is dead on in her assessment of the whole situation. You said some pretty nasty stuff about me as a teenager because you've been feeling the heat as of late.....you got called on it and now you're trying to shift the focus to DJ/WY, ANYone but you.
If you had a friend who had a son who committed suicide would you bring it up in mixed company just because she has spoken openly about it before?
If it was on a discussion board and it related to the topic of discussion and I knew the person was fine with talking about it (as everyone here knows I am regarding the rape), then absolutely! Why wouldn't I?
Tragic events bring up memories that can be unsettling to many people and bringing up the subject could make the person suddenly sad or cause her pain in other ways. The same as bringing up the fact that Anne was Raped. why make her think about it or defend it? Why expose her to the memory of this when she didnt ask for it?
BECAUSE I"M FINE WITH IT!! Goddamn! How many times do you need to be told this before it sinks in?
I think you are wrong that everyone has the right to talk about this just because Anne has brought it up in the past. You have very little insight into how victims can be affected by the recall of a horrific event.
Well, I think I've got plenty of insight as to how this is effecting me and, once again.....I'M FINE WITH IT. Will you shut the hell up about it now so we can discuss it??
You people just defend each other blindly, it is absolutely amazing the double standard you hold. If this had been me who brought up Annes Rape you would have been looking for me to be banned.
No! It would depend on your motives for bringing it up and whether or not it was pertinent to the discussion at hand. If you brought it up in the same way that you brought up what you think I did before being put in Straight, then yes....it would be inappropriate. I wouldn't necessarily ask that you be banned for it, but it would be inappropriate. In this situation, it's appropriate.
-
I really dont care what you think Anne. As I have said before I dont think it is appropriate to bring up another persons rape or suicide or any victimization event. I have seen this with bringing up the Reubens sons suicide on this forum and inviting members of the family to come visit fornits to watch the circus of open discussion on their family tragedy.
Now we are seeing it with survivors rapes being discussed without the consent of the person who was attacked.
It is wrong in my opinion, Anne, you may think these events are okay but I dont. This is my point.
...
-
I really dont care what you think Anne.
That's quite obvious.
As I have said before I dont think it is appropriate to bring up another persons rape or suicide or any victimization event.
It really doesn't matter what you think. It has nothing to do with you.
I have seen this with bringing up the Reubens sons suicide on this forum and inviting members of the family to come visit fornits to watch the circus of open discussion on their family tragedy.
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here.
Now we are seeing it with survivors rapes being discussed without the consent of the person who was attacked.
{deep sigh}......You really are having a hard time with reading comprehension on this one, aren't you. My consent has been given. Has it sunk in yet?
It is wrong in my opinion, Anne, you may think these events are okay but I dont.
I don't care if you think it's ok or not. It doesn't concern you.
-
Whatever Whooter, this thread is not about talking about peoples stories, with or without consent. It is about the lengths pro-program people will go to in order to discredit the victims of their money machines. Stay on topic. And for the record everybody, I am male, sorry if using Bebe as my avatar confused anyone, I just really liked the picture.
-
{deep sigh}......You really are having a hard time with reading comprehension on this one, aren't you. My consent has been given. Has it sunk in yet?
Hey, go easy, Anne, we are not understanding each other. I dont think you see my point either.
I understand that you are giving consent. Did someone get the consent of the Reubens when they talked about their son/brothers suicide and then invited them to join the conversation here on fornits?
In general this isnt right, not everyone is you and other people may not want their rape being discussed when ever someone else feels like it. Talking about rape can stir up bad feelings in the person who was victimized, it may not with you, but it does in some victims.
If there were another survivor on this board who was raped I dont think it would be appropriate for anyone to just start talking about it openly without that person giving the okay. I think as a minimum it is just common courtesy.
...
-
I understand that you are giving consent.
Really? Cuz from the quote below, it doesn't appear that you do.
Now we are seeing it with survivors rapes being discussed without the consent of the person who was attacked.
That discussion was about me and my rape. Nobody else was referenced, so you can stop pretending that you care if I was hurt by it or not.
Did someone get the consent of the Reubens when they talked about their son/brothers suicide and then invited them to join the conversation here on fornits?
I haven't seen any 'invitation' extended to the Reubens. I could be wrong, but I haven't seen any personally. Even so, I think it's an appropriate discussion for the TTI because many of us who have been through programs (unlike yourself) understand how damaging they are and how that can effect someone's sense of self and could lead to or at least contribute to suicidal feelings. If John Reuben is going to put himself out there as a representative of the TTI by starting a "non-profit" to get more kids into programs.....then he's made himself somewhat of a public figure and it's absolutely appropriate to discuss the fact that sending his son to a program very well could have contributed to how he was feeling when he took his life.
In general this isnt right, not everyone is you and other people may not want their rape being discussed when ever someone else feels like it.
But we're talking about MY situation. You feigned being upset that someone brought up MY rape, not anyone else. That's what we're talking about.
Talking about rape can stir up bad feelings in the person who was victimized, it may not with you, but it does in some victims.
Well, WY didn't bring up any other rape victims.
If there were another survivor on this board who was raped I dont think it would be appropriate for anyone to just start talking about it openly without that person giving the okay.
That didn't happen.
Quit playing the victim here. You voluntarily, regularly and knowingly come to a board populated mostly by survivors of these programs and routinely dismiss and minimize what we've been through. If the heat's too much for you, either put your big boy pants on or get the fuck out of the kitchen.
-
If there were another survivor on this board who was raped I dont think it would be appropriate for anyone to just start talking about it openly without that person giving the okay.
That didn't happen.
I tend to agree, I dont think it has either that I am aware of. If it does I think it should be addressed, at least that is my opinion. The moderators can approach it any way they like.
Quit playing the victim here. You voluntarily, regularly and knowingly come to a board populated mostly by survivors of these programs and routinely dismiss and minimize what we've been through. If the heat's too much for you, either put your big boy pants on or get the fuck out of the kitchen.
I will let the attack slide.
...
-
If there were another survivor on this board who was raped I dont think it would be appropriate for anyone to just start talking about it openly without that person giving the okay.
That didn't happen.
I tend to agree, I dont think it has either that I am aware of.
Then why are you pretending to be so upset about this since it only referred to me and I gave my consent? You're getting upset about things that didn't happen.
Quit playing the victim here. You voluntarily, regularly and knowingly come to a board populated mostly by survivors of these programs and routinely dismiss and minimize what we've been through. If the heat's too much for you, either put your big boy pants on or get the fuck out of the kitchen.
I will let the attack slide.
It's not an attack. Calling you an asshole would be considered an attack. ^^^^^^ is some unsolicited advice to you.
-
If there were another survivor on this board who was raped I dont think it would be appropriate for anyone to just start talking about it openly without that person giving the okay.
That didn't happen.
I tend to agree, I dont think it has either that I am aware of.
Then why are you pretending to be so upset about this since it only referred to me and I gave my consent? You're getting upset about things that didn't happen.
Whether you give people consent or not I dont think it is right for others to just bring the subject of another persons rape or suicide when ever they choose.
You could give me (or someone else) consent to talk about your rape openly at any time of my choosing. But I would consider it wrong for me or anyone else to bring the subject up, say a month from now, unless you consented to it then or brought it up yourself.
Violent crimes can bring up memories which the person may not want to deal with or think about at that time. The person who was victimized should choose the time and place to talk about those issues.
Lets get this back on topic
...
-
Topic reminder.
The fact is that Whooter did this awful thing to Anne as way to "punch back" for being caught in a web of lies in another thread. He attempted to invalidate Anne's experience by calling what happened to her "unprotected sex," but it was actually forcible rape, which he later denied knowing. It was demonstrated that he indeed knew this and actually made commentary on it before - his previous comments about it were posted. Pretending he didn't know was the last possible attempt to squirm out of responsibility for his deplorable actions. Now that has blown up in his face as well and we are back to the beginning.
Below is what Whooter said and did to invalidate Anne. He still will not say why he feels the need to revictimize/invalidate victims of abuse. Probably everyone here draws the same conclusion about why he does this: to protect his income stream from the TTI business.
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
-
Whether you give people consent or not I dont think it is right for others to just bring the subject of another persons rape or suicide when ever they choose.
Then what was this all about........?
Now we are seeing it with survivors rapes being discussed without the consent of the person who was attacked.
You could give me (or someone else) consent to talk about your rape openly at any time of my choosing. But I would consider it wrong for me or anyone else to bring the subject up, say a month from now, unless you consented to it then or brought it up yourself.
Pay attention......I gave my consent. Has that fact still not sunk in? Besides, it really doesn't concern you. It was about me. It was someone coming to my defense after you posted the vileness you did about me as a teenager.
Violent crimes can bring up memories which the person may not want to deal with or think about at that time. The person who was victimized should choose the time and place to talk about those issues.
Pay attention......I gave my consent. Has that fact still not sunk in?
And it was how the violent crime was dealt with in Straight that did more damage than the actual crime itself.
Lets get this back on topic
This is absolutely on the topic of how far program pushers will go to invalidate abuse victims. You've been a prime example in this entire thread, among others.
-
I think we all understand that you are upset about bringing up Annes rape on the open forum and have a need to put the focus on someone else. That is understandable.
As a recap of the discussion to date I think we all understand that it wasnt intentional on your part to hurt Anne in any way. Your fury was aimed at me and you made an error in your rush to judgement. Anne has come forward and says she is not upset with you for this. She is actually more upset with me if that helps at all, DJ.
I think we can move forward from the rape topic since it has exhausted itself and we have worked through the issues.
...
-
Here's the actual recap of this topic which I have just read from front to back.
1. I posted only this post in this thread. Why Whooter is so obsessed with me, I have no idea.
2. Whooter called Anne's being raped "unprotected sex," an absoultely heinous remark, because he was busted out telling more lies in another thread and he wanted to hit back at Anne for catching him lying, which apparently spawned this topic.
3. Anne is upset and angry with Whooter for his callous remarks.
4. Anne is not upset with me because I have not been involved with this topic at all, nor is she mad at any other posters beside Whooter, as she has stated.
5. Whooter got caught again lying his ass off multiple times.
6. Whooter tried to blame Anne, WY and me for his actions/lies.
7. Whooter was proven to be lying that he wasn't aware of Anne's situation via his own posts.
8. Whooter wants this topic shut down because it reveals his serious personality disorders.
I think that about covers it. I'm lecturing this week and next but will check back on this topic later on. See you around, people.
-
It would be helpful if you provided links for the posts, DJ, when you post them. That conversation could have been written years ago for all we know.
Who cares if it was written years ago. It was in a discussion with you. You mean you can somehow grasp the details of my life as a teenager before I was shipped off to Straight but you can't remember a conversation you had with me? Hmm.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642)
Here's another one where I stated it and you responded just a few posts down from mine.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327)
-
It would be helpful if you provided links for the posts, DJ, when you post them. That conversation could have been written years ago for all we know.
Who cares if it was written years ago. It was in a discussion with you. You mean you can somehow grasp the details of my life as a teenager before I was shipped off to Straight but you can't remember a conversation you had with me? Hmm.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642)
Here's another one where I stated it and you responded just a few posts down from mine.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327)
No, sorry, I dont remember those at all. Thanks for the links, though, Anne. It helps to have a reference to help remember when they occurred. That was 3 years ago!
...
-
I think we (no-no) all understand that you are upset about bringing up Annes rape on the open forum and have a need to put the focus on someone else. That is understandable.
No, people are upset at the garbage you posted about me as a teenager in order to invalidate the abuse I suffered at the hands of Straight.....but you know this already and are still trying to deflect the attention away from that.
As a recap of the discussion to date I think we (no-no) all understand that it wasnt intentional on your part to hurt Anne in any way. Your fury was aimed at me and you made an error in your rush to judgement. Anne has come forward and says she is not upset with you for this. She is actually more upset with me if that helps at all, DJ.
He's not worried about me being upset with him, as he's able to read for comprehension and understands that I've given my consent for the rape to be discussed, especially in relation to how Straight's dealing of it made the damage much, much worse. He's simply pointing out what is plain to see. You've been feeling the heat lately and decided to post something nasty about my teenage years in order to take the attention off of yourself.
I think we can move forward from the rape topic since it has exhausted itself and we have worked through the issues.
The topic isn't and never was the rape. The topic is the extent to which you and other program supporters will go try to discredit survivors accounts of abuse inside programs. And of course you'd like to move on. You've really been catching a lot of flak lately for saying some pretty hurtful things about me and others and you'd like it to all just go away.
-
It would be helpful if you provided links for the posts, DJ, when you post them. That conversation could have been written years ago for all we know.
Who cares if it was written years ago. It was in a discussion with you. You mean you can somehow grasp the details of my life as a teenager before I was shipped off to Straight but you can't remember a conversation you had with me? Hmm.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=16007&start=540#p238642)
Here's another one where I stated it and you responded just a few posts down from mine.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=23728&start=30#p290327)
No, sorry, I dont remember those at all. Thanks for the links, though, Anne. It helps to have a reference to help remember when they occurred. That was 3 years ago!
So.
You mean you can somehow grasp the details of my life as a teenager before I was shipped off to Straight but you can't remember a conversation you had with me?
-
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
I also asked him to provide examples of where I lied. He's yet to do that either.
And that post of his really is a prime example of the title of this thread. Not only is it filled with outright lies about my years before Straight, it was posted solely to try to hurt me and to take the focus off of him.
-
From the looks of this thread, apparently they'll go pretty god damn far. Yall do realize the whootie fish has been playing you all like a violin. He could care less about your little rages against him. In fact, I'd go so far as to claim he loves them as yet another spam posting of nonsensical horseshit that only a very small subsection of the reading audience will ever get to comprehend.
The rest will just go, WTF is this shit and look at him as if he's semi-normal.
People have enough trouble believing this shit. Almost everyone here knows this and has experienced this personally. Yet for the life of me I can't begin to understand why you allow him to play you like a 3 dollar fiddle to the extent that you've marginalized yourselves completely.
Morons.
-
I could not disagree more, Che Gookin. I find this thread absolutely informative and completely fascinating. To an outside reader it is quite clear what the dynamic is here. The thread is properly titled and the behavior of the "pro-program" poster is perfectly described. This person has gone to great lengths in order to invalidate the experiences of the abused. His approach and tactics are designed to completely destroy others' credibility through purposeful slander and bullying. If you can't see this then you are probably not reading objectively. To me, it's as clear as the nose on my face.
-
So whose sock are you again?
There is no dynamic here. Just a bunch or yahoo bubbas ranting around raving with the Whooter twisting their words to piss them off more.
-
I never really thought of myself as a bully. Maybe this proves the theory that if you bully someone long enough they become a bully themselves.
...
-
I never really thought of myself as a bully. Maybe this proves the theory that if you bully someone long enough they become a bully themselves.
...
Theory? It is the operational philosophy of the programs you champion.
-
I believe that's probably true. Bullying is certainly a learned behavior, but I'm assuming you are an adult and if so, bullying is your choice of behavior and you voluntarily engaged in it.
As I read through this thread I was actually quite shocked. This also fits into some feedback I read on another thread that "pro-program" posters tend to act like other posters are "still in the program" and, in a sense, try to control them here as they were controlled in the program. That is a basic summation of this entire thread and demonstrative of the topic.
From what I have seen, the pro-program posters have no real limits on what they are willing to do or say to try to control or invalidate the abuse victims that post here. I find this to be more than a bit scary because in the program these same personalities have physical access to their victims where the abuse could be much more serious.
-
I find this to be more than a bit scary because in the program these same personalities have physical access to their victims where the abuse could be much more serious.
Exactly. It is scary.
-
I believe that's probably true. Bullying is certainly a learned behavior, but I'm assuming you are an adult and if so, bullying is your choice of behavior and you voluntarily engaged in it.
Well I think even as an adult if you hang around with a certain type of behavior long enough you will pick up their habits. It is an interesting observation, though, DKincaidCFS. I think if someone had said to me "Did you fabricate your sons or did you fabricate a daughter which is it?" when I first started posting here on fornits I would have been intimidated and backed down. But now after 5 years of back and forth with the same people I feel comfortable enough to fight back. So I think in a sense I have learned these behaviors here on fornits or maybe they were always there and have just emerged over time. I would say I would go much further now than I did 5 years ago.
As I read through this thread I was actually quite shocked. This also fits into some feedback I read on another thread that "pro-program" posters tend to act like other posters are "still in the program" and, in a sense, try to control them here as they were controlled in the program. That is a basic summation of this entire thread and demonstrative of the topic.
From what I have seen, the pro-program posters have no real limits on what they are willing to do or say to try to control or invalidate the abuse victims that post here. I find this to be more than a bit scary because in the program these same personalities have physical access to their victims where the abuse could be much more serious.
As far as limits goes on what people (program pushers as well as anti-program pushers) say I think the limits have no boundaries from what I have read here over the years. I would agree with your observation. There are no limits on how far a person would go to invalidate another poster here. So the limit on how far a pro-program poster would go to invalidate an abuse victim would depend on the individual poster. I think it would vary.
I am intrigued by the comment of pro-program people trying to control others as they were in programs. This is definitely something we see a lot of here on fornits (but not exclusive to the pro-program posters) although there are not many pro-program people on fornits to know if this would be typical behavior of the pro-program group or not.
...
-
I think it's a little different for the anti crowd than it is the pro crowd. The pro crowd is very actively advocating the very thing that has devastated so many of us in the anti crowd. We've had actual EdCons here (Sue Scheff, Lon Woodbury etc.) here denigrating survivors and at the same time trying to recruit more parents/kids into the very things that have damaged us, so.....yeah....it brings out some pretty heavy emotions in us. And the fact that we learned some of the very same harsh techniques seen in our reactions to these people inside the very programs they advocate shouldn't be overlooked.
-
I really dont care what you think Anne. As I have said before I dont think it is appropriate to bring up another persons rape or suicide or any victimization event. I have seen this with bringing up the Reubens sons suicide on this forum and inviting members of the family to come visit fornits to watch the circus of open discussion on their family tragedy.
Now we are seeing it with survivors rapes being discussed without the consent of the person who was attacked.
It is wrong in my opinion, Anne, you may think these events are okay but I dont. This is my point.
...
Yet you think it is acceptable to simply lie about people. That seems to be your usual MO. Why is that Whooter?
-
I think it's a little different for the anti crowd than it is the pro crowd. The pro crowd is very actively advocating the very thing that has devastated so many of us in the anti crowd. We've had actual EdCons here (Sue Scheff, Lon Woodbury etc.) here denigrating survivors and at the same time trying to recruit more parents/kids into the very things that have damaged us, so.....yeah....it brings out some pretty heavy emotions in us. And the fact that we learned some of the very same harsh techniques seen in our reactions to these people inside the very programs they advocate shouldn't be overlooked.
I was totally oblivious to the SS and Lon Woodbury posts. I dont remember that at all. Maybe Bruce, DJ and I were busy building TheWho thread. What year was that?
A little off topic I guess, but I am curious.
...
-
I think it's a little different for the anti crowd than it is the pro crowd. The pro crowd is very actively advocating the very thing that has devastated so many of us in the anti crowd. We've had actual EdCons here (Sue Scheff, Lon Woodbury etc.) here denigrating survivors and at the same time trying to recruit more parents/kids into the very things that have damaged us, so.....yeah....it brings out some pretty heavy emotions in us. And the fact that we learned some of the very same harsh techniques seen in our reactions to these people inside the very programs they advocate shouldn't be overlooked.
I was totally oblivious to the SS and Lon Woodbury posts. I dont remember that at all. Maybe Bruce, DJ and I were busy building TheWho thread. What year was that?
A little off topic I guess, but I am curious.
Don't know, but it wasn't just them either.
-
There is no greater crime than that which is committed against a child. A child does not have the skills or abilities to handle any form of abuse. A child withdraws from society and in adulthood can become a recluse. A sad damaging fact far worse than the original crime. Living alone away from the world.
Just something to think about.
-
There is no greater crime than that which is committed against a child. A child does not have the skills or abilities to handle any form of abuse. A child withdraws from society and in adulthood can becomes a recluse. A sad damaging fact far worse than the original crime. Living alone away from the world.
Just something to think about.
Dead on target Heretik !!!! It causes a kid not to trust in fear of humiliation, the mentality becomes to the point that the child trusts no one and that trait sticks through adult life
-
There is no greater crime than that which is committed against a child. A child does not have the skills or abilities to handle any form of abuse. A child withdraws from society and in adulthood can becomes a recluse. A sad damaging fact far worse than the original crime. Living alone away from the world.
Just something to think about.
Child abusers should receive the harshest penalties permissible by law.
...
-
There is no greater crime than that which is committed against a child. A child does not have the skills or abilities to handle any form of abuse. A child withdraws from society and in adulthood can becomes a recluse. A sad damaging fact far worse than the original crime. Living alone away from the world.
Just something to think about.
Child abusers should receive the harshest penalties permissible by law.
...
How do you feel about recruiters that promote these places. I was just talking with a fellow survivor about the Straight that we both were in and I remembered the name of the company that was the recruiter in my home town...I looked them up and found they are still in existance, a crying shame they did not shut down at the same time as Straight, just goes to show you they were getting their pockets greased by other facilities as well.
-
How do you feel about recruiters that promote these places. I was just talking with a fellow survivor about the Straight that we both were in and I remembered the name of the company that was the recruiter in my home town...I looked them up and found they are still in existance, a crying shame they did not shut down at the same time as Straight, just goes to show you they were getting their pockets greased by other facilities as well.
I don’t know a lot about Edcons because I did not use one. But I am sure that they vary. The edcon business is unregulated so there are probably many predators looking to make as much money as possible with an attitude that every kids could benefit from a program and feel "what the hell the parents have the cash and motivation to send them". But I also think there are probably legitimate businesses that are there to help people navigate the TTI.
But how do we know since they are unregulated?
Lets say a parent of a troubled teen opens an Edcon business with the intention of helping people the way his family was helped. He researches the best places and decides to stay away from CEDU and WWASP schools and not refer there. He chooses Academy at Swift River, Aspen Ranch (because his kid did well there) a few other Aspen Schools, Academy at Sisters and a couple others and a host of Wilderness programs. Things go fine and then after a few years the owner needs to figure out how to increase business and Aspen comes along and says they will shoot $4,800 back to every child that you place into their facility and another $1,800 bonus if they complete the program. This changes the business model and since there is no regulation it also challenges the ethical standards of each EdCon. What do they do? They are left to decide if it is ethical or not.
Lets say the guy running the place says “No big deal, I am ethical and only have the best interest of the child and family at heart”. So he accepts the kick backs and carries on. After a few years I think he would be subconsciously referring to the place that offers the most money even though he never intended to make a decision based on that. Corruption can take root like a weed in an unintentional crack in the sidewalk and just takes off and before you know it you are being sued for ethics violations because you took a step back and allowed a manager to take over part of your responsibilities while you enjoy your success and spend more time with your family. Eventually the business was only referring to those programs who would pay him a kick back.
The owner would be considered guilty in my opinion of taking kick backs but I wouldn’t consider him scum just negligent. I think the EdCon business is dangerous, but I also think it is needed. The trouble is how does a parent know who to listen to?
I believe this response is off topic, If this turns into a discussion or gathers interest maybe we can break this off into another thread. Otherwise I apologize and am not intending to derail.
...
-
Posted in Wrong thread
...
-
So I'm new here, I've been sitting back reading posts here for a few weeks now. I have got to chime in on this stuff. As a survivor of one of the roughest programs out there I have a few things that just need to be said. First of all, there are definitely lies and fabrications by some people about the level of abuse and exactly what happened during their incarcerations. I have seen some posts on another topic that I witnessed personally, and the story was complete B.S. I 100% agree that the people out there lying about incidences of abuse need to reign it in and be honest. That being said, without any fabrication these programs are abusive and wrong. At least the one I was in. Judging from the fact that the people who ran my program (Brightway and Paradise Cove) are basically the same people running most of these programs (WWASPS), I don't discount the fact that abuse occurs, rampantly. Here's my issue. If you are a parent out there and you think that an out of control teen, and there are many variations as to what constitutes "out of control", answer me this. What do you think would happen if you hogtied your teen and locked him in a closet for a week, fed him one cup of rice and a cup of water a day, and if he "refused" to cooperate (CAT 4!!!) so you physically assaulted (I mean "restrained") him or her to the point of causing injury, that means even bruising, what do you think would happen to you?
Well, I'll tell you. You would go to Jail! You would not pass go, you would not get a chance to explain to CPS that this is for their own good, your ass would get locked up. So tell me why are these programs allowed to therapeutically abuse? Plain and simple, follow the money trail. If you were a billion dollar parent, you could afford to lobby some legislation to allow you to beat the hell out of your kid whenever you want.
What I'm saying is, at the least these programs are child abusers. My experience, beyond abuse. Fabrications are completely unnecessary, so the survivors out there please be straight shooters, the lies are only going to help the real criminals get away with their crimes.
Res ipsa loquitur
-
What do you think would happen if you hogtied your teen and locked him in a closet for a week, fed him one cup of rice and a cup of water a day, and if he "refused" to cooperate (CAT 4!!!) so you physically assaulted (I mean "restrained") him or her to the point of causing injury, that means even bruising, what do you think would happen to you?
Well, I'll tell you. You would go to Jail! You would not pass go, you would not get a chance to explain to CPS that this is for their own good, your ass would get locked up. So tell me why are these programs allowed to therapeutically abuse? Plain and simple, follow the money trail. If you were a billion dollar parent, you could afford to lobby some legislation to allow you to beat the hell out of your kid whenever you want.
What I'm saying is, at the least these programs are child abusers. My experience, beyond abuse. Fabrications are completely unnecessary, so the survivors out there please be straight shooters, the lies are only going to help the real criminals get away with their crimes.
Res ipsa loquitur
:notworthy:
-
So I'm new here, I've been sitting back reading posts here for a few weeks now. I have got to chime in on this stuff. As a survivor of one of the roughest programs out there I have a few things that just need to be said. First of all, there are definitely lies and fabrications by some people about the level of abuse and exactly what happened during their incarcerations. I have seen some posts on another topic that I witnessed personally, and the story was complete B.S. I 100% agree that the people out there lying about incidences of abuse need to reign it in and be honest. That being said, without any fabrication these programs are abusive and wrong. At least the one I was in. Judging from the fact that the people who ran my program (Brightway and Paradise Cove) are basically the same people running most of these programs (WWASPS), I don't discount the fact that abuse occurs, rampantly. Here's my issue. If you are a parent out there and you think that an out of control teen, and there are many variations as to what constitutes "out of control", answer me this. What do you think would happen if you hogtied your teen and locked him in a closet for a week, fed him one cup of rice and a cup of water a day, and if he "refused" to cooperate (CAT 4!!!) so you physically assaulted (I mean "restrained") him or her to the point of causing injury, that means even bruising, what do you think would happen to you?
Well, I'll tell you. You would go to Jail! You would not pass go, you would not get a chance to explain to CPS that this is for their own good, your ass would get locked up. So tell me why are these programs allowed to therapeutically abuse? Plain and simple, follow the money trail. If you were a billion dollar parent, you could afford to lobby some legislation to allow you to beat the hell out of your kid whenever you want.
What I'm saying is, at the least these programs are child abusers. My experience, beyond abuse. Fabrications are completely unnecessary, so the survivors out there please be straight shooters, the lies are only going to help the real criminals get away with their crimes.
Res ipsa loquitur
Welcome. If it hasn't happened already, there is a poster here called "Whooter" who will be along shortly to try to invalidate your experience and discredit you as a person. Good luck with that. This thread is about people like him.
-
there please be straight shooters, the lies are only going to help the real criminals get away with their crimes.
Welcome. If it hasn't happened already, there is a poster here called "Whooter" who will be along shortly to try to invalidate your experience and discredit you as a person. Good luck with that. This thread is about people like him.
Yes I have met Whooter. You may find some very interesting conversations between the two of us in the OFFA. I have found that reading his posts can be hazardous to one's intelligence.
:wall:
-
This sick, demented response from a program pusher belongs here:
I think the kids and staff are already in danger.
Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, the agency failed to provide for the needs,
care, protection, and supervision of the children in care;
Findings Include:
(1) During an interviews conducted on September 1, 2010 from 1:00 pm-3:30 pm with Residents
101, 102, 108, 109, 110, and 112 in which all residents acknowledged that they are aware of
residents engaging in sexually inappropriate behavior. It was reported that the residents would
sneak off in designated areas unbeknownst to staff.
(2) Record review on September 1, 2010 of Incident Report dated 06-06-10 for Resident #11
revealed Resident #11 along with 6 other females disclosed to staff an incident involving sexual
activity between Resident #11 and an older male resident. It was documented that Resident #11
appeared upset and stated that what occurred between herself (R11) and the male resident was
an unwelcome encounter.
This girl was raped by a male inmate due to lack of supervision.
So based on this definition, 99% of all kids in highschool are raped !! OMG!!! Lets wait for the swat team to come in. 2 teenagers had sex with one another.
Its just paper work, DJ. Imagine the number of reports there would be if your local highschool had to write a report everytime one of their students has sex lol.
...
This girl was raped by an older inmate of RCS/HLA and Whooter thinks it's funny. He also commented that another poster who was raped at seven years of age was simply engaging in "unprotected sex" and therefore "needed a program."
-
This sick, demented response from a program pusher belongs here:
I think the kids and staff are already in danger.
Based on record review, resident and staff interviews, the agency failed to provide for the needs,
care, protection, and supervision of the children in care;
Findings Include:
(1) During an interviews conducted on September 1, 2010 from 1:00 pm-3:30 pm with Residents
101, 102, 108, 109, 110, and 112 in which all residents acknowledged that they are aware of
residents engaging in sexually inappropriate behavior. It was reported that the residents would
sneak off in designated areas unbeknownst to staff.
(2) Record review on September 1, 2010 of Incident Report dated 06-06-10 for Resident #11
revealed Resident #11 along with 6 other females disclosed to staff an incident involving sexual
activity between Resident #11 and an older male resident. It was documented that Resident #11
appeared upset and stated that what occurred between herself (R11) and the male resident was
an unwelcome encounter.
This girl was raped by a male inmate due to lack of supervision.
So based on this definition, 99% of all kids in highschool are raped !! OMG!!! Lets wait for the swat team to come in. 2 teenagers had sex with one another.
Its just paper work, DJ. Imagine the number of reports there would be if your local highschool had to write a report everytime one of their students has sex lol.
...
This girl was raped by an older inmate of RCS/HLA and Whooter thinks it's funny. He also commented that another poster who was raped at seven years of age was simply engaging in "unprotected sex" and therefore "needed a program."
This is one of the reasons you lose so much credibility with the readers here DJ. You are screaming "Rape" but no one else is. You get so offended when people disagree with you and your obvious agenda is to discredit RCS.
The report stated "sexual activity". There was no mention of physical force. Sexual activity could be that he exposed himself to her or masturbated in front of her. Maybe she invited him in and was caught and now feels embarrassed or does not want to get punished for breaking the rules. Maybe she doesnt want her parents to think she was having sex.. etc. But the only one who mentions rape is you, DJ.
You are an obvious disgruntled ex-employee who still holds anger towards the program which rejected you and you spend your years trying to get even and you will never satisfy your rage and drive because the program will continue on just fine without you. You dont matter to them and they probably dont even remember you. The information you post is almost always false or embellished just like this view of rape. This is obvious even to first time readers. Your energy and rage never match the events.
...
-
Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". It was brutal and as far as I can remember, he refused to apologize for this remark. Sorry Whoot but its true. Program pushers are ruthless in pursuing their agenda.
-
Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". It was brutal and as far as I can remember, he refused to apologize for this remark. Sorry Whoot but its true. Program pushers are ruthless in pursuing their agenda.
lol, If you cant provide a link it never happened, shaggy.
Its easy to make things up ... Shaggy said: "As long as you use a condom then it is not considered rape".
...
-
As long as you use a condom then it is not considered rape.
Shaggy that is a totally wrong. You are a sick individual to think that!!! Having sex with a 7 year old girl is just wrong either way!! What is the matter with you?
So you see anyone can make up a quote about anyone else, but regular readers know what is true and what isnt by the lack of links to the original post and Dysfunction junction/ Troll control and now "Yourself" make accusations without backing them up. If DJ/Troll control leaves out the link then we all know it id just made up info.
...
-
As long as you use a condom then it is not considered rape.
Shaggy that is a totally wrong. You are a sick individual to think that!!! Having sex with a 7 year old girl is just wrong either way!! What is the matter with you?
So you see anyone can make up a quote about anyone else, but regular readers know what is true and what isnt by the lack of links to the original post and Dysfunction junction/ Troll control and now "Yourself" make accusations without backing them up. If DJ/Troll control leaves out the link then we all know it id just made up info.
...
Whooter I thought we had a better relationship than this. All you had to do was apolagize and admit you mis-spoke. It happens to everybody. Now you're just being a dick and proving the point: Program pushers will try anything to promote their agenda.
-
Whooter I thought we had a better relationship than this. All you had to do was apolagize and admit you mis-spoke. It happens to everybody. Now you're just being a dick and proving the point: Program pushers will try anything to promote their agenda.
Mis-spoke about what? Pull up the original link and we will talk about it. I gaurentee that I never said or insinuated this,Shaggy:
"Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex"
You are the one being a dick, if you are going to say something about someone then you should at least have some evidence. What am I suppose to apologize for? At this point you owe me an apology for making that dick comment. I understand DJ making the comment because he never provides links and just makes up what he pleases. Most readers realize this.
...
-
You know I'm not gonna search out that particular thread (maybe somebody else will) and i shouldn't have to. We both know what you said. Why can't you just admit you misspoke when you equated child rape with unprotected sex. All you had to say was that you didn't really mean it that way and sincerly apolagize. The matter would have been completely closed then and there. You are keeping it going by not just dealing with it directly.
-
There was no mention of physical force.
This shows your ignorance. Rape doesn't have to be by physical force. The report clearly states she was upset over unwanted sexual contact with an older male inmate. UNWANTED SEXUAL CONTACT are the key words here. I didn't think anyone could be this dense and ignorant anymore. "No mention of physical force"? That's some 1950's backward-ass mentality there, Whooter. Incredibly ignorant remark.
-
Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". It was brutal and as far as I can remember, he refused to apologize for this remark. Sorry Whoot but its true. Program pushers are ruthless in pursuing their agenda.
Yes. What he said was this is why she needed Straight, Inc. Because she was having "unprotected sex." This was after the other poster said the only "sex" she had before going to Straight was that she was raped at 15 years old and was sexually abused at 7. Whooter described it as "unprotected sex."
-
Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". It was brutal and as far as I can remember, he refused to apologize for this remark. Sorry Whoot but its true. Program pushers are ruthless in pursuing their agenda.
Yes. What he said was this is why she needed Straight, Inc. Because she was having "unprotected sex." This was after the other poster said the only "sex" she had before going to Straight was that she was raped at 15 years old and was sexually abused at 7. Whooter described it as "unprotected sex."
You still have no provided any links, DJ.
...
-
You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life.
Personally I thought it was wrong of Watchful Yeoman/Dysfunction junction to bring up Annes rape on the open forum like that. This is a subject that should have been brought up for conversation by Anne herself at a time of her chosing to talk about it.
I've talked about it here several times.
I never mentioned Anne was raped nor (like many others here) did not know that she was. I am sorry to hear that this happened to you, Anne, and I am sorry that the subject had to be forced out into the open forum like that without your control.
It wasn't forced out in the open. I've spoken about it here several times, as you already know. It was brought up because of your cheap shot towards me about my time before Straight, which you know nothing about.
I think the moderators should rethink the policy of revealing personal violent acts on the forum by other people besides the victim themselves. We see this all too often here on fornits.
Stop trying to insinuate that WY or whoever else brought it up to hurt me. It was brought up to show your insensitivity towards survivors, as evidenced by your cheap shot.
I think it is unfortunate that my comments ended up with someone revealing a violent act of another poster here on fornits (without their consent) and he should rethink his actions in the future.
Stop trying to insinuate that WY or whoever else brought it up to hurt me. It was brought up to show your insensitivity towards survivors, as evidenced by your cheap shot.
I don’t think banning Dysfunction junction/Watchful Yeoman would be appropriate but I am sure the moderators are addressing the issue and we should move forward and allow Anne to discuss this at her own discretion.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life.
Still no link? But I will accept this because I believe this is close to what I had said. The unsafe sex she was having was a concern to her parents.
So I never mentioned anyone being raped. Thanks for clearing this up.
If you read further through it you will see it was DJ who brought the whole rape subject into it, not me.
So Shaggys where does it say that I stated: "Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex"."?
The next time you should be careful of what you say about other people.
...
-
Damn you are stubborn. You really should apolagize to everyone involved and then move on from it. You would retain a degree of respect for being straight-up. I'm gonna bail on this convo soon cause you just wont be honest no matter how many chances you're given.
-
Damn you are stubborn. You really should apolagize to everyone involved and then move on from it. You would retain a degree of respect for being straight-up. I'm gonna bail on this convo soon cause you just wont be honest no matter how many chances you're given.
Well point out where I even used the word rape, Shaggys. That has to at least be in there right? I have a a close friend whose sister was raped, but she was also having a ton of unprotected sex prior to that. This made it difficult for her when she took the man to court. Rape victims have sex too, shaggys, they have relationships and normal curiosities with the opposite sex just like none rape victims. Rape is a violent act like a stabbing or beating, it is one event, it doesnt define their sex life or preferences.
Are you ready to appoligize about me saying: "Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". or are you going to run off and not provide the link?
...
-
When are you going to apologize to Anne for this John?
Whooter wrote:
Unprotected sex was only part of the problems Anne was posing to her parents. I also mentioned she dropped out of school, was drinking, drugging and getting into car accidents among other issues she had at the time.
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=unprotected&start=90
What you term "unprotected sex" was Anne being raped and molested. Get it? She didn't have consensual sex before being placed in a program. Just because you call it something different doesn't change what it is. You're highlighting your programmie mentality when you do that. Further you've provided no links whatsoever to any of your other lies about her. Just your usual MO of trying to attack those who make you look bad. You're pretty sick John, even for a sociopath.
-
When are you going to apologize to Anne for this John?
Whooter wrote:
Unprotected sex was only part of the problems Anne was posing to her parents. I also mentioned she dropped out of school, was drinking, drugging and getting into car accidents among other issues she had at the time.
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=unprotected&start=90
What you term "unprotected sex" was Anne being raped and molested. Get it? She didn't have consensual sex before being placed in a program. Just because you call it something different doesn't change what it is. You're highlighting your programmie mentality when you do that. Further you've provided no links whatsoever to any of your other lies about her. Just your usual MO of trying to attack those who make you look bad. You're pretty sick John, even for a sociopath.
I never refereed to her being raped or brought it up initially, Bruce. If you read back you will see that I was referring to her having unprotected sex. I know a person who was raped when she was younger and she also had sex with people too. Not all of the times she had sex was it rape, only one of the times. Do you see the difference?
Anne and I have spoken since DJ brought up the whole rape incident. I still dont agree with him bringing up this incident without first asking Anne. But that is between Anne and DJ.
...
-
I never refereed to her being raped or brought it up initially, Bruce.
Following the bouncing ball over the words John, it may help.
She-never-had-consensual-sex-before-going-into-a-program.
-
I never refereed to her being raped or brought it up initially, Bruce.
Following the bouncing ball over the words John, it may help.
She-never-had-consensual-sex-before-going-into-a-program.
Link?
...
-
[Link?]
I don't recall posting anything about my sexual activities before going in Straight, other than the rape & childhood sexual abuse, so for you to toss that around so casually and refer to it as me having 'unprotected sex' is pretty low, even for you
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&p=384488&hilit=+sex#p384488
Looking forward to watching as you avoid accontability and try to squirm away like a coward per your usual MO.
-
[Link?]
I don't recall posting anything about my sexual activities before going in Straight, other than the rape & childhood sexual abuse, so for you to toss that around so casually and refer to it as me having 'unprotected sex' is pretty low, even for you
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&p=384488&hilit=+sex#p384488
Looking forward to watching as you avoid accontability and try to squirm away like a coward per your usual MO.
Whooter has trouble with what "rape" is. He conflates it with "flirting" and "masturbation" and also "unprotected sex."
As RB rightly points out, Anne never discussed anything about consensual sex at all and Whooter doesn't know Anne, so he just made up the entire "story" of How Anne Ended Up in Straight, including calling her rape at 15 years of age "unprotected sex."
What do you expect from someone who made up his own kids and their "program experiences"? Seriously.
-
[Link?]
I don't recall posting anything about my sexual activities before going in Straight, other than the rape & childhood sexual abuse, so for you to toss that around so casually and refer to it as me having 'unprotected sex' is pretty low, even for you
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&p=384488&hilit=+sex#p384488
Looking forward to watching as you avoid accontability and try to squirm away like a coward per your usual MO.
Whooter has trouble with what "rape" is. He conflates it with "flirting" and "masturbation" and also "unprotected sex."
As RB rightly points out, Anne never discussed anything about consensual sex at all and Whooter doesn't know Anne, so he just made up the entire "story" of How Anne Ended Up in Straight, including calling her rape at 15 years of age "unprotected sex."
What do you expect from someone who made up his own kids and their "program experiences"? Seriously.
Sorry DJ, you are the one who brought the rape into it, I never did. I dont agree with discussing another person violent attack without their consent, so I will not discuss this further. If you can find a link that shows I brought up her rape then we can discuss this. But this is your bad choice to wallow in.
Anne and I already spoke about this issue and it is behind us. Why is it so important for you to bring it up again? You should have a little bit more compassion for the victim in these cases. You put her past out their once for all to see and now you are doing it again. Let be.
...
-
and you should apologize for lying about her John. Just because she embarrassed you by proving you wrong is no reason to employ your usual MO by lying about her.
-
and you should apologize for lying about her John. Just because she embarrassed you by proving you wrong is no reason to employ your usual MO by lying about her.
If you take the time to go back and read the posts (like I think Shaggys has by now) you will see that your friend DJ brought up the rape. I never did. I didnt agree with DJ's decision to post information regarding another person attack upon them but that is between Anne and DJ. I have since spoken to Anne and we have put this behind us. If there is an area that continues to give you heartburn then speak with Anne on this issue.
...
-
If you take the time to go back and read the posts (like I think Shaggys has by now) you will see that your friend DJ brought up the rape. I never did. I didnt agree with DJ's decision to post information regarding another person attack upon them but that is between Anne and DJ. I have since spoken to Anne and we have put this behind us. If there is an area that continues to give you heartburn then speak with Anne on this issue.
The fact that your actions don't give you heartburn is just further evidence that you are a sociopath. Anne had been open about her rape and molestation prior to her incarceration in Straight long ago. You however lied and claimed she had been placed in her program because of her having unprotected sex. Of course the only sex she had was being raped. You brought it up, again, calling it something else doesn't negate your actions. No one expects you to take respondsibility for what you did, nor do they expect you to be accountable, we all know how much you hate that. Add that to the fact that what you're doing is typical programmie behavior. Make baseless accusations when shown to be wrong rather than admitting the error and apologizing, they claim something the person was a victim of, was actually the victims fault. You really are sick John.
-
If you take the time to go back and read the posts (like I think Shaggys has by now) you will see that your friend DJ brought up the rape. I never did. I didnt agree with DJ's decision to post information regarding another person attack upon them but that is between Anne and DJ. I have since spoken to Anne and we have put this behind us. If there is an area that continues to give you heartburn then speak with Anne on this issue.
The fact that your actions don't give you heartburn is just further evidence that you are a sociopath. Anne had been open about her rape and molestation prior to her incarceration in Straight long ago. You however lied and claimed she had been placed in her program because of her having unprotected sex. Of course the only sex she had was being raped. You brought it up, again, calling it something else doesn't negate your actions. No one expects you to take respondsibility for what you did, nor do they expect you to be accountable, we all know how much you hate that. Add that to the fact that what you're doing is typical programmie behavior. Make baseless accusations when shown to be wrong rather than admitting the error and apologizing, they claim something the person was a victim of, was actually the victims fault. You really are sick John.
Fine, Bruce, believe what you will. Anne and I spoke about this already. Its closed out for me.
...
-
Fine, Bruce, believe what you will. Anne and I spoke about this already. Its closed out for me.
Again, we all know you hate accountability, so no surprises that you'd want to avoid accountability for your actions.
-
You (Whooter) however lied and claimed she had been placed in her program because of her having unprotected sex. Of course the only sex she had was being raped. You brought it up, again, calling it something else doesn't negate your actions. No one expects you to take respondsibility for what you did, nor do they expect you to be accountable
Do you mean taking responsibility for calling a poster's rape "unprotected sex"? Rape is rape, Whooter, not "unprotected sex" or "flirting." You, of all people, after being imprisoned for it, should know this.
-
You (Whooter) however lied and claimed she had been placed in her program because of her having unprotected sex. Of course the only sex she had was being raped. You brought it up, again, calling it something else doesn't negate your actions. No one expects you to take respondsibility for what you did, nor do they expect you to be accountable
Do you mean taking responsibility for calling a poster's rape "unprotected sex" or taking responsibility for what he did to kids? He did go to prison for it, but he still doesn't want to admit it was a crime. Rape is rape, Whooter, not "unprotected sex" or "flirting." You, of all people, after being imprisoned for it, should know this.
I like to go with the reports that supply links
Lets not forget your past DJ:
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390164#p390164)
...
-
There you go, Whooter. Get it out of your system, boy. You have limited time to practice your craft here so you might as well stick to your best work - accusing almost every other poster here who embarasses you of molesting their own children. It's what you do best and I think it really helps you to invalidate the abuse victims that had to endure your placement at programs you support.
Since Whooter was exposed here for who he truly is he gets very angry and has to purge himself on the forum. Fornits threatens his income stream so he resorts to what you are reading in this thread. "Rape is unprotected sex," etc. Any way to transfer blame to the victim is Whooter's way. It's really sad that anyone would behave this way, but here you see it on full display from a self-proclaimed "moderate" who will literally say or do anything to invalidate the abused.
Anyway, get it all out now before you get pulled from the program.
You tried convincing people that I called you a "child rapist".
Well, I didn't have to try very hard. You toss that accusation around here at pretty much everybody. You just did it again in your last post, this time via your "phony quote" strategy.
Here's another Whooter Classic with some of his views on how funny rape is:
You're just a plain ol' asshole, Who.
The way you're treated by everyone out in the world is the way you're treated here. The common link: You being an arrogant, know-it-all, last word-having, patronizing, condescending asshole.
Hope this helps!
Ha, Ha, Ha... Too funny.... You must have been one of those kids raped with a broom handle in your program (one of my favorites!)... Ha, Ha, Ha...
-
There you go, Dysfunction Junction. Get it out of your system, boy. You have limited time to practice your craft here so you might as well stick to your best work - accusing almost every other poster here who embarasses you of molesting their own children. It's what you do best and I think it really helps you to invalidate the abuse victims that had to endure your placement at programs you support.
Since Dysfunction Junction was exposed here for who he truly is he gets very angry and has to purge himself on the forum. Being fired from HLA threatened his income stream so he resorts to what you are reading in this thread. "Rape is a common word that I find funny," etc. Any way to transfer blame to the victim is Dysfunction Junction's way. It's really sad that anyone would behave this way, but here you see it on full display from a self-proclaimed "extremist" who will literally say or do anything to invalidate people who disagree with him.
Anyway, get it all out now before you get pulled from the program.
You tried convincing people that I called you a "child rapist".
Well, I apologize it is myself who uses the rape word.
Here's another Dysfunction JunctionClassic with some of his views on how funny rape is:
You're just a plain ol' asshole, Dysfunction Junction.
The way you're treated by everyone out in the world is the way you're treated here. The common link: You being an arrogant, know-it-all, last word-having, patronizing, condescending asshole.
Hope this helps!
Ha, Ha, Ha... Too funny.... You must have been one of those kids raped with a broom handle in your program (one of my favorites!)... Ha, Ha, Ha... Dont I laugh like Whooter?
DJ, you are a very sick person.
...
-
There you go, Dysfunction Junction. Get it out of your system, boy. You have limited time to practice your craft here so you might as well stick to your best work - accusing almost every other poster here who embarasses you of molesting their own children. It's what you do best and I think it really helps you to invalidate the abuse victims that had to endure your placement at programs you support.
Since Dysfunction Junction was exposed here for who he truly is he gets very angry and has to purge himself on the forum. Being fired from HLA threatened his income stream so he resorts to what you are reading in this thread. "Rape is a common word that I find funny," etc. Any way to transfer blame to the victim is Dysfunction Junction's way. It's really sad that anyone would behave this way, but here you see it on full display from a self-proclaimed "extremist" who will literally say or do anything to invalidate people who disagree with him.
Anyway, get it all out now before you get pulled from the program.
You tried convincing people that I called you a "child rapist".
Well, I apologize it is myself who uses the rape word.
Here's another Dysfunction JunctionClassic with some of his views on how funny rape is:
You're just a plain ol' asshole, Dysfunction Junction.
The way you're treated by everyone out in the world is the way you're treated here. The common link: You being an arrogant, know-it-all, last word-having, patronizing, condescending asshole.
Hope this helps!
Ha, Ha, Ha... Too funny.... You must have been one of those kids raped with a broom handle in your program (one of my favorites!)... Ha, Ha, Ha... Dont I laugh like Whooter?
DJ, you are a very sick person.
...
How do you function with all of your lie's and stories John. ??
-
How do you function with all of your lie's and stories John. ??
I think you mean "How do you dysfunction....", lol.
I'll give you a hint: (I didnt write it)
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390254#p390254)
...
-
So, out of concern, Whooter repeats it over and over, capitalized no less. Whooter are you TRYING to answer the question posed by the title of this thread? It is very hard to find something to say to you now that is not an insult, but I am trying. Your sickness is becoming clearer and clearer.
How clear is it now, Shadyacres?
-
Whooter are you TRYING to answer the question posed by the title of this thread?
No, Shady, I have not tried to answer this question but I can give it a try.
Thread question: How far will program pushers go to invalidate abuse victims?
Being a moderate myself I cannot answer this first hand because I don’t know any program pushers personally and fornits rarely has posters which are staunch pro-program. I have witnessed people invalidating each other all the time, regardless of position, here on fornits.
In one case that pops into my head there was a program survivor who committed suicide and a fornits poster would email this persons’ siblings to make fun of his family. These emails were posted in the open forum and not one person (except che) came out against the decision to harass the survivors’ siblings about the suicide. In my opinion this went beyond invalidating and exceeds anything that a program pusher would do.
So to answer your question I think that program pushers will not go as far as survivors would go to invalidate abuse victims. I dont think I have ever heard of a program pusher who ridiculed a suicide victim and his family.
...
-
Really? "Moderate"? Really? I don't think so, lol.
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
-
Really? "Moderate"? Really? I don't think so, lol.
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
With the absence of links I dont know which ones of those are actually mine. But as you can clearly see I will protect myself as anyone would. If I am attacked I will respond. But I think we can all agree the lowest level we have seen here is a "3 week survivor" (fornits regular) emailing families who had children who committed suicide just to make fun of the dead child and harass the siblings of this victim.
That is a different level in my opinion and many people stood around and watched and did not say a word. But that doesnt seem to concern many people here, interesting.
...
-
Oh, you wrote all of that. Your posts were strung together and there, laid bare, was the depth of your illness. So we know you said it, we just need to know why you and people like you would resort to this behavior while claiming to be "moderate," which clearly you are not.
So...why did you do that again? To me it looks like it's your attempt to descredit a source of information critical of a program to thereby invalidate the victims of the program's malpractice. You were doing this to me yesterday and I've seen you do it to several other posters as well.
Is it that you define "protecting yourself" as "accusing people of pedophilia"? It's a peculiar habit you have. Frankly it doesn't make any sense either. I can't see how this can be deemed "self protection," Whooter. You're making a vicious personal attack on someone who disagrees with you, not protecting yourself. Most people I think understand this.
-
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
I also asked him to provide examples of where I lied. He's yet to do that either.
And that post of his really is a prime example of the title of this thread. Not only is it filled with outright lies about my years before Straight, it was posted solely to try to hurt me and to take the focus off of him.
Sorry, Anne already answered the question. I must have missed it. Still, she did sum it up pretty well.
-
lol, our DJ has a bit of a temper when the truth comes out.
Fact One: This post shows Dysfunction Junction worked at Daytop at one time. It also shows that he had a felony conviction and prison sentance.
Fact Two: He no longer works in the TBS field. According to him he got disillusioned with the industry. I suspect he isn't allowed to be employed by them with a previous felony conviction as most TBS's do background checks for most of their employees usually.
I'll bust your fucking teeth down your throat, choke you until you nearly fall unconscious, then give you a wake-up kick to the temple and send you on your merry way. Your pain, suffering and disfigurement wouldn't matter .......
Look, DJ, you dont need to threaten everyone that disagrees with you. I think we all know that if it were not for your criminal past that you would still be working in the TT industry instead of posting here on fornits to establish a resume that doesnt exist in real life. Maybe when you took this anger of yours out on the kids is why HLA decide to release you and the fact that HLA found out about your drug conviction that you lied about.
...
-
After DJ calmed down he started blaming the law makers instead of taking responsibility for the fact that he was caught selling drugs to kids. They ended up being the abuse victims (victims of his drug sales) He is handing out advice to lie on your employment application. He invalidated the abuse victims by trying to blame the law instead of taking responsibility for his actions.
I personally would advise never to tell. Nothing good can come from it. Only REAL possibility is getting terminated on the spot.
DEFINITELY don't tell, even when asked.
The laws are all fucked up, yes. I ended up getting hit with 1-3 in NYS system for my first and only pop - no sale involved. However, I was CHARGED with A Class felony which carries 25-life in NY. ...
He moved out of New York state (Daytop) to try to get near kids again and fooled HLA for awhile but he found out real quick what happens when HLA found out that he was a jail bird with a felon background. DJs' own words : " getting terminated on the spot". This is why DJ spends his time trying to discredit HLA/RCS. He still blames them for his own mistakes.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=103722#p103722)
...
-
My comments in blue
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343)
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. (True, absolutely true. I was extremely shy and timid, never dropped out of school.) You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
Citation please. Please show me where I've changed my "story" or lied. I've asked you this before and you've yet to come up with an answer.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school (See above. I never dropped out of school) started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents A car accident.....ONE and I wasn't even driving.) and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. (where the hell did that come from? I don't recall saying anything close to that) You were having unsafe sex (And there it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
And I don't ever recall being "surly". :twofinger:
-
My comments in blue
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343)
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. (True, absolutely true. I was extremely shy and timid, never dropped out of school.) You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
Citation please. Please show me where I've changed my "story" or lied. I've asked you this before and you've yet to come up with an answer.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school (See above. I never dropped out of school) started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents A car accident.....ONE and I wasn't even driving.) and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. (where the hell did that come from? I don't recall saying anything close to that) You were having unsafe sex (And there it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
And I don't ever recall being "surly". :twofinger:
Thank you Anne, This clearly shows that I never brought up any topic of "Rape". That was Dysfunction Junction who brought up that topic.
...
-
My comments in blue
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=32341&hilit=sex&start=60#p384343)
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. (True, absolutely true. I was extremely shy and timid, never dropped out of school.) You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
Citation please. Please show me where I've changed my "story" or lied. I've asked you this before and you've yet to come up with an answer.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school (See above. I never dropped out of school) started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents A car accident.....ONE and I wasn't even driving.) and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. (where the hell did that come from? I don't recall saying anything close to that) You were having unsafe sex (And there it is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
And I don't ever recall being "surly". :twofinger:
Thank you Anne, This clearly shows that I never brought up any topic of "Rape". That was Dysfunction Junction who brought up that topic.
Maybe not, but you sure did insinuate that I had "unprotected sex", implying that I was a willing participant and that it was one of the reasons that I needed to be shipped off. Twist all you want.......you tried to make it seem like I was running around like a slut and that they sent me away to protect me from myself.
I also noticed that you didn't address the other lies that you stated in that post, as usual.
-
Thank you Anne, This clearly shows that I never brought up any topic of "Rape". That was Dysfunction Junction who brought up that topic.
Maybe not, but you sure did insinuate that I had "unprotected sex", implying that I was a willing participant and that it was one of the reasons that I needed to be shipped off.
Yes, I did say that, but I never mentioned anything about a rape. We both agree that DJ brought that into the discussion.
Twist all you want.......you tried to make it seem like I was running around like a slut and that they sent me away to protect me from myself.
I also noticed that you didn't address the other lies that you stated in that post, as usual.
You can read into it all you want, Anne. You never addressed the lies you told about me like working for the industry, being a shill or having made up having a daughter or multiple sons. How come it is always up to me to supply the links. Lets see you prove some of your own comments for a change.
...
-
OMG Whoot is implying that he deserves an apology from Anne? I wouldn't believe it had I not just read it there. I'm really starting to develop an intense dislike for you now Whooter. Just apolagize to everyone for your outrageous remarks and you can still retain some measure of believability. Otherwise you have just shot yourself in the foot big time.
-
OMG Whoot is implying that he deserves an apology from Anne? I wouldn't believe it had I not just read it there. I'm really starting to develop an intense dislike for you now Whooter. Just apolagize to everyone for your outrageous remarks and you can still retain some measure of believability. Otherwise you have just shot yourself in the foot big time.
I didnt ask for an apology. Anne just cleared up what everyone was confused about, yourself included. You yourself have been hollering that I called child rape "unprotected sex", here take a look:
You know I'm not gonna search out that particular thread (maybe somebody else will) and i shouldn't have to. We both know what you said. Why can't you just admit you misspoke when you equated child rape with unprotected sex. All you had to say was that you didn't really mean it that way and sincerly apolagize. The matter would have been completely closed then and there. You are keeping it going by not just dealing with it directly.
Whooter did call child rape "unprotected sex". It was brutal and as far as I can remember, he refused to apologize for this remark. Sorry Whoot but its true. Program pushers are ruthless in pursuing their agenda.
You even went as far as asking me to apologize for something I had repeatedly told you I did not say. You attack and accuse people of things they did not do as is evident in your above responses, Shaggys. I dont expect you to apologize because you are not the type.
DJ brought the whole Rape issue up, but I expect you to give him a pass on that because he is anti-program, am I right?
...
-
No John, you're wrong. Of course you're too arrogant to accept that so why don't you take a moment to clear up your position. Do you really feel that Anne being raped was her fault? Yes or no John. No spinning. Yes or no.
-
Wow! This thread is full-on Whooter-flail now. See, Whooter got caught and admitted "fabricating his family," that is, making up family/program stories to try to promote abusive programs. He got pinched and had to admit it.
I fabricated a son
I admit that Anne
So Anne was pushing him to get honest about the other kids he "fabricated" and he got mad and made up a story about when she was a 15 year old child having "unsafe sex," etc, but Anne had already said on the board, and Whooter responded to it so he knew about it, that the only "sex" she had prior to Straight was being raped.
We all called Whooter on his lies about Anne and his calling child rape "unsafe sex." Since he said this he keeps getting called on it and is now just lashing out at everyone who tries to make him accountable for his remarks.
He made up a whole story about me for sticking up for Anne and calling him out for his lies, but, as usual he got all the details wrong and just ended up with a fairy tale that he posts repetitively when he's caught lying.
In addition, he's on the cusp of a lifetime ban from Fornits and he admits he has a "Fornits-centric life," meaning he does Fornits all day and night every day and night while neglecting his family, fabricated or not. Lol.
But let's go back to the root of Whooter's real anger:
I was arrested several times in Boston and Ann Arbor Michigan. It was a long time ago, but I did have to do a prison sentence for sexually abusing several kids, including my own daughter. When I got locked up I was really scared because you know how other criminals treat sex offenders. I was in an isolation cell in protective custody in the sex offender wing of the prison, so I didn't have to fight to protect myself. I just did my time and after a seven years I was out, my debt to society paid. I don't know why you people keep bringing it up when I already explained it.
This is why Whooter always tries to redfine rape as "flirting" or "masturbation" because if he changs the definition, he won't feel so guilty about how he sodomized those children. But you can see he still has a lot of issues with it and is currently barred from being around children, which is why the court took his daughter from him and he had to make up a whole new story about how SHE was the "bad one" and had to be sent away to reform school, when actually she was taken from him and put in foster care because he sexually molested her. This is why he dreamed up his "program story." And also why he won't say why his daughter was sent away (or taken away, as it were).
That's Whooter's sad story and it's why he gets so angry and starts accusing people of being child molesters - he knows the stigma associated with child molesters because he wears the "scarlet M" everywhere he goes. He can never get off the sex offender registry, so he wants people to believe others are on it with him, but he's alone. He's the only child rapist here on Fornits. And he admitted it.
-
Seems this thread is about DJ and his invalidation of abuse victims
Fact One: This post shows Dysfunction Junction worked at Daytop at one time. It also shows that he had a felony conviction and prison sentance.
Fact Two: He no longer works in the TBS field. According to him he got disillusioned with the industry. I suspect he isn't allowed to be employed by them with a previous felony conviction as most TBS's do background checks for most of their employees usually.
I'll bust your fucking teeth down your throat, choke you until you nearly fall unconscious, then give you a wake-up kick to the temple and send you on your merry way. Your pain, suffering and disfigurement wouldn't matter .......
Look, DJ, you dont need to threaten everyone that disagrees with you. I think we all know that if it were not for your criminal past that you would still be working in the TT industry instead of posting here on fornits to establish a resume that doesnt exist in real life. Maybe when you took this anger of yours out on the kids is why HLA decide to release you and the fact that HLA found out about your drug conviction that you lied about.
...
-
Lets not forget! lol
I like to go with the reports that supply links
Lets not forget your past DJ:
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390164#p390164)
...
-
Making up phony quotes isn't going to make this go away, Whooter. I'm sorry, people here are very forgiving, but molesting your own daughter and having her taken to fostercare while making up a story of how you "helped her by putting her in a program" doesn't cut it anymore. You molested your child, admitted it and think we're all just going to give you a free pass when you act out? I don't think so. Your run here is just about over, so I guess you need to get in your last licks before you disappear for good. It still doesn't change your confession about molesting your daughter.
Wow! This thread is full-on Whooter-flail now. See, Whooter got caught and admitted "fabricating his family," that is, making up family/program stories to try to promote abusive programs. He got pinched and had to admit it.
I fabricated a son
I admit that Anne
So Anne was pushing him to get honest about the other kids he "fabricated" and he got mad and made up a story about when she was a 15 year old child having "unsafe sex," etc, but Anne had already said on the board, and Whooter responded to it so he knew about it, that the only "sex" she had prior to Straight was being raped.
We all called Whooter on his lies about Anne and his calling child rape "unsafe sex." Since he said this he keeps getting called on it and is now just lashing out at everyone who tries to make him accountable for his remarks.
He made up a whole story about me for sticking up for Anne and calling him out for his lies, but, as usual he got all the details wrong and just ended up with a fairy tale that he posts repetitively when he's caught lying.
In addition, he's on the cusp of a lifetime ban from Fornits and he admits he has a "Fornits-centric life," meaning he does Fornits all day and night every day and night while neglecting his family, fabricated or not. Lol.
But let's go back to the root of Whooter's real anger:
I was arrested several times in Boston and Ann Arbor Michigan. It was a long time ago, but I did have to do a prison sentence for sexually abusing several kids, including my own daughter. When I got locked up I was really scared because you know how other criminals treat sex offenders. I was in an isolation cell in protective custody in the sex offender wing of the prison, so I didn't have to fight to protect myself. I just did my time and after a seven years I was out, my debt to society paid. I don't know why you people keep bringing it up when I already explained it.
This is why Whooter always tries to redfine rape as "flirting" or "masturbation" because if he changs the definition, he won't feel so guilty about how he sodomized those children. But you can see he still has a lot of issues with it and is currently barred from being around children, which is why the court took his daughter from him and he had to make up a whole new story about how SHE was the "bad one" and had to be sent away to reform school, when actually she was taken from him and put in foster care because he sexually molested her. This is why he dreamed up his "program story." And also why he won't say why his daughter was sent away (or taken away, as it were).
That's Whooter's sad story and it's why he gets so angry and starts accusing people of being child molesters - he knows the stigma associated with child molesters because he wears the "scarlet M" everywhere he goes. He can never get off the sex offender registry, so he wants people to believe others are on it with him, but he's alone. He's the only child rapist here on Fornits. And he admitted it.
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past. My victim was my own daughter.
...
Changing your quote to put my name on it doesn't change your sex offender registation status, now does it, Whooter? You are a sad and desperate man.
-
I was abused in a program that the poster whooter recommended to my parents. The staff licked my bottom and forced me to perform oral sex on them my first day there. They made me touch their dogs in places that I don’t want to talk about. I ran away and my parents are suing the program. I am scared for life.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=335866#p335866)
-
After DJ calmed down he started blaming the law makers instead of taking responsibility for the fact that he was caught selling drugs to kids. They ended up being the abuse victims (victims of his drug sales) He is handing out advice to lie on your employment application. He invalidated the abuse victims by trying to blame the law instead of taking responsibility for his actions.
I personally would advise never to tell. Nothing good can come from it. Only REAL possibility is getting terminated on the spot.
DEFINITELY don't tell, even when asked.
The laws are all fucked up, yes. I ended up getting hit with 1-3 in NYS system for my first and only pop - no sale involved. However, I was CHARGED with A Class felony which carries 25-life in NY. ...
He moved out of New York state (Daytop) to try to get near kids again and fooled HLA for awhile but he found out real quick what happens when HLA found out that he was a jail bird with a felon background. DJs' own words : " getting terminated on the spot". This is why DJ spends his time trying to discredit HLA/RCS. He still blames them for his own mistakes.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=103722#p103722)
...
-
This hasn't changed. Phony quotes don't make your past go away, Whooter. I'm sorry, but you have to be accountable.
Making up phony quotes isn't going to make this go away, Whooter. I'm sorry, people here are very forgiving, but molesting your own daughter and having her taken to fostercare while making up a story of how you "helped her by putting her in a program" doesn't cut it anymore. You molested your child, admitted it and think we're all just going to give you a free pass when you act out? I don't think so. Your run here is just about over, so I guess you need to get in your last licks before you disappear for good. It still doesn't change your confession about molesting your daughter.
Wow! This thread is full-on Whooter-flail now. See, Whooter got caught and admitted "fabricating his family," that is, making up family/program stories to try to promote abusive programs. He got pinched and had to admit it.
I fabricated a son
I admit that Anne
So Anne was pushing him to get honest about the other kids he "fabricated" and he got mad and made up a story about when she was a 15 year old child having "unsafe sex," etc, but Anne had already said on the board, and Whooter responded to it so he knew about it, that the only "sex" she had prior to Straight was being raped.
We all called Whooter on his lies about Anne and his calling child rape "unsafe sex." Since he said this he keeps getting called on it and is now just lashing out at everyone who tries to make him accountable for his remarks.
He made up a whole story about me for sticking up for Anne and calling him out for his lies, but, as usual he got all the details wrong and just ended up with a fairy tale that he posts repetitively when he's caught lying.
In addition, he's on the cusp of a lifetime ban from Fornits and he admits he has a "Fornits-centric life," meaning he does Fornits all day and night every day and night while neglecting his family, fabricated or not. Lol.
But let's go back to the root of Whooter's real anger:
I was arrested several times in Boston and Ann Arbor Michigan. It was a long time ago, but I did have to do a prison sentence for sexually abusing several kids, including my own daughter. When I got locked up I was really scared because you know how other criminals treat sex offenders. I was in an isolation cell in protective custody in the sex offender wing of the prison, so I didn't have to fight to protect myself. I just did my time and after a seven years I was out, my debt to society paid. I don't know why you people keep bringing it up when I already explained it.
This is why Whooter always tries to redfine rape as "flirting" or "masturbation" because if he changs the definition, he won't feel so guilty about how he sodomized those children. But you can see he still has a lot of issues with it and is currently barred from being around children, which is why the court took his daughter from him and he had to make up a whole new story about how SHE was the "bad one" and had to be sent away to reform school, when actually she was taken from him and put in foster care because he sexually molested her. This is why he dreamed up his "program story." And also why he won't say why his daughter was sent away (or taken away, as it were).
That's Whooter's sad story and it's why he gets so angry and starts accusing people of being child molesters - he knows the stigma associated with child molesters because he wears the "scarlet M" everywhere he goes. He can never get off the sex offender registry, so he wants people to believe others are on it with him, but he's alone. He's the only child rapist here on Fornits. And he admitted it.
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past. My victim was my own daughter.
...
Changing your quote to put my name on it doesn't change your sex offender registation status, now does it, Whooter? You are a sad and desperate man.
-
This hasn't changed. Phony quotes don't make your past go away, DJ. I'm sorry, but you have to be accountable.
Notice I supply links!! lol Look at the edit stamps!!!
I would not listen to “TheWho” cuz I was abused in a program. I’m pissed off cuz people do not believe that kids like me got sent to isolation. I was put in a small room for 2 days with no windows and was only allowed out to use the bathroom. I was not allowed to shower. I did not make any mistakes to daserve this. I will post more later.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=335674#p335674)
...
-
There is no greater crime than that which is committed against a child. A child does not have the skills or abilities to handle any form of abuse. A child withdraws from society and in adulthood can becomes a recluse. A sad damaging fact far worse than the original crime. Living alone away from the world.
Just something to think about.
Child abusers should receive the harshest penalties permissible by law.
...
I agree.
I was arrested several times in Boston and Ann Arbor Michigan. It was a long time ago, but I did have to do a prison sentence for sexually abusing several kids, including my own daughter. When I got locked up I was really scared because you know how other criminals treat sex offenders. I was in an isolation cell in protective custody in the sex offender wing of the prison, so I didn't have to fight to protect myself. I just did my time and after a seven years I was out, my debt to society paid. I don't know why you people keep bringing it up when I already explained it.
...
This wasn't harsh enough.
-
Yes, I did say that, but I never mentioned anything about a rape. We both agree that DJ brought that into the discussion.
No, we don't agree (we had an agreement that you wouldn't use the word "we" and I wouldn't use the word "shill". I've held up my end) on that. I've been away for a while so I have no idea if you did or didn't say that. However, you did twist what I said to further your agenda. You implied that I was behaving like a slut and I never said anything close to that. And it's especially egregious that you would take my rape and twist it into saying that I was having "unprotected sex". That's really, really low.
You can read into it all you want, Anne. You never addressed the lies you told about me like working for the industry, being a shill or having made up having a daughter or multiple sons.
Before we came to the agreement that I wouldn't use the word "shill" and you wouldn't use the word "we". Since then I haven't called you a shill. I said that I believed that you were working in some way for the industry, be it a strict employee or an Educational Consultant or a referral agency. I don't believe I ever said for sure that you were either. And you've admitted that you fabricated a fictitious son.
How come it is always up to me to supply the links. Lets see you prove some of your own comments for a change.
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
-
Lets not forget! lol
I like to go with the reports that supply links
Lets not forget your past DJ:
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390164#p390164)
That's a link to a quote that you could very well have edited. How 'bout the original link?
-
No, we don't agree (we had an agreement that you wouldn't use the word "we" and I wouldn't use the word "shill". I've held up my end) on that. I've been away for a while so I have no idea if you did or didn't say that. However, you did twist what I said to further your agenda. You implied that I was behaving like a slut and I never said anything close to that. And it's especially egregious that you would take my rape and twist it into saying that I was having "unprotected sex". That's really, really low.
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
Before we came to the agreement that I wouldn't use the word "shill" and you wouldn't use the word "we". Since then I haven't called you a shill. I said that I believed that you were working in some way for the industry, be it a strict employee or an Educational Consultant or a referral agency. I don't believe I ever said for sure that you were either. And you've admitted that you fabricated a fictitious son.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters. I have explained this clearly enough to you, but you like to twist and mislead to fit your agenda. If you act a certain way towards someone then you should expect to be treated the same way in return.
...
-
Yes, I did say that, but I never mentioned anything about a rape. We both agree that DJ brought that into the discussion.
No, we don't agree (we had an agreement that you wouldn't use the word "we" and I wouldn't use the word "shill". I've held up my end) on that. I've been away for a while so I have no idea if you did or didn't say that. However, you did twist what I said to further your agenda. You implied that I was behaving like a slut and I never said anything close to that. And it's especially egregious that you would take my rape and twist it into saying that I was having "unprotected sex". That's really, really low.
You can read into it all you want, Anne. You never addressed the lies you told about me like working for the industry, being a shill or having made up having a daughter or multiple sons.
Before we came to the agreement that I wouldn't use the word "shill" and you wouldn't use the word "we". Since then I haven't called you a shill. I said that I believed that you were working in some way for the industry, be it a strict employee or an Educational Consultant or a referral agency. I don't believe I ever said for sure that you were either. And you've admitted that you fabricated a fictitious son.
How come it is always up to me to supply the links. Lets see you prove some of your own comments for a change.
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
Whooter, you did say you fabricated a son and you also posed as the parent of another son on another thread so I think that's where she gets sons plural from. Right after that you attacked her and said her rape was unsafe sex. I read it in this thread. I mean, I'm fine with what you said. She deserved it. But you did say it.
-
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
:rofl:
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters.
You admitted making up a son/daughter (I can't keep track anymore). So what am I to think?
-
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. People who have been raped can also have sex willingly with others.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
:rofl:
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters. I explained why I did it and when. It was very clear to you.
You admitted making up a son/daughter (I can't keep track anymore). So what am I to think?
So there you go again, Anne, lol. If you want to toss aside my explanations then so can the rest of us. I cant keep track (and neither could your parents) of how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good. Why is it okay for you to twist my words to further your agenda but you dont want others to twist your words?
If you are fair and honest I will be too.
...
-
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. People who have been raped can also have sex willingly with others.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
:rofl:
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters. I explained why I did it and when. It was very clear to you.
You admitted making up a son/daughter (I can't keep track anymore). So what am I to think?
So there you go again, Anne, lol. If you want to toss aside my explanations then so can the rest of us. I cant keep track (and neither could your parents) of how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good. Why is it okay for you to twist my words to further your agenda but you dont want others to twist your words?
If you are fair and honest I will be too.
...
QFT. Reported to moderator.
-
Lets not forget! lol
I like to go with the reports that supply links
Lets not forget your past DJ:
I was fired for what I did when they found out and now I am paying for it in prison.............I know firsthand what I am talking about because I molested a child in the past.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390164#p390164)
That's a link to a quote that you could very well have edited. How 'bout the original link?
Follow it through it links back to the original. Its interesting that you never ask DJ for a link, he rarely provides links.
...
-
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. People who have been raped can also have sex willingly with others.
But that's not what you were insinuating. This is what you were insinuating.....
I cant keep track (and neither could your parents) of how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
Did you or did you not create a fictitious son/daughter? I don't give a shit about your reasons....did you do it?
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters. I explained why I did it and when. It was very clear to you.
You DID make up a son/daughter. Doesn't matter why.
I cant keep track (and neither could your parents) of how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good.
Classy ::)
How do you come by this "information"?
-
But that's not what you were insinuating. This is what you were insinuating.....
I cant keep track (and neither could your parents) of how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good.
exactly, Anne, Someone else brought rape into this. I was not me, it is clear you and I agree on this.
You DID make up a son/daughter. Doesn't matter why.
So why people do things doesnt matter to you? That is very telling, Anne.
Classy ::)
How do you come by this "information"?
Your fabricated son/daughter is classy also, Anne. You can find the information in the same thread where you claimed I fabricated son(s) and daughters(s). Also where you claimed I said I worked for the industry.
...
-
"How far will program pushers go to invalidate abuse victims?" This thread has turned into exactly what it was designed to expose.
A girl, raped at 15, was just "having unsafe sex" according to the program pusher.
Just look at the program pusher attack victims to try to minimize their abuse and blame it on them instead of the people who committed crimes against them when they were children.
It's disgusting and it's wrong.
-
"How far will program pushers go to invalidate abuse victims?" This thread has turned into exactly what it was designed to expose.
A girl, raped at 15, was just "having unsafe sex" according to the program pusher.
Just look at the program pusher attack victims to try to minimize their abuse and blame it on them instead of the people who committed crimes against them when they were children.
It's disgusting and it's wrong.
:tup: :notworthy:
-
exactly, Anne, Someone else brought rape into this. I was not me, it is clear you and I agree on this.
So you're playing the semantics game again.
You DID make up a son/daughter. Doesn't matter why.
So why people do things doesnt matter to you? That is very telling, Anne.
When it comes to something like what you did, no......it doesn't. You fabricated a son/daughter in order to advance your agenda.
Classy ::)
How do you come by this "information"?
Your fabricated son/daughter is classy also, Anne.
Exactly my point. MY fabricated daughter?? Where, exactly, did you come up with this one?
You can find the information in the same thread where you claimed I fabricated son(s) and daughters(s). Also where you claimed I said I worked for the industry.
I said it was my belief. I did not state it as a fact. There is a difference Mr. Black/White
Now, answer the question......did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter and where are you getting this information........
"how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good."
-
"How far will program pushers go to invalidate abuse victims?" This thread has turned into exactly what it was designed to expose.
A girl, raped at 15, was just "having unsafe sex" according to the program pusher.
Just look at the program pusher attack victims to try to minimize their abuse and blame it on them instead of the people who committed crimes against them when they were children.
It's disgusting and it's wrong.
I think this is one of the few times that we agree, DJ. I think to bring up another person being raped and discussing it openly on a forum without the victims consent is insensitive at the very least. Victims of rape should be allowed the time and place to talk about their tragedy of their own choosing. There is is a certain ex-staff program pusher (one who pushes programs down) from HLA who likes to dig up and expose survivors personal injuries and discuss them openly on the internet. To me this is wrong. Maybe he gains a sense of power by doing this, I really dont know. I understand that other people dont have a problem with this, but it is my personal view.
...
-
"How far will program pushers go to invalidate abuse victims?" This thread has turned into exactly what it was designed to expose.
A girl, raped at 15, was just "having unsafe sex" according to the program pusher.
Just look at the program pusher attack victims to try to minimize their abuse and blame it on them instead of the people who committed crimes against them when they were children.
It's disgusting and it's wrong.
That's the entire M.O. of LGAT-type programs. Blame the victim. Everything is the kids fault. It helps parents to alleviate their guilt/responsibility.
-
When it comes to something like what you did, no......it doesn't. You fabricated a son/daughter in order to advance your agenda.
Anne, you are not being truthful and your intentions are not sincere. I explained this to you several times in the past. You expect others to be truthful you need to be truthful yourself. I wont respond further to this subject.
...
-
When it comes to something like what you did, no......it doesn't. You fabricated a son/daughter in order to advance your agenda.
Anne, you are not being truthful and your intentions are not sincere. I explained this to you several times in the past. You expect others to be truthful you need to be truthful yourself.
Dude......you're cooked and this thread has proven that more than any of the others. Please name where I've been "untruthful".
I wont respond further to this subject.
Gee......I wonder why? ::)
-
exactly, Anne, Someone else brought rape into this. I was not me, it is clear you and I agree on this.
So you're playing the semantics game again.
You DID make up a son/daughter. Doesn't matter why.
So why people do things doesnt matter to you? That is very telling, Anne.
When it comes to something like what you did, no......it doesn't. You fabricated a son/daughter in order to advance your agenda.
Classy ::)
How do you come by this "information"?
Your fabricated son/daughter is classy also, Anne.
Exactly my point. MY fabricated daughter?? Where, exactly, did you come up with this one?
You can find the information in the same thread where you claimed I fabricated son(s) and daughters(s). Also where you claimed I said I worked for the industry.
I said it was my belief. I did not state it as a fact. There is a difference Mr. Black/White
Now, answer the question......did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter and where are you getting this information........
"how many times you had unprotected sex before your parents finally had to intervene for your own good."
I guess now we'll find out "how much FURTHER program pushers will go to invalidate abuse victims?" I was stunned he went this far, but I guess we could see even more if we wait. I'd like to know how Whooter came about creating this fake story of Anne Before Straight and how none of it turns out to be in any way even resembling the truth.
-
That's the entire M.O. of LGAT-type programs. Blame the victim. Everything is the kids fault. It helps parents to alleviate their guilt/responsibility.
Another way to view it ...... could be to Blame the program or the parents... Some survivors mantra: "I never did anything wrong to deserve being placed into a program, everything wrong in my life is due to them. Nothing is my fault, my parents raised me so therefore they are responsible for how I turned out!! lol
...
-
That's the entire M.O. of LGAT-type programs. Blame the victim. Everything is the kids fault. It helps parents to alleviate their guilt/responsibility.
Another way to view it ...... could be to Blame the program or the parents... Some survivors mantra: "I never did anything wrong to deserve being placed into a program, everything wrong in my life is due to them. Nothing is my fault, my parents raised me so therefore they are responsible for how I turned out!! lol
It's one or the other. Unless you just believe that some kids are just born bad.
You seriously don't think that the way kids are raised has anything to do with any "issues" they may or may not have??? You've really gone off the deep end.
-
I wont respond further to this subject.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
-
It's one or the other. Unless you just believe that some kids are just born bad.
You seriously don't think that the way kids are raised has anything to do with any "issues" they may or may not have??? You've really gone off the deep end.
I never said that Anne. You are making things up again. When you start to feel that I am making things up about you just remember these posts of yours. You will be treated the way you treat others. Now on to my response:
I believe that each situation is unique. The child is a result of his/her environment and genetic make up which could have some predisposed risks of depression, addiction etc. Some children are damaged by their unhealthy family life, some are not. Some kids get off track by siding with a bad group of kids which effects them adversely and come from a very healthy family structure. Each child arrives at the front steps of a program with a unique past. There is nothing black and white that can be said about these children and their past.
...
-
Let's get this resolved before we move on.
How does Whooter know about Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15?
Also, we still have the issue f the "fabricated son" which was created in direct response to someone accusing a program of abuse , so Whooter fabricated a son, lied that he went to that program and told his "success story" all just to invalidate that abused kid.
We need to clear up why this was done to that kid and to Anne before we move onto other excuses for other invalidations.
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
:rofl:
I do. You don't. You twist what people say and pull quotes out of context to fit your agenda.
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters.
You admitted making up a son/daughter (I can't keep track anymore). So what am I to think?
-
I think we should try to understand why DJ brought up Anne Bonneys rape without her consent also.
...
-
I think we should try to understand why DJ brought up Anne Bonneys rape without her consent also.
...
I gave consent.
OK, that's resolved, so we need to go back to Whooter's assertions about Anne and see the proof he has of what he purported to be Anne's behavior. Keep in mind he never knew Anne, doesn't now and claims to know her sexual history from 30 years ago. This should be interesting and informative.
Please, go ahead and explain, Whooter.
-
I think we should try to understand why DJ has a need to focus on Annes Rape in this thread. No one has made an issue of it except him. No one brought it up in any of the arguments except him and one time shaggys did. Is this possibly a fixation that he has? It would be interesting to get to the bottom of this and find some answers. It is a little troubling.
...
-
We're past that. Anne doesn't care and neither does anyone else. Now, what we need to know is where did you get your information about Anne's sex life thirty years ago when she was 15. Any links? Newspaper articles? Wikipedia entries ; ) Anything? Or can we just conclude you made it up as a means to try to hurt her for pointing out your fabricated son?
-
We're past that. Anne doesn't care and neither does anyone else. Now, what we need to know is where did you get your information about Anne's sex life thirty years ago when she was 15. Any links? Newspaper articles? Wikipedia entries ; ) Anything? Or can we just conclude you made it up as a means to try to hurt her for pointing out your fabricated son?
Just out of the blue we were talking about how far program pushers will go to invalidate abuse victims and you start talking about Anne Bonney being raped. Why is that DJ? What is it about that subject that keeps you having to insert it into every conversation? You have been fixated on this for a few months now and when we ask you about it you try to blame me and others for bring up. Your whole manner on this thread is troubling, DJ.
...
-
It's one or the other. Unless you just believe that some kids are just born bad.
You seriously don't think that the way kids are raised has anything to do with any "issues" they may or may not have??? You've really gone off the deep end.
I never said that Anne. You are making things up again.
Really???
That's the entire M.O. of LGAT-type programs. Blame the victim. Everything is the kids fault. It helps parents to alleviate their guilt/responsibility.
Another way to view it ...... could be to Blame the program or the parents... Some survivors mantra: "I never did anything wrong to deserve being placed into a program, everything wrong in my life is due to them. Nothing is my fault, my parents raised me so therefore they are responsible for how I turned out!! lol
-
Another way to view it ...... could be to Blame the program or the parents... Some survivors mantra: "I never did anything wrong to deserve being placed into a program, everything wrong in my life is due to them. Nothing is my fault, my parents raised me so therefore they are responsible for how I turned out!! lol
I thought I would hi-light that for ya!!
...
-
Let's get this resolved before we move on.
How does Whooter know about Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15?
I'd like an answer to that as well.
Also, we still have the issue f the "fabricated son" which was created in direct response to someone accusing a program of abuse , so Whooter fabricated a son, lied that he went to that program and told his "success story" all just to invalidate that abused kid.
:tup:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Semantics
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
Did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter?
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters.
Did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter?
-
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
I also asked him to provide examples of where I lied. He's yet to do that either.
And that post of his really is a prime example of the title of this thread. Not only is it filled with outright lies about my years before Straight, it was posted solely to try to hurt me and to take the focus off of him.
We're discussing this. Anne's waiting for you to either show her evidence that what you said was true (For the record she says you are lying, see above) or to admit you made it up to hurt her and we can move on.
I think she has a legitimate right to know why you would say something so ugly and false about someone just because they caught you fabricating a child. The post just before you invented this story was asking you directly about your fabricated family members and you went off on Anne with the above lie-laden falsehood streak. So that's what set you off, but why would you go this far with your disgusting lies about Anne? That's what needs to be explained.
-
Thanks,DJ, for clearing up the fact that I never mentioned the word "Rape". I am just sitting here scratching my head wondering why you focus so much on this area. As an example, Just out of the blue, we were talking about how far program pushers will go to invalidate abuse victims and you start talking about Anne Bonney being raped. Why is that DJ? What is it about that subject that keeps you having to insert it into every conversation? You have been fixated on this for a few months now and when we ask you about it you try to blame me and others for bring up. Your whole manner on this thread is troubling, DJ.
I would like to see this resolved.
...
-
Here's the link to Whooter "fabricating his son," as it were. Notice Mr. "I Take Accountability" (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=344767#p344767) has gone back and edited the contents of his post.
Now we just want to know why a self-proclaimed "truth seeker" would lie about having a kid he didn't have and also make up his "program story" too.
And, the main point of this thread so far is we need to hear why Whooter was talking about Anne's childhood "sex life" when he could not possibly know anything about it even going as far as to call a rape simply the 15 year old child "having unsafe sex." And deserving getting sent to a program for it. This is a far length to go to in order to punch back at someone who caught you making up a kid.
-
Here's the link to Whooter "fabricating his son," as it were. Notice Mr. "I Take Accountability" (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=344767#p344767) has gone back and edited the contents of his post.
Now we just want to know why a self-proclaimed "truth seeker" would lie about having a kid he didn't have and also make up his "program story" too.
And, the main point of this thread so far is we need to hear why Whooter was talking about Anne's childhood "sex life" when he could not possibly know anything about it even going as far as to call a rape simply the 15 year old child "having unsafe sex." And deserving getting sent to a program for it. This is a far length to go to in order to punch back at someone who caught you making up a kid.
Here is DJ bringing up Anne Bonneys rape yet again, unbelievable. Anne and I already agreed that I never brought her rape into the conversation. You brought it up. Here take a look:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
Your continuous fixation is troubling, DJ. You are the only one on this thread that keeps bringing it up. why is that?
...
-
Anne wants an answer, too. Just answer the lady already.
Let's get this resolved before we move on.
How does Whooter know about Anne's "sex life" at the age of 15?
I'd like an answer to that as well.
Also, we still have the issue f the "fabricated son" which was created in direct response to someone accusing a program of abuse , so Whooter fabricated a son, lied that he went to that program and told his "success story" all just to invalidate that abused kid.
:tup:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Semantics
But just to say I made up a son is misleading. I was trying to protect another poster at the time. If you added that in when you brought it up you would be more sincere and less misleading.
Did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter?
So do you, with your comments about me making up sons and daughters.
Did you or did you not fabricate a son/daughter?
-
Here's the link to Whooter "fabricating his son," as it were. Notice Mr. "I Take Accountability" (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=344767#p344767) has gone back and edited the contents of his post.
Now we just want to know why a self-proclaimed "truth seeker" would lie about having a kid he didn't have and also make up his "program story" too.
And, the main point of this thread so far is we need to hear why Whooter was talking about Anne's childhood "sex life" when he could not possibly know anything about it even going as far as to call a rape simply the 15 year old child "having unsafe sex." And deserving getting sent to a program for it. This is a far length to go to in order to punch back at someone who caught you making up a kid.
Here is DJ bringing up Anne Bonneys rape yet again, unbelievable. Anne and I already agreed that I never brought her rape into the conversation. You brought it up. Here take a look:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
Your continuous fixation is troubling, DJ. You are the only one on this thread that keeps bringing it up. why is that?
...
I would like to get an answer on this before we move forward, DJ. I find it disturbing that you continue to pry into this subject. Do you have a response?
...
-
I find it troubling that you call the rape of a 15 year old girl "unprotected sex" and Anne would like to know where you got your information because it's false. Just admit you made it up and we can talk about whatever you like. You fabricated a child, you would obviously fabricate Anne's story after she challenged you about the fabricated child. You made it up, Whooter. Just be honest for once.
-
I find it troubling that you call the rape of a 15 year old girl "unprotected sex" and Anne would like to know where you got your information because it's false. Just admit you made it up and we can talk about whatever you like. You fabricated a child, you would obviously fabricate Anne's story after she challenged you about the fabricated child. You made it up, Whooter. Just be honest for once.
There it is again. Anne Bonney and myself already agreed that I never brought this word up, DJ. I think you should try to explain why you try to insert this into every conversation. We can move on to other topics and issues but I need to feel comfortable about why you keep obsessing about Anne and her being attacked like that. It is troubling to me and I am sure many of the readers.
If you could take a minute to explain it may be helpful in understand why you continue like this.
...
-
It has been proven Whooter knew about the rape and intentionally called it "unsafe sex" to try to hurt Anne. He won't admit it now, but these posts prove it without a doubt.
I've talked about it here several times.
I never read it before.
...
Of course, you are a liar doing what you do most often - lying.
Many kids grow and suffer at home. Trying to get thru the teenage years is difficult at beast and their ican much pain involved as they grow.
That's the natural process that is supposed to happen. You guys take that away when you ship these kids off.
The pain and suffering may not be the result of the school but may be natural maturation. I think we can all point to many kids we knew who grew and matured at home and it wasnt considered a joyous occasion.
I've used this analogy before but it fits. I was raped when I was 15. It made me stronger eventually. I sure would go back in time and remove that night from my life if I could though. Whatever growth comes from abuse isn't worth it.
I was referring to the pain and suffering of growing up at home naturally, not kids that were beaten or raped.[/size] I believe pain and suffering can be a natural process of getting thru the teen years for most kids.
Not only have you read it many times, you responded to it several times as well. Drop this onto the "Lie Pile" Whooter is building.
He knew it and intentionally made the most hurtful comment he could (calling rape "unprotected sex") for the express purpose of punching Anne in the gut and shutting her down. It's deplorable that anyone would do this. But we've come to expect this behavior from Whooter.
-
There it is again. Anne Bonney and myself already agreed that I never brought this word up, DJ.
SEMANTICS
-
Read it and weep! lol
Anne and I already agreed that I never brought her rape into the conversation. You brought it up. Here take a look:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
Your continuous fixation is troubling, DJ. You are the only one on this thread that keeps bringing it up. why is that?
...
-
It actually was rape, although I didn't use that word. He was an adult and I was a child.
Whooter's playing the semantics game AGAIN to take the focus off of him.
-
Read it and weep! lol
Anne and I already agreed that I never brought her rape into the conversation. You brought it up. Here take a look:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
Your continuous fixation is troubling, DJ. You are the only one on this thread that keeps bringing it up. why is that?
But you keep inferring that I was a willing participant.....that it was part of my "norm" and that I was having "unprotected sex". Whether or not the actual word "rape" was used is irrelevant, but you know this. Same mindset as program staff.
-
You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Why did you do that, Whooter? It's a simple question, bro.
-
It actually was rape, although I didn't use that word. He was an adult and I was a child.
I am sorry that this was brought up in an open forum like this, Anne. I understand that you and DJ are friends but I still don't agree with his decision to bring up the fact that you were raped as a young girl. I consider it poor judgment. This should be reserved for a time and place when you are comfortable to speak about it.
...
-
It actually was rape, although I didn't use that word. He was an adult and I was a child.
I am sorry that this was brought up in an open forum like this, Anne.
Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze. I brought it up and have no problem talking about it.
I understand that you and DJ are friends
I know him as much as I know you. From postings only. Never met him, nor talked on the phone and probably PMed just as much as I have with you, which is a handful at best.
but I still don't agree with his decision to bring up the fact that you were raped as a young girl. I consider it poor judgment. This should be reserved for a time and place when you are comfortable to speak about it.
No, because it directly relates to how it was "treated" in Straight......pretty much how you've dealt with it here.
-
I understand that you and DJ are friends
I know him as much as I know you. From postings only. Never met him, nor talked on the phone and probably PMed just as much as I have with you, which is a handful at best.
But can't you see how similar you are? It's like he is your fellow kindred spirit, in the epic cosmic battle against the evil Whooter Empire. Whooter is an early riser, usually the first to post. Strangely enough, he also posts quite late many nights. I've heard the older you get the less you sleep, perhaps that explains it. But what's your routine, Anne?
You and DJ seem to start posting at about the same time each morning. It would seem you have somewhat similar routines, and also similar psychological needs, which is the only explanation for as why a sane adult person would dedicate themselves to feeding a troll, day in, day out. Do you get up about 6AM? Go for a job around the neighborhood, maybe? Or are you not that into health, and perhaps start the morning with a cigarette and coffee?
Well at some point, you kiss your family goodbye and sit down at the computer, and think to yourself... "Hmm, wonder what Whooter posted this morning?". You then log onto fornits, check what predictable, infinitely repeated argument Whooter made, and sign in and start responding. That leads into more topics of conversation and before you know it, you spent all day on the computer again, talking about hypothetical moral situations about how to handle adolescents in programs.
This, Dysfunction and Anne have both in common, some psychological need, some deep desire to have an intellectual and ego battle with Whooter. The reasons they give for this behavior are similar to what you'd hear from an alcoholic explaining why it's okay they drink everyday, all day long. It only makes sense to them. To us, shall I be as bold to call us sane, at least relatively speaking, on the outside looking in, well it's just confusing and appears as to be some sick form of self torture. Do these people not get bored of having the same argument, day in, day out? Do they really look forward every morning to sitting down and arguing with Whooter, once again?
Fornits does't seem to be a place where people come idly by and discuss things. The people who are regular posters on this forum have some need, some thing, that drives them to torture themselves with these behaviors. I can't say I know exactly what that need is. But luckily for the world it only seems to effect a minuscule portion of the survivor population. Most of us see fornits for the loony bin that it is. Although, it used to be good for entertainment. Now it's boring, predictable, and downright sad.
-
Daily Recap:
DJ continues to struggle with explaining why he brings up Anne Bonneys rape in every other post. He seemed desperate today in trying to pin the blame on someone else (myself) but failed miserably when faced with supplying links to back up his statements. The slam dunk was when Anne came out herself and stated that I never mentioned rape in my initial post which started this whole conversation in motion. He is a little piece:
Anne and I already agreed that I never brought her rape into the conversation. You brought it up. Here take a look:
Cut the crap, Anne, I never mentioned your Rape. You and I spoke about this in PM's. I never brought it up as a topic. If you can show me the post where you think I said that then I will apologize.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
...
...
-
John, I wonder if you could explain why you brought up and lied about Anne having unprotected sex as a child, and how you could possibly know about it?
-
John, I wonder if you could explain why you brought up and lied about Anne having unprotected sex as a child, and how you could possibly know about it?
John? You may have posted on the wrong thread. This recent discussion is mostly between Dysfunction Junction, Anne Bonney, Shaggys and myself.
...
-
I understand that you and DJ are friends
I know him as much as I know you. From postings only. Never met him, nor talked on the phone and probably PMed just as much as I have with you, which is a handful at best.
But can't you see how similar you are? It's like he is your fellow kindred spirit, in the epic cosmic battle against the evil Whooter Empire. Whooter is an early riser, usually the first to post. Strangely enough, he also posts quite late many nights. I've heard the older you get the less you sleep, perhaps that explains it. But what's your routine, Anne?
You and DJ seem to start posting at about the same time each morning. It would seem you have somewhat similar routines, and also similar psychological needs, which is the only explanation for as why a sane adult person would dedicate themselves to feeding a troll, day in, day out. Do you get up about 6AM? Go for a job around the neighborhood, maybe? Or are you not that into health, and perhaps start the morning with a cigarette and coffee?
Well at some point, you kiss your family goodbye and sit down at the computer, and think to yourself... "Hmm, wonder what Whooter posted this morning?". You then log onto fornits, check what predictable, infinitely repeated argument Whooter made, and sign in and start responding. That leads into more topics of conversation and before you know it, you spent all day on the computer again, talking about hypothetical moral situations about how to handle adolescents in programs.
This, Dysfunction and Anne have both in common, some psychological need, some deep desire to have an intellectual and ego battle with Whooter. The reasons they give for this behavior are similar to what you'd hear from an alcoholic explaining why it's okay they drink everyday, all day long. It only makes sense to them. To us, shall I be as bold to call us sane, at least relatively speaking, on the outside looking in, well it's just confusing and appears as to be some sick form of self torture. Do these people not get bored of having the same argument, day in, day out? Do they really look forward every morning to sitting down and arguing with Whooter, once again?
Fornits does't seem to be a place where people come idly by and discuss things. The people who are regular posters on this forum have some need, some thing, that drives them to torture themselves with these behaviors. I can't say I know exactly what that need is. But luckily for the world it only seems to effect a minuscule portion of the survivor population. Most of us see fornits for the loony bin that it is. Although, it used to be good for entertainment. Now it's boring, predictable, and downright sad.
That's quite a prose. I post during the day while I'm at work and it's slow. That's really about it. Conjure up whatever you want about my motives for posting. If it's so boring, predictable and sad then don't read it.
-
DJ continues to struggle with explaining why he brings up Anne Bonneys rape in every other post.
You brought up (and totally exaggerated) my sexual past in order to discredit my stating that there was no need for me to be in Straight. The way you stated it was not only wrong but the reason behind it was to imply that I needed to be in Straight. That's really about it. The word rape is inconsequential, however it was statutory rape if you want to get technical about it.
-
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. .
Is it just me, or is Whooter implying that SOME rape victims are "willing participants?" As in "she asked for it?" Whooter, you are even more fucked up than I originally thought. By definition, the only willing participant in a rape is the rapist. Whooter, however, seems to believe otherwise.
-
No, what needs to happen is for Whooter to end up in a situation where he thought he wanted to have sex but then decided no, I don't want to. But the other person who happens to be more dominate, stronger and violent decides well you are going to have sex whether you want to or not. Then proceeds to take what he wants. This is called rape, whether it is a prostitute, your wife or your virgin daughter. No!!!! Means!!!! No!!!!!
Statutory rape victims have usually been manipulated and or coerced into the actual sexual act from someone much older then them. The victims most always end up being hurt psychologically from the experience. This has been my experience with family members, friends and others I have had the benefit of assisting in the aftermath.
The children Whooter, remember!!! This is what this site is all about.
Whooter, you think this site is a fucking game, where you can play. You take what people share and you insult them with what they so graciously shared. Your a fucking asshole. Period!!!!!
I don't care if I get banned, censored or whatever. In my opinion as many others you just have to go and I mean as soon as possible.
You are a fool who's time has long passed.
Sorry everyone but this sensitive subject which is hard to read for me coupled with Whooters comments I just find entirely repugnant.
-
No, what needs to happen is for Whooter to end up in a situation where he thought he wanted to have sex but then decided no, I don't want to. But the other person who happens to be more dominate, stronger and violent decides well you are going to have sex whether you want to or not. Then proceeds to take what he wants. This is called rape, whether it is a prostitute, your wife or your virgin daughter. No!!!! Means!!!! No!!!!!
Statutory rape victims have usually been manipulated and or coerced into the actual sexual act from someone much older then them. The victims most always end up being hurt psychologically from the experience. This has been my experience with family members, friends and others I have had the benefit of assisting in the aftermath.
The children Whooter, remember!!! This is what this site is all about.
Whooter, you think this site is a fucking game, where you can play. You take what people share and you insult them with what they so graciously shared. Your a fucking asshole. Period!!!!!
I don't care if I get banned, censored or whatever. In my opinion as many others you just have to go and I mean as soon as possible.
You are a fool who's time has long passed.
Sorry everyone but this sensitive subject which is hard to read for me coupled with Whooters comments I just find entirely repugnant.
:tup:
-
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. .
Is it just me, or is Whooter implying that SOME rape victims are "willing participants?" As in "she asked for it?" Whooter, you are even more fucked up than I originally thought. By definition, the only willing participant in a rape is the rapist. Whooter, however, seems to believe otherwise.
That's pretty messed up. It explains a lot though.
-
No, what needs to happen is for Whooter to end up in a situation where he thought he wanted to have sex but then decided no, I don't want to. But the other person who happens to be more dominate, stronger and violent decides well you are going to have sex whether you want to or not. Then proceeds to take what he wants. This is called rape, whether it is a prostitute, your wife or your virgin daughter. No!!!! Means!!!! No!!!!!
Statutory rape victims have usually been manipulated and or coerced into the actual sexual act from someone much older then them. The victims most always end up being hurt psychologically from the experience. This has been my experience with family members, friends and others I have had the benefit of assisting in the aftermath.
The children Whooter, remember!!! This is what this site is all about.
Whooter, you think this site is a fucking game, where you can play. You take what people share and you insult them with what they so graciously shared. Your a fucking asshole. Period!!!!!
I don't care if I get banned, censored or whatever. In my opinion as many others you just have to go and I mean as soon as possible.
You are a fool who's time has long passed.
Sorry everyone but this sensitive subject which is hard to read for me coupled with Whooters comments I just find entirely repugnant.
:tup:
:tup: :tup: :nods:
-
John, I wonder if you could explain why you brought up and lied about Anne having unprotected sex as a child, and how you could possibly know about it?
John? You may have posted on the wrong thread. This recent discussion is mostly between Dysfunction Junction, Anne Bonney, Shaggys and myself.
...
Call yourself whatever you like, the question to you remains. Why did you bring up Anne having unprotected sex as a child and why did you lie about it?
-
"Program pushers" will go to just about ANY length to invalidate abuse victims...
The #1 rule at STRAIGHT INC. was "Confidentiality."
"What you see here, hear here (sic), and do here remains here."
If you broke this rule and got caught you were "started over."
This illustrates the type of oppressive mentality you are dealing with in regard to programs like STRAIGHT.
STRAIGHT INC is still in business today, but under different names (it began as a spin-off of The Seed, and sustains itself by forming offshoot organizations when the lawsuits get out of hand.) Perhaps someone could name a few of the current Straight-descendant programs, like Teen Challenge?
-
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. .
Is it just me, or is Whooter implying that SOME rape victims are "willing participants?" As in "she asked for it?" Whooter, you are even more fucked up than I originally thought. By definition, the only willing participant in a rape is the rapist. Whooter, however, seems to believe otherwise.
Its you, RTP2003. So this means that you are calling Anne Bonney , using your vernacular "even more fucked up than you originally thought." I think you should apologize to Anne for thinking this and taking her words out of context to further your agenda against me. Again you stand on other peoples backs to try to make a point. why dont you try to speak for yourself once in a while?
Next time try to follow along in the conversation to understand you said what before you embarrass yourself and insult Annes choice of words. I undestood what Anne meant and so did the other readers.
I never said that you said the word "rape". You did imply that I was having "unprotected sex", inferring that I was a willing participant.
To which I replied:
Yes, but I never said you were a willing participant in a rape. People who have been raped can also have sex willingly with others.
Link (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=390557#p390557)
...
-
Yet you are still unable to respond to the questions regarding why you brought up your claim that Anne was placed in Straight due to having unprotected sex or why you lied about it. Get on it son.
-
Yet you are still unable to respond to the questions regarding why you brought up your claim that Anne was placed in Straight due to having unprotected sex or why you lied about it. Get on it son.
He can't/won't. He made even more assumptions about my pre-Straight history. This thread shows that he's really gone off the deep end.
-
Yet you are still unable to respond to the questions regarding why you brought up your claim that Anne was placed in Straight due to having unprotected sex or why you lied about it. Get on it son.
He can't/won't. He made even more assumptions about my pre-Straight history. This thread shows that he's really gone off the deep end.
Assumptions are an awful thing arent they? Imagine if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry or their name was John Reuben, Peter or Alan Newman, or assumed they profited from the industry or assumed they were an EdCon.
Do you think people on fornits would ever make assumptions like this?
...
-
Yet you are still unable to respond to the questions regarding why you brought up your claim that Anne was placed in Straight due to having unprotected sex or why you lied about it. Get on it son.
He can't/won't. He made even more assumptions about my pre-Straight history. This thread shows that he's really gone off the deep end.
Assumptions are an awful thing arent they? Imagine if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry or their name was John Reuben, Peter or Alan Newman, or assumed they profited from the industry or assumed they were an EdCon.
Do you think people on fornits would ever make assumptions like this?
Even if you don't have any financial connection to the TTI, you sure are a Kool-Aid drinker about it. Kinda like a cult member that refuses to listen to anything other than what they've been taught.
Again.....what you've posted here shows that you've gone waaaaaayyyyy too far and will go to any lengths to defend programs. (I'm speaking of LGAT-type programs. I've never said that there are no teens that need help from time to time. Of course there are, but the programs we're talking about don't provide help. They do the opposite.)
-
Even if you don't have any financial connection to the TTI, you sure are a Kool-Aid drinker about it. Kinda like a cult member that refuses to listen to anything other than what they've been taught.
Again.....what you've posted here shows that you've gone waaaaaayyyyy too far and will go to any lengths to defend programs. (I'm speaking of LGAT-type programs. I've never said that there are no teens that need help from time to time. Of course there are, but the programs we're talking about don't provide help. They do the opposite.)
and that is okay, Anne. It all depends on perspective. The people you hang out with probably think you have a healthy view on the industry. I see it differently, I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight. Its not your fault, it is just the way it is, you were damaged by your experience along with your perspective on the industry. So what is in reality a person with an open mind and a moderate view on the industry is viewed by you as someone who is a kool-aid drinker because they dont side with your extreme viewpoints.
...
-
"Program pushers" will go to just about ANY length to invalidate abuse victims...
The #1 rule at STRAIGHT INC. was "Confidentiality."
"What you see here, hear here (sic), and do here remains here."
If you broke this rule and got caught you were "started over."
This illustrates the type of oppressive mentality you are dealing with in regard to programs like STRAIGHT.
STRAIGHT INC is still in business today, but under different names (it began as a spin-off of The Seed, and sustains itself by forming offshoot organizations when the lawsuits get out of hand.) Perhaps someone could name a few of the current Straight-descendant programs, like Teen Challenge?
:bump:
-
Even if you don't have any financial connection to the TTI, you sure are a Kool-Aid drinker about it. Kinda like a cult member that refuses to listen to anything other than what they've been taught.
Again.....what you've posted here shows that you've gone waaaaaayyyyy too far and will go to any lengths to defend programs. (I'm speaking of LGAT-type programs. I've never said that there are no teens that need help from time to time. Of course there are, but the programs we're talking about don't provide help. They do the opposite.)
and that is okay, Anne. It all depends on perspective. The people you hang out with probably think you have a healthy view on the industry. I see it differently, I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight.
And I've told you repeatedly that I'm not speaking about ALL programs.
-
"Program pushers" will go to just about ANY length to invalidate abuse victims...
The #1 rule at STRAIGHT INC. was "Confidentiality."
"What you see here, hear here (sic), and do here remains here."
If you broke this rule and got caught you were "started over."
This illustrates the type of oppressive mentality you are dealing with in regard to programs like STRAIGHT.
STRAIGHT INC is still in business today, but under different names (it began as a spin-off of The Seed, and sustains itself by forming offshoot organizations when the lawsuits get out of hand.) Perhaps someone could name a few of the current Straight-descendant programs, like Teen Challenge?
:bump:
:tup: :tup: :nods:
-
Even if you don't have any financial connection to the TTI, you sure are a Kool-Aid drinker about it. Kinda like a cult member that refuses to listen to anything other than what they've been taught.
Again.....what you've posted here shows that you've gone waaaaaayyyyy too far and will go to any lengths to defend programs. (I'm speaking of LGAT-type programs. I've never said that there are no teens that need help from time to time. Of course there are, but the programs we're talking about don't provide help. They do the opposite.)
and that is okay, Anne. It all depends on perspective. The people you hang out with probably think you have a healthy view on the industry. I see it differently, I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight.
And I've told you repeatedly that I'm not speaking about ALL programs.
Of course. I have told you several times that I only had a daughter placed in a program, but that still doesnt stop you from asking about the multiple sons and daughters. So we both may have to communicate things to each other more than once to get the other person to understand.
...
-
Even if you don't have any financial connection to the TTI, you sure are a Kool-Aid drinker about it. Kinda like a cult member that refuses to listen to anything other than what they've been taught.
Again.....what you've posted here shows that you've gone waaaaaayyyyy too far and will go to any lengths to defend programs. (I'm speaking of LGAT-type programs. I've never said that there are no teens that need help from time to time. Of course there are, but the programs we're talking about don't provide help. They do the opposite.)
and that is okay, Anne. It all depends on perspective. The people you hang out with probably think you have a healthy view on the industry. I see it differently, I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight.
And I've told you repeatedly that I'm not speaking about ALL programs.
Of course. I have told you several times that I only had a daughter placed in a program, but that still doesnt stop you from asking about the multiple sons and daughters.
Because you posted that you put a son in a program.
-
He attacked Anne for the same reason he did this:
Why, Whooter? Why do you call people pedophiles and accuse them of bestiality? Read your own words below and tell us again how you never did this. Why do you accuse others of doing this when the record is clear that it was you who did it?
And as far as Anne is concerned you have been involved in several threads where she told her personal story. You were and are aware of her sexual assault. Then you ridiculed her by calling her rape "unprotected sex." WHY DID YOU DO THIS?
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
He was called on the carpet for lying and went nuclear on the poster who caught him. Same thing with Anne. She pressed Whooter about his "fabricated sons" and Whooter popped a vein on her too. It's right on the firt page of this thread.
-
He attacked Anne for the same reason he did this:
Why, Whooter? Why do you call people pedophiles and accuse them of bestiality? Read your own words below and tell us again how you never did this. Why do you accuse others of doing this when the record is clear that it was you who did it?
And as far as Anne is concerned you have been involved in several threads where she told her personal story. You were and are aware of her sexual assault. Then you ridiculed her by calling her rape "unprotected sex." WHY DID YOU DO THIS?
In my experience reading Whooter's posts, whatever he is accusing someone else of is what he himself has actually done, usually many, many times.
To wit:
Pedophilia/Child Molestation
If your point is to just post laws, well, thats easy. There are thousands of them. I didnt see where the law you posted was written for AARC. The one posted pertains to people like yourself who abuse their kids sexually. At least mine has some credibility.
More pedophilia/Child Molestation
You are sick Ajax13. Stop molesting and abusing your son. Just because this poster proved you wrong is no reason to take it out on your own family. Its only a forum. Leave your kid in peace.
Bestiality (keep in mind he is posing as "RobertBruce" claiming to engage in bestiality while simultaneously trying to make people believe RobertBruce actually is TheWho, thereby transferring all of his nasty posts onto RobertBruce, so this is a double whammy - a survivor engaged in bestiality and a survivor posting all of TheWho's disgusting posts)
I only do dogs remember? woof, woof. Its me Bruce. Sorry I trolled you all those years and made you look foolish, but I was taking my anger out on you for my time in HLA. I retired TheWhos name to Ursus and now just post under RobertBruce or as a "Guest".
So here is indelible evidence that Whooter routinely accuses people of bestiality and child molestation. This is only two example of what are many.
Again, we all want to know, why does Whooter do this? The answer, I'm afraid, is simple - to invalidate abuse victims and take the power of their stories away.
Sometimes he's even more explicit in denying victims of abuse:
How would you know what a parent thinks, Who? You threw your daughter away to ASR, so you don't have the right to call yourself that anymore, and your continued use of the word is a heavy insult to the real parents reading this forum.
Kinda like the rest of you calling yourself survivors. Surviving what? A cush stay at RTC? Its an insult to people who actually survived something.
Only a very sick mind operates like this and, unfortunately, we here at Fornits have seen that Whooter is an exemplar of the behavior of all program pushers. They have all had the exact same M.O.
He was called on the carpet for lying and went nuclear on the poster who caught him. Same thing with Anne. She pressed Whooter about his "fabricated sons" and Whooter popped a vein on her too. It's right on the firt page of this thread.
:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy: :nods: :nods: :nods: :nods: :nods: :nods:
-
Because you posted that you put a son in a program.
and I explained why I did what I did. If you take a look at the thread and read the posts leading up to where I stated that it would be more clear to you why I said what I said. If the reason why a person says something doesn't matter to you than just say so and I will not try to explain the reasoning behind what I say. We can communicate in sound bites if that works. But I dont want to waste my breath if you are not interested.
...
-
Assumptions are an awful thing arent they? Imagine if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry or their name was John Reuben, Peter or Alan Newman, or assumed they profited from the industry or assumed they were an EdCon.
Do you think people on fornits would ever make assumptions like this?
You say this as if there were never any basis or evidence to bolster our claims concerning you. You provided all the support we needed to make our (true) claims against you. Here take a look:
if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry
And here's you giving us all a reason to believe that:
I have a fiduciary duty which prevents me from speaking in any specific terms in this area
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=24054&p=295949&hilit=fiduciary#p295949
As for the John Reuben:
3 Days maybe 4 I dont remember. A family member an aunt I think picked him up and went back with him. He wasnt forced to go, he was glad to get a break from that place.
Here you are answering your own questions about Max Reuben and attending his mother's funeral.
How else would you have such detailed information John?
In the meantime you have never backed up any of your lies about us. Not about myself, Anne, DJ, Ajax, or all the numerous others you've had to lie about after being proven wrong.
John I think your problem is you're so arrogant that you can't not talk about yourself and give us clues. You have such a high (misplaced) opinion of yourself and you feel you can read people's minds that you honestly think there's no way we would put the pieces together. I keep telling you, you'd probably be a lot better off if you could just get over yourself.
-
Assumptions are an awful thing arent they? Imagine if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry or their name was John Reuben, Peter or Alan Newman, or assumed they profited from the industry or assumed they were an EdCon.
Do you think people on fornits would ever make assumptions like this?
You say this as if there were never any basis or evidence to bolster our claims concerning you. You provided all the support we needed to make our (true) claims against you. Here take a look:
if someone assumed that they worked in the TT industry
And here's you giving us all a reason to believe that:
I have a fiduciary duty which prevents me from speaking in any specific terms in this area
http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=24054&p=295949&hilit=fiduciary#p295949
As for the John Reuben:
3 Days maybe 4 I dont remember. A family member an aunt I think picked him up and went back with him. He wasnt forced to go, he was glad to get a break from that place.
Here you are answering your own questions about Max Reuben and attending his mother's funeral.
How else would you have such detailed information John?
In the meantime you have never backed up any of your lies about us. Not about myself, Anne, DJ, Ajax, or all the numerous others you've had to lie about after being proven wrong.
John I think your problem is you're so arrogant that you can't not talk about yourself and give us clues. You have such a high (misplaced) opinion of yourself and you feel you can read people's minds that you honestly think there's no way we would put the pieces together. I keep telling you, you'd probably be a lot better off if you could just get over yourself.
In all fairness I will give this guy John a chance to respond to this before I jump in. I have a few points which may help to clear this up but it would not be fair to John if I jumped on his post.
...
-
As I said, call yourself whatever you like. The post was directed towards you.
-
"Program pushers" will go to just about ANY length to invalidate abuse victims...
The #1 rule at STRAIGHT INC. was "Confidentiality."
"What you see here, hear here (sic), and do here remains here."
If you broke this rule and got caught you were "started over."
This illustrates the type of oppressive mentality you are dealing with in regard to programs like STRAIGHT.
STRAIGHT INC is still in business today, but under different names (it began as a spin-off of The Seed, and sustains itself by forming offshoot organizations when the lawsuits get out of hand.) Perhaps someone could name a few of the current Straight-descendant programs, like Teen Challenge?
-
As I said, call yourself whatever you like. The post was directed towards you.
We all call ourselves what we like. You call yourself RobertBruce others Watchful Yeoman. I call myself Whooter. If you address the post to Peter, Alan Newman or John then it confuses the readers and myself. If you want me to respond to a specific post then you should indicate that. If I ask Watchful Yeoman a question I dont say Frank or Trevor. How would people understand the flow of the conversation or know why watchful Yeoman was answering another persons' post.
To make it easier for others to follow I will stick to answering posts directed towards Whooter. I hope this helps to clear things up for you.
...
-
Absolutely. I hope your fellow board of directors and family members know your username(s) and can figure all the crazy things you've been saying on here. In the meantime rest assured all posts directed towards "John" are meant for you. For the time being I'll refer to you as Whooter or it's derivatives.
-
Absolutely. I hope your fellow board of directors and family members know your username(s) and can figure all the crazy things you've been saying on here. In the meantime rest assured all posts directed towards "John" are meant for you. For the time being I'll refer to you as Whooter or it's derivatives.
Will you respond to Squiggy? I will take on the name "John" if you answer to Squiggy. Then we can both call Dysfunction Junction "Lenny". How does that sound?
Maybe we can call Anne "Shirley"?
Give it some thought.
...
-
As I've said to you many times before, I have no idea who Lenny or Squiggy is. You may refer to me as Robert, Bruce, Bob if you like, although it's seldom I hear that one aside from one guy in my office.
In the meantime I honestly wonder how in your overblown sense of arrogance you justify your inability to respond to all the questions and comments that tear apart your arguments or paint you into corners.
I mean obviously you believe you're far smarter than all the other people who post here (you aren't). So since you think that's true, why is it we seem able to repspond to whatever you throw our way, while you have to pick and choose while you try and sort out the toughies?
Let me know Hoot.
-
As I've said to you many times before, I have no idea who Lenny or Squiggy is. You may refer to me as Robert, Bruce, Bob if you like, although it's seldom I hear that one aside from one guy in my office.
In the meantime I honestly wonder how in your overblown sense of arrogance you justify your inability to respond to all the questions and comments that tear apart your arguments or paint you into corners.
I mean obviously you believe you're far smarter than all the other people who post here (you aren't). So since you think that's true, why is it we seem able to repspond to whatever you throw our way, while you have to pick and choose while you try and sort out the toughies?
Let me know Hoot.
Squiggy, anyone who has read here for even a short while knows I am not usually lost for words and dont shy away from any discussion. I dont believe I am smarter than anyone else. I just happen to be on the side of the argument which has more facts to back me up.
...
-
Squiggy, anyone who has read here for even a short while knows I am not usually lost for words and dont shy away from any discussion. I dont believe I am smarter than anyone else. I just happen to be on the side of the argument which has more facts to back me up.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Then for once in your life John, provide them. Back up any of your lies you've told about people on here.
-
Squiggy, anyone who has read here for even a short while knows I am not usually lost for words and dont shy away from any discussion. I dont believe I am smarter than anyone else. I just happen to be on the side of the argument which has more facts to back me up.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Then for once in your life John, provide them. Back up any of your lies you've told about people on here.
Squiggy, Anyone who has been reading here for even a few days realizes that I provide more links to back up what I say than yourself, Lenny and Laverne combined. If you check with the moderators they will tell you that I even received a warning for supplying too many links. I dont think you and Lenny can make that claim.
...
-
Squiggy, Anyone who has been reading here for even a few days realizes that I provide more links to back up what I say than yourself, Lenny and Laverne combined. If you check with the moderators they will tell you that I even received a warning for supplying too many links. I dont think you and Lenny can make that claim.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
We can Johnny, most of my own links are to stupid comments you've made and then tried to lie about later on. Usually you drop out of the conversation at that point and try to forget about the whole thing.
You don't back up anything with facts John. But if you're so certain that you do, by all means please link again to something proving one of your lies about myself, DJ, or Anne.
-
Squiggy, Anyone who has been reading here for even a few days realizes that I provide more links to back up what I say than yourself, Lenny and Laverne combined. If you check with the moderators they will tell you that I even received a warning for supplying too many links. I dont think you and Lenny can make that claim.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
We can Johnny, most of my own links are to stupid comments you've made and then tried to lie about later on. Usually you drop out of the conversation at that point and try to forget about the whole thing.
You don't back up anything with facts John. But if you're so certain that you do, by all means please link again to something proving one of your lies about myself, DJ, or Anne.
Look Squiggy, just because you are angry and losing the argument does not mean you can go off calling people liars. The Gatekeeper set up a thread for those who want to discredit each other in that manner. If you are struggling trying to express yourself and need to let off steam post it over in that thread and I will respond over there (or maybe I wont).
Off Topic discussions (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=32474)
...
-
Here's me John. You are a liar. You have never won a single argument against me. Not once. If you can link to an example, by all means go ahead. If not I'll add it to your long list of lies you've told that you've never once backed up. Ever.
While you aren't backing that up we're all still waiting on you to explain why you brought up and lied about Anne's sexual history, something you have no way of knowing anything about.
Looking forward to watching you be too afraid to answer Johnny.
-
Now that Whooter John has been sufficently sidelined from his attempts to derail this thread we can get back on topic.
Programmies seem to thrive on abusing the abused. There was a girl in my peer group who had been sexually molested by her step father for years. The mother was a nut job who after the step father was arrestted for his crimes actually blamed the daughter for breaking up her marriage. Then to add salt to the wound she put her in an abusive crack pot unlicensed kiddie prison (aren't they all?). While the girl was incarcerated in HLA the "counselors" actually took the stupid mothers side, claiming that the girl (who was around 6 when the abuse started) actually had seduced the step father.
How theraputic is that?
-
Here's me John. You are a liar. You have never won a single argument against me. Not once. If you can link to an example, by all means go ahead. If not I'll add it to your long list of lies you've told that you've never once backed up. Ever.
While you aren't backing that up we're all still waiting on you to explain why you brought up and lied about Anne's sexual history, something you have no way of knowing anything about.
Looking forward to watching you be too afraid to answer Johnny.
Now isnt it better to purge here on a dedicated thread, Squiggy. I think this is a good idea. Whenever you and Lenny lose an argument you can come over here and purge your pent-up anger and absolve yourselves. You can explain how you think I killed my wife and children (lol) fabricated families, you can even jump up and down and tell the world that you were at HLA longer than 3 weeks and maybe someone will believe you. You and Lenny can bring up Annes sexual history every day and all day if that is what makes you happy, call me a liar and a pedophile. Its a win win for you.
...
-
I will respond to it over over there (or maybe I wont).
Off Topic discussions (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=32474)
...
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
This belongs over here, it's about the topic at hand. I have no idea why it was moved.
Now that Whooter John has been sufficently sidelined from his attempts to derail this thread we can get back on topic.
Programmies seem to thrive on abusing the abused. There was a girl in my peer group who had been sexually molested by her step father for years. The mother was a nut job who after the step father was arrested for his crimes actually blamed the daughter for breaking up her marriage. Then to add salt to the wound she put her in an abusive crack pot unlicensed kiddie prison (aren't they all?). While the girl was incarcerated in HLA the "counselors" actually took the stupid mothers side, claiming that the girl (who was around 6 when the abuse started) actually had seduced the step father.
How theraputic is that?
-
Back on topic, please.
I have been continuously amazed at the lengths pro-program people will go to discredit abuse vicims and smear their character in order to invalidate their personal stories of abuse at programs.
Here's an example of a pro-program poster using this tactic of personal destruction to invalidate the experiences and words of an abuse survivor from one of the most notoriously abusive and harmful programs ever to exist - Straight, Inc.
Fabricated sons. Plural. Or fabricated daughter, singular. Which is it?
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
...
Anne Bonney has been very open about the abuse she suffered inside and outside Straight, including the horrible fact that she was raped as an underaged girl and was blamed for her own rape by the program staff. She was a young rape victim not old enough to drive or to know anyone in any jails and she was put into Straight where she was dreadfully abused, as all the kids there were, and revictimized. Whooter knows this story. Yet he found it fit to comment on Anne's personal history with disgusting false accusations and sexualized aggression toward her.
What is wrong with sadistic cretins like this?
I stand behind my posts.
Now I'd like to hear your reasons for posting that Anne Bonney was having unprotected sex as an underaged girl. You know she was raped. Was this rape what you're calling "unprotected sex"? You do realize that your average rapist doesn't ask his victim if she wants to have "protected non-consensual sex," right? I'm curious to hear your reasons why you are taking personal potshots of a sexual nature at a rape victim. That's not cool. Did the admin warn you about this deplorable behavior?
Stand behind your posts like a man. Why did you do this to a person who has told you several times in the past she was raped and the program staff blamed her for it?
What did the mods say to you about it?
Once more, when confronted with his own ugly words and deeds, Whooter scurries away like a plague rat.
He wants to avoid this, but he should not be allowed.
-
Thanks for getting us back on topic. As we all read through the above post it settles the dispute as to who brought Anne's rape into the conversation. Anne and I spoke in PMs and she indicated that she didnt think that your bringing up her rape into the conversation was intended to hurt or embarrass her and I agree. I think you brought it up more as an attack on me than anything else, but I think it was in poor taste for you to use Annes' victimization and circumstances as a means to attack others. I hope that you would rethink doing this in the future and try to be more sensitive of other peoples personal stories.
...
-
Anne and I spoke in PMs and she indicated that she didnt think that your bringing up her rape into the conversation was intended to hurt or embarrass her and I agree. I think you brought it up more as an attack on me than anything else, but I think it was in poor taste for you to use Annes' victimization and circumstances as a means to attack others. I hope that you would rethink doing this in the future and try to be more sensitive of other peoples personal stories.
No, you used it by characterizing it as "unprotected sex" for one of the excuses for my being put into Straight. You also characterized my limited experimentation with weed as "drug use". You twist things to fit your agenda.
-
I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight.
And I've told you REPEATEDLY that I don't view ALL programs that way. Are you having trouble comprehending what I've written? There are teens that need help, but the LGAT-type programs don't provide help. They make things worse.
-
I feel you view all programs through your filtered experiences you had at straight.
And I've told you REPEATEDLY that I don't view ALL programs that way. Are you having trouble comprehending what I've written? There are teens that need help, but the LGAT-type programs don't provide help. They make things worse.
I am not saying that you view all programs the same. I am saying you view them based on your experiences at straight and what you have read here on fornits. We all base our views on what we have experienced and read.
...
-
I am not saying that you view all programs the same.
Bullshit. You say that quite a bit.
-
I am not saying that you view all programs the same.
Bullshit. You say that quite a bit.
Yes I do. but what I meant in that last statement is that you view programs through a filter. The filter or bias that was bestowed upon you by your experiences at straight and reading here. I view the industry via my own filter based on my experiences and what I have read here on fornits.
...
-
I am not saying that you view all programs the same.
Bullshit. You say that quite a bit.
Yes I do. but what I meant in that last statement is that you view programs through a filter. The filter or bias that was bestowed upon you by your experiences at straight and reading here. I view the industry via my own filter based on my experiences and what I have read here on fornits.
I view SOME programs through a filter because they're basically the same, or worse, than what I went through. You keep implying that I view ALL programs through that filter.
-
I am not saying that you view all programs the same.
Bullshit. You say that quite a bit.
Yes I do. but what I meant in that last statement is that you view programs through a filter. The filter or bias that was bestowed upon you by your experiences at straight and reading here. I view the industry via my own filter based on my experiences and what I have read here on fornits.
I view SOME programs through a filter because they're basically the same, or worse, than what I went through. You keep implying that I view ALL programs through that filter.
Yes I did. We all do whether you like it or not. All our views are based on past experiences and reading on the subjects. Some people may chose to discard certain facts when forming their opinions, but most of us base them on something.
...
-
I am not saying that you view all programs the same.
Bullshit. You say that quite a bit.
Yes I do. but what I meant in that last statement is that you view programs through a filter. The filter or bias that was bestowed upon you by your experiences at straight and reading here. I view the industry via my own filter based on my experiences and what I have read here on fornits.
I view SOME programs through a filter because they're basically the same, or worse, than what I went through. You keep implying that I view ALL programs through that filter.
Yes I did. We all do whether you like it or not. All our views are based on past experiences and reading on the subjects. Some people may chose to discard certain facts when forming their opinions, but most of us base them on something.
What???? Some programs are decent and treat the kids well. The LGAT-type programs don't. Why is this hard to understand?
-
What???? Some programs are decent and treat the kids well. The LGAT-type programs don't. Why is this hard to understand?
Yes, there are good and bad programs. Bbut you and I may differ on which ones are good and which ones are bad based on our individual experiences and knowledge.
...
-
Of course. You view the ones who pay you for your referals as good, and the ones who don't as potential customers you don't want to speak ill of.
You keep missing we all actually experienced this abusive industry first hand. All you did was lock your kids up from it and then find a way to get a check out of it. Your filter is based on money, nothing more.
-
As we all read through the above post it settles the dispute as to who brought Anne's rape into the conversation.
You did. Thanks for finally admitting that.
Anne and I spoke in PMs and she indicated that she didnt think that your bringing up her rape into the conversation was intended to hurt or embarrass her and I agree. I think you brought it up more as an attack on me than anything else, but I think it was in poor taste for you to use Annes' victimization and circumstances as a means to attack others. I hope that you would rethink doing this in the future and try to be more sensitive of other peoples personal stories.
Was it in poor taste for you to lie about Anne, or bring up things you had no way of actually knowing? Get over yourself John. You sound like Al Haig refering to lies he told Congress as 'terminological inexactitude'. Your cowardice shines through when you can't even stand behind your own lies.
-
Of course. You view the ones who pay you for your referals as good, and the ones who don't as potential customers you don't want to speak ill of.
You keep missing we all actually experienced this abusive industry first hand. All you did was lock your kids up from it and then find a way to get a check out of it. Your filter is based on money, nothing more.
I agree with you on one small part and that is that our filters are different based on our individual experiences. This is an area where we agree. The rest of your post and follow-on response is in error.
...
-
What???? Some programs are decent and treat the kids well. The LGAT-type programs don't. Why is this hard to understand?
Yes, there are good and bad programs. Bbut you and I may differ on which ones are good and which ones are bad based on our individual experiences and knowledge.
But you keep defending the programs that use the LGAT methods, i.e. humiliation, extreme confrontation, degradation etc. Those do nothing to help and most often harm the kids. We know this because we've been exposed to it. You have no idea what it's like to be locked up for years on end being subjected to that kind of "treatment".
-
Was it in poor taste for you to lie about Anne, or bring up things you had no way of actually knowing?
As much as he thinks it bothers me, it doesn't in the least. I know what happened to me before and after Straight. He has no knowledge of the inner workings of those kinds of programs.
-
Look, Anne, we have already established that you have not been truthful with the readers here on fornits. You try to make the readers believe that you were this shy little girl prior to going into a program and they turned you into the foul mouthed person that we read about everyday here who blames the program for your lack of education. You change your story with the wind and lie about the events that occurred in your program to gain attention.
But the truth is that you dropped out of school started drinking and doing drugs. You got into car accidents and started hanging out with with kids who were ending up in jail. You were having unsafe sex and your parents didn’t want to raise their grandchildren while you figured out your life. Maybe straight wasn’t the best choice, but you were surly at risk and they needed to do something.
Please explain or cite your sources for this. I WAS a shy and timid girl, I never dropped out of school. I drank some, but not much and experimented with weed. I wasn't having unsafe sex willingly. How did you come to these conclusions?
Passive-aggressive.
-
He has no knowledge of the inner workings of those kinds of programs.
No more than he knows any of our experiences or the events that happened to us. He thinks he does, because he thinks he's smarter than everyone, so he feels justified in lying. He isn't willing to accept the fact that no one believes his lies and in the end he's the only one who ends up looking stupid.
-
He has no knowledge of the inner workings of those kinds of programs.
No more than he knows any of our experiences or the events that happened to us. He thinks he does, because he thinks he's smarter than everyone, so he feels justified in lying. He isn't willing to accept the fact that no one believes his lies and in the end he's the only one who ends up looking stupid.
Merry Christmas, Bruce, I hope you can find a way to purge your anger. Enjoy the weekend and get to connect with family somehow.
...
-
Wow, Whoots, Anne sounds like many normal girls I knew! Even if she did more that that, she'd still sound like many normal girls I knew.
And even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory. For some reason - maybe common sense - I don't think you address issues with wholesale emotional and psychological abuse. But maybe that's just me.
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
-
This thread really shows his attitude towards kids. It's the best insight into how he thinks.
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in a mind rape factory. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
...
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in Straight. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in Straight. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
Why do you lie and say I profit from the industry or have sons I placed in the industry? Why do any of us lie?
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing. Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
..
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in Straight. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
Why do you lie and say I profit from the industry or have sons I placed in the industry?
I said that was my BELIEF......not a fact.
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing.
Actually, as you've read, my dad has started to come around and figuring out that what he did was wrong.
Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
(http://http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/blog/images/QuizzicalDog.jpg)
-
Merry Christmas, Bruce, I hope you can find a way to purge your anger. Enjoy the weekend and get to connect with family somehow.
Merry Christmas to you too Whooter. I'm already at my parents house with my family. I hope you have a chance to spend some time with your family as well.
Before that though Anne asked you a question I think deserves an answer.
-
Actually, as you've read, my dad has started to come around and figuring out that what he did was wrong.
Glade to hear it. At the time I am sure he felt he was doing the right thing.
...
-
even if she dropped out and enjoyed every vice known to man on a daily basis - I still don't think the answer is a Mind Rape Factory.
Of course not...is it ever the answer?
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in Straight. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
:bump:
-
Actually, as you've read, my dad has started to come around and figuring out that what he did was wrong.
Glade to hear it. At the time I am sure he felt he was doing the right thing.
No, not really. He was a controlling freak. He treated my Mom horribly. He's mellowed in his old age.
-
This thread really shows Whooter's attitude towards kids and how to deal with them. It's one of, if not the most, telling threads he's participated in.
-
I think we all agree, I dont think anyone deserved to be placed in a mind rape factory. I dont think the parents knew much about them in those days.
Yet you refuse to acknowledge how little has changed between programs back then, and programs today.
Why do you lie and say I profit from the industry or have sons I placed in the industry? Why do any of us lie?
This has been addressed already. You provided the evidence that showed you receive a profit from the TTI industry by discussing your fiduicary interest.
You also provided the evidence that you have sons placed in the industry by claiming as much.
As for us lying, if you'd like to link to any lies you feel we have told by all means do so and we can discuss them.
In the meantime try and answer Anne's question directly without comparing your actions to someone else. Why did you lie. Take respondsibility.
-
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing. Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
Public Schools on average remain far safer than programs, so there's no reason people would think this in 50 years. Afterall public schools in America have existed for over 100 years. No reason for that to suddenly change.
-
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing. Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
Public Schools on average remain far safer than programs, so there's no reason people would think this in 50 years. Afterall public schools in America have existed for over 100 years. No reason for that to suddenly change.
I heard people said straight was a safe place back in the 1970's.
...
-
I heard people said straight was a safe place back in the 1970's.
How would you have heard about Straight back in the 70's before your children were even born unless you had a connection to this industry?
-
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing. Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
Public Schools on average remain far safer than programs, so there's no reason people would think this in 50 years. Afterall public schools in America have existed for over 100 years. No reason for that to suddenly change.
I heard people said straight was a safe place back in the 1970's.
Citation please.
-
Your parents felt they were doing the right thing. Maybe in 50 years we will realize how damaging it was to send our kids to public school.
Public Schools on average remain far safer than programs, so there's no reason people would think this in 50 years. Afterall public schools in America have existed for over 100 years. No reason for that to suddenly change.
I heard people said straight was a safe place back in the 1970's.
Citation please.
Heard, I dont have a link for that.
...
-
How would you have heard about straight back in the 70's?
-
I heard it got worse when Miller Newton became involved.
-
How would you have heard about straight back in the 70's?
Just go on-line and you can read about straight and the seed when it originated. If you research back 100 years you will read that public schools would whip and humiliate the children if they were bad. Those actions, which were once acceptable, would result in law suits and jail time today. So 50 years form now our public schools today may seem abusive to those in the future.
...
-
If they think that about public schools 50 years from now, how much worse do you think they'll view these programs which are already considered abusive by todays standards?
-
If they think that about public schools 50 years from now, how much worse do you think they'll view these programs which are already considered abusive by todays standards?
Only time will tell.
...
-
My guess is the word 'gulag' will seem that much more appropriate.
Before the year 2060 arrives though Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question.
Why did you lie about her?
-
My guess is the word 'gulag' will seem that much more appropriate.
I disagree, I believe our public school system will become more like programs and more kids will be schooled at home.
Before the year 2060 arrives though Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question.
Why did you lie about her?
I believe Anne is busy today. If you believe I lied than you must think you know the truth. Tell about what you know.
...
-
Actually, as you've read, my dad has started to come around and figuring out that what he did was wrong.
So initially he thought he was doing the right thing.
...
-
I disagree, I believe our public school system will become more like programs and more kids will be schooled at home.
So you think public schools will become as abusive as programs? I doubt it. Public schools embrace accountability and transparency, programs abhore it. My guess is that public schools will become safer and safer as time goes on and programs will either be forced to accept oversite or will disappear (hopefully).
-
I believe Anne is busy today. If you believe I lied than you must think you know the truth. Tell about what you know.
Anne has already made it clear you did lie, we all know you lied. You claim to accept respondsibility for your actions. Now it's time to pay up. Don't try and make this about someone else, it's about you and your lies. Now she deserves an answer to her question.
-
I believe Anne is busy today. If you believe I lied than you must think you know the truth. Tell about what you know.
Anne has already made it clear you did lie, we all know you lied. You claim to accept respondsibility for your actions. Now it's time to pay up. Don't try and make this about someone else, it's about you and your lies. Now she deserves an answer to her question.
What are you talking about, Bruce? Lied about what? Why cant you and DJ leave Anne alone?
...
-
Here you go Whootie. You claimed just the other day how you accept respondsibility for your actions:
I think it is very clear that I take accountability for my actions very seriously and accept the consequences of my actions
Now obviously this is a lie. Your narcissim leads you to believe that people actually believe the nonsense you say, and so you think you can get away without backing up your comments all because you're a coward.
The truth however is something else entirely.
Here's Anne's question, get to it son:
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
-
Here you go Whootie. You claimed just the other day how you accept respondsibility for your actions:
I think it is very clear that I take accountability for my actions very seriously and accept the consequences of my actions
Now obviously this is a lie. Your narcissim leads you to believe that people actually believe the nonsense you say, and so you think you can get away without backing up your comments all because you're a coward.
The truth however is something else entirely.
Here's Anne's question, get to it son:
Then why do you lie about my actions pre-Straight and say that my parents were right in sending me there?
That was rude, Bruce. You dont seriously expect people to respond to you when you treat them this way do you? Waiters must spit in your soup, Bruce. When you feel like having a civil conversation let me know. This question was posed to me by Anne (not by you) and we are still waiting on an answer from you and DJ on why you keep drudging up Annes Rape on the internet. We have a list of things to discuss before we get to that one. Cool down a bit and try to be civil.
...
-
This question was posed to me by Anne (not by you) and we are still waiting on an answer from you and DJ on why you keep drudging up Annes Rape on the internet.
Because you lied about her sexual past. We were merely educating you. Your question has been answered, now go answer Anne's and stop crying and trying to avoid accountability.
-
This question was posed to me by Anne (not by you) and we are still waiting on an answer from you and DJ on why you keep drudging up Annes Rape on the internet.
Because you lied about her sexual past. We were merely educating you. Your question has been answered, now go answer Anne's and stop crying and trying to avoid accountability.
Lied about what specifically? Who is we? Who was educating me about Annes Sexual past and why would you want to do this? Why do you and DJ always get fixated on Anne? If you claimed I lied about something then you must know the truth. What is it that you know?
You need to get these questions answered before we move forward and if you continue to be rude towards me then we will stop here.
...
-
Lied about what specifically?
You lied when you claimed Anne had been placed in Straight because she was having unprotected sex, and her parents didn't want to raise their grandchildren.
Who is we?
DJ, Anne, myself, and others.
Who was educating me about Annes Sexual past and why would you want to do this?
You misunderstand (on purpose). You lied about Anne, we were correcting you. You pretended to have knowledge you have no way of knowing.
Why do you and DJ always get fixated on Anne?
Not at all. We're simply pointing out you once again attacking an abuse survivor.
If you claimed I lied about something then you must know the truth. What is it that you know?
That you lied. Is this still in question?
You need to get these questions answered before we move forward
All done Whootie. Now Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question. Why did you lie and claim she had been placed in straight for having 'unprotected sex'?
-
So let me ask you, Bruce, why do you and DJ have such a fixation on Anne Bonney being raped? You keep avoiding the subject and subsequently avoiding responsibility once again by placing blame on others. This seems to be a pattern with you. The readers have been waiting for you to respond.
...
-
All done Whootie. Now Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question. Why did you lie and claim she had been placed in straight for having 'unprotected sex'?
-
All done Whootie. Now Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question. Why did you lie and claim she had been placed in straight for having 'unprotected sex'?
Anne and I already spoke via PM's.
You should PM her if you would like the details.
...
-
Lots of posts in this thread from yesterday, which of course we all know was Christmas. Really, guys? You had nothing better to do on Christmas than log onto fornits, and argue with one another? You've been having the same argument for years now, don't you ever get bored with arguing with the same people, about the same things? Come on, I'm sure you guys had something better to do on Christmas. Because at this point (well actually a long time ago), it's just sad. Your arguments are tired and repetitive, but the very act of you posting on days like Christmas says more about you than any post you will ever make.
-
Lots of posts in this thread from yesterday, which of course we all know was Christmas. Really, guys? You had nothing better to do on Christmas than log onto fornits, and argue with one another? You've been having the same argument for years now, don't you ever get bored with arguing with the same people, about the same things? Come on, I'm sure you guys had something better to do on Christmas. Because at this point (well actually a long time ago), it's just sad. Your arguments are tired and repetitive, but the very act of you posting on days like Christmas says more about you than any post you will ever make.
Guest I hate to tag you as one who does not understand how much programs effected us , but truth be known you don't know shit about what we have been through only the true survivors understand... So step back and take an open mind and you may learn something !!!
Sincerely Botched
-
Guest I hate to tag you as one who does not understand how much programs effected us , but truth be known you don't know shit about what we have been through only the true survivors understand... So step back and take an open mind and you may learn something !!!
Sincerely Botched
Spare me. True survivors? What is that supposed to mean? Contrary to your idiotic assumptions, I most likely spent more time in a program than you did, that was much more abusive than where you went, and unlike most of the posters here this didn't occur forty years ago. Believe me, I understand exactly what programs are like. But you know what? Arguing with Whooter all day, every day, even on Christmas isn't going to make me feel any better.
For some unknown reason, arguing with Whooter everyday appears to be some sort of therapy to you. Like I said in my other post, I find this sad. Fornits used to be known as a biker bar, well reading fornits these days is more like watching the bum in the park drink his 40 in a paper bag. It's just fucking sad, period.
But don't let me interrupt the group psychosis, it seems strangely enjoyable to many of you. I could make a similar assertion as you, that if you truly understand programs and how it effects people, you wouldn't suggest that posting on fornits is in any way a good idea. A waste of time perhaps, if you're lucky, but for many like RobertBruce, Whooter, DJ and Anne, it seems to have devolved into full blown mental illness, and addiction. The best thing for survivors at this point, is if this fucked up, censored, staff-run version of fornits goes offline forever. Which it will, eventually.
-
I'll admit it, I don't get why people bother engaging the likes of TheWho (Whooter's old moniker) every day on here.
Fucking waste of time...
Glad I don't have ~that addiction....
If everyone acted as if he didn't exist (by ignoring him completely), perhaps he'd fuck off.
-
I'll admit it, I don't get why people bother engaging the likes of TheWho (Whooter's old moniker) every day on here.
Fucking waste of time...
Glad I don't have ~that addiction....
If everyone acted as if he didn't exist (by ignoring him completely), perhaps he'd fuck off.
Me either my brother .... I post sincere stuff that I deal with ... No arguement with Whooter ... as a matter of a fact I hate to admit it but Whooter can be civil and a human being sometimes... This is not me siding with him but he and I have had our differences but for the most part he is not all bad.. There is a side of Whooter people should see read my last post .... Started over at age 44 .... he was actually nice to me... Just take a look for yourself.... He has his mind set on programs and we have ours... But we can agree to disagree...
Sincerely Botched
-
All done Whootie. Now Anne is still waiting on you to answer her question. Why did you lie and claim she had been placed in straight for having 'unprotected sex'?
Anne and I already spoke via PM's.
You should PM her if you would like the details.
...
No response, Bruce? lol That's what I thought. Anne and I worked it all out and she now agrees with me that she needed to be sent to Straight because of her promiscuity.
...