INTENSITY²

Start here => Free For ALL => Topic started by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 02:21:43 AM

Title: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 02:21:43 AM
My aunt and uncle had came home from their fortnight vacation to Hawaii and my boyfriend is leaving because they came came home. He will be getting up early to head into work and then he has to go back home to Forest Grove where he lives. I enjoyed the breakfasts he has cooked for me, him putting on kid shows for me to watch and kid movies, spanking me, watering the flowers with me, and doing everything for me such as him picking up after me so I didn't have to clear my spot when done eating, putting my things away since he did it for me anyway. Now it be back in my room again for us to have our fun than the whole house and me being responsible again just like an adult.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 02:33:01 AM
I hope that it's your boyfriend you
enjoy spanking you, and NOT your
uncle.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:00:26 AM
I hope that it's your boyfriend you
enjoy spanking you, and NOT your
uncle.

Who cares. Her fantasies are freaking me out. I think Dr. Drew needs to have a talk with her.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 03:04:07 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:13:57 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 03:17:59 AM
Don't you understand that your
aunt may not be happy that you're
getting paddled by her husband?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:19:57 AM
Don't you understand that your
aunt may not be happy that you're
getting paddled by her husband?

I'm trying to be serious if you don't mind.  :police:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 03:22:19 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Maybe she can do some videos for you like Peegai....
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:24:13 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Maybe she can do some videos for you like Peegai....

I'm afraid she might. Do you have an idea of what I'm getting at here??
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 03:26:08 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Maybe she can do some videos for you like Peegai....

I'm afraid she might. Do you have an idea of what I'm getting at here??
Turning my stomach upside down...?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:29:22 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Maybe she can do some videos for you like Peegai....

I'm afraid she might. Do you have an idea of what I'm getting at here??
Turning my stomach upside down...?

No, This sounds more and more as if Spokane Girl has suffered severe trauma/abuse as an infant/toddler. When people suffer severe abuse, it has an effect of emotionaly and developmentaly, locking them in the age in which the abuse occured.

PMS Elle correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 03:32:43 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??
Maybe she can do some videos for you like Peegai....

I'm afraid she might. Do you have an idea of what I'm getting at here??
Turning my stomach upside down...?

No, This sounds more and more as if Spokane Girl has suffered severe trauma/abuse as an infant/toddler. When people suffer severe abuse, it has an effect of emotionaly and developmentaly, locking them in the age in which the abuse occured.

PMS Elle correct me if I'm wrong.
That is what I wanted you not to say, not where she can read it...
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:35:00 AM
Not only do I want her to read it, I'm half an inch away from calling her out on it.... for her own fucking good.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 03:36:01 AM
Not only do I want her to read it, I'm half an inch away from calling her out on it.... for her own fucking good.
Go ahead, it could be an intresting one.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 03:56:01 AM
Presuming this happened, she
probably wouldn't even know.
What's the point?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 03:57:51 AM
Presuming this happened, she
probably wouldn't even know.
What's the point?
So Scrap can be entertained, and relieve some of his stresses.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 03:58:29 AM
Presuming this happened, she
probably wouldn't even know.
What's the point?

To get her to fucking therapy.

She has a job, and I'm guessing health benefits too. She can get a shrink for only a small co-pay.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 04:00:32 AM
Presuming this happened, she
probably wouldn't even know.
What's the point?

To get her to fucking therapy.

She has a job, and I'm guessing health benefits too. She can get a shrink for only a small co-pay.
And why are you so bothered...
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 04:02:32 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 04:05:52 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 04:08:22 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.

Even wal-mart employees get health benefits. I'm sure they give her something along those lines.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 04:12:20 AM
Maybe things have changed for the
better, since the 1980's, but I know
'twas damned hard to get insurance
in chain motels then.

Plus, SOME packages are such a bad
deal, that they're unaffordable for
the workers.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Kosmonaut on September 03, 2007, 06:26:10 AM
I was quite normal before therapy.
I forgot to ask for a refund.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 06:55:56 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 06:58:37 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.

Even wal-mart employees get health benefits. I'm sure they give her something along those lines.

Having worked for Wal-Mart, I'd have to say that their 'benefit' plan is largely a joke that they offer just so they can say they offer insurance.  But, maybe they've improved it since I worked there.  It has been many years.  On the other hand medical costs have increased substantially as well.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 07:00:48 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 07:15:19 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.

Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?

And by the way, now who's arguing from authority?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 07:39:19 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.

Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?

And by the way, now who's arguing from authority?
Who doesnt on here. The imagination fills in the rest.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 07:44:05 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.

Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?

And by the way, now who's arguing from authority?
Who doesnt on here. The imagination fills in the rest.

Is that your answer to the first or second question?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 07:48:36 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.

*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.

Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?

And by the way, now who's arguing from authority?
Who doesnt on here. The imagination fills in the rest.

Is that your answer to the first or second question?
Both.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: El on September 03, 2007, 07:50:50 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: purposefulinsanity on September 03, 2007, 07:53:52 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 07:55:41 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 08:02:52 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 08:05:33 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 08:08:02 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: El on September 03, 2007, 08:08:23 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?

 :agreed: :plus:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Kosmonaut on September 03, 2007, 08:09:42 AM
O lawd is hadron getting p3wned again ?
I thought i was a masochist.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 08:16:43 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: McGiver on September 03, 2007, 08:53:07 AM
She's a housekeeper
at a motel. I doubt she
has insurance. Plus,
the one person that
I know who went through
therapy for such things, really
wasn't helped by it.

Destroyed her family though.

Even wal-mart employees get health benefits. I'm sure they give her something along those lines.
not that i know of.  walmart coaches their employees how to live off of state assisted welfare.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 08:55:04 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
You have just attacked such claims, so I suggest by your own rules you go and fetch evidence.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: McGiver on September 03, 2007, 08:55:45 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
maybe scrap is posting in the mirror?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 09:25:51 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
You have just attacked such claims, so I suggest by your own rules you go and fetch evidence.

Where did you learn to debate?  You made the claim with no proof or supporting arguments.  I asked for proof.  If you wish to carry the point, it is up to you to support it.

How about, just once, you put up or shut up.  I have, as yet, made no claim as to the point in contention. ("Therapy rarely helps people full stop", in case you've forgotten.)  Therefore, I have nothing to defend.  I merely ask you to substantiate it.  Provide the basis for you contention.  At that point, I will either provide a counter-argument (with supporting evidence) or concede the point.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 09:35:14 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
You have just attacked such claims, so I suggest by your own rules you go and fetch evidence.

Where did you learn to debate?  You made the claim with no proof or supporting arguments.  I asked for proof.  If you wish to carry the point, it is up to you to support it.

How about, just once, you put up or shut up.  I have, as yet, made no claim as to the point in contention. ("Therapy rarely helps people full stop", in case you've forgotten.)  Therefore, I have nothing to defend.  I merely ask you to substantiate it.  Provide the basis for you contention.  At that point, I will either provide a counter-argument (with supporting evidence) or concede the point.
Surprisingly I dont carry a great stack of proof around with me, nor do you. Take it whatever way you want it. My initial statement was vague, delibrately so. It rests on what you consider "help".
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 09:38:42 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
maybe scrap is posting in the mirror?

No, if anything, I've been listening to too much Dr.Drew.  ;)
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: McGiver on September 03, 2007, 09:39:59 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
maybe scrap is posting in the mirror?

No, if anything, I've been listening to too much Dr.Drew.  ;)
i was touched when i was younger.  wanna call me out?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 09:41:20 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
maybe scrap is posting in the mirror?

No, if anything, I've been listening to too much Dr.Drew.  ;)
i was touched when i was younger.  wanna call me out?
Did your mommy give you massages, McJ? :P
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 09:57:08 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
You have just attacked such claims, so I suggest by your own rules you go and fetch evidence.

Where did you learn to debate?  You made the claim with no proof or supporting arguments.  I asked for proof.  If you wish to carry the point, it is up to you to support it.

How about, just once, you put up or shut up.  I have, as yet, made no claim as to the point in contention. ("Therapy rarely helps people full stop", in case you've forgotten.)  Therefore, I have nothing to defend.  I merely ask you to substantiate it.  Provide the basis for you contention.  At that point, I will either provide a counter-argument (with supporting evidence) or concede the point.
Surprisingly I dont carry a great stack of proof around with me, nor do you. Take it whatever way you want it. My initial statement was vague, delibrately so. It rests on what you consider "help".

Then don't make grand, unfounded claims if you can't back them up.  Putting it another way since you seem to be fond of logical fallacies lately -- don't make hasty generalizations.  Here, have a wiki link -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization)

And you'd be surprised what I carry around with and within me.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 10:07:43 AM
Therapy rarely helps people full stop. Its just to keep psychology grads in some sort of employment.
*sigh*  Not this canard again.  And what, pray tell, do you base this supreme knowledge upon?   ::)
Experience.
Wonderfully vague answer there.  Care to expound upon this?
The imagination fills in the rest.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Your claim is based on experience which is based on your imagination.
No, I have my experiences. I just lead it up to the individual reader to embellish them in anyway they see fit.

I'll just add another tally on the 'unsubstantiated claims made by hadron' board then, shall I?
Can you substanciate the opposite to my claim then. Go ahead if you think you can.

The point is that I don't have to.  I have made no such claims.  To do so would require knowledge beyond what either of us could know.  This is what I'm flagging you on (again).  You make grand, global claims and then don't back them up.  And when called on it, you instead try to turn it around on the one who questioned you.
You have just attacked such claims, so I suggest by your own rules you go and fetch evidence.

Where did you learn to debate?  You made the claim with no proof or supporting arguments.  I asked for proof.  If you wish to carry the point, it is up to you to support it.

How about, just once, you put up or shut up.  I have, as yet, made no claim as to the point in contention. ("Therapy rarely helps people full stop", in case you've forgotten.)  Therefore, I have nothing to defend.  I merely ask you to substantiate it.  Provide the basis for you contention.  At that point, I will either provide a counter-argument (with supporting evidence) or concede the point.
Surprisingly I dont carry a great stack of proof around with me, nor do you. Take it whatever way you want it. My initial statement was vague, delibrately so. It rests on what you consider "help".

Then don't make grand, unfounded claims if you can't back them up.  Putting it another way since you seem to be fond of logical fallacies lately -- don't make hasty generalizations.  Here, have a wiki link -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization)

And you'd be surprised what I carry around with and within me.
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:28:35 AM
Don't you understand that your
aunt may not be happy that you're
getting paddled by her husband?


My uncle doesn't hit me. My boyfriend does but it's just for fun. He doesn't hit me hard. It's just a swat and that's it.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:30:24 AM
Be glad I didn't mention diapers. This is all real alright I just talked about above.


No, it's NOT O.K. Don't you understand what all this fascination with childhood means??


Let me ask you a question. Do you have a real meek, mousy, little girl voice??

No I do not sound like a little girl. I sound like I have an accent when I talk. But I do sound immature when I get excited (I don't mean sexually).
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 10:30:58 AM
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.

Who is "us"?  If you mean you, say you.  I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But when you make a statement of opinion as if it were a fact, don't be surprised if you get called on it and/or asked to support it.

Do I "pick" on others?  I'm not picking on you.  Lose the persecution/martyr complex.  I'm picking on your argument.  You're headed for uni soon.  You might even find some of this useful if you can back up and look at what I've said objectively.

As for others, when I notice it, I try to point it out.  Just ask Alex179.

Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: richard on September 03, 2007, 10:33:41 AM
My aunt and uncle had came home from their fortnight vacation to Hawaii and my boyfriend is leaving because they came came home. He will be getting up early to head into work and then he has to go back home to Forest Grove where he lives. I enjoyed the breakfasts he has cooked for me, him putting on kid shows for me to watch and kid movies, spanking me, watering the flowers with me, and doing everything for me such as him picking up after me so I didn't have to clear my spot when done eating, putting my things away since he did it for me anyway. Now it be back in my room again for us to have our fun than the whole house and me being responsible again just like an adult.
sounds absolutley terrible. i hope you'll be alright, wait you watch kid shows and wear diapers? uhh
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 10:36:05 AM
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.

Who is "us"?  If you mean you, say you.  I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But when you make a statement of opinion as if it were a fact, don't be surprised if you get called on it and/or asked to support it.

Do I "pick" on others?  I'm not picking on you.  Lose the persecution/martyr complex.  I'm picking on your argument.  You're headed for uni soon.  You might even find some of this useful if you can back up and look at what I've said objectively.

As for others, when I notice it, I try to point it out.  Just ask Alex179.


Us being the vast majority of people who do not have a long memory of how they came to every opinion they made, when I come to a decision on something I like to dump how I came to it, until a few years down the line when I reconsider it from afresh.

If you are picking on my arguement, feel free to do so, but dont do it as a gang with Lucifer and her friends. If she is as good as she says she is then there is no need for you to do so, is there? When I sit exams I am prepared to back up my arguements, but I dont like to live my life like a constant exam.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:37:49 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 10:40:56 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.

I think you're missing the point.

Were you abused as a young child??
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 10:46:12 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.

I think you're missing the point.

Were you abused as a young child??
I thought you were going to make it a call out...?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 10:50:43 AM
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.

Who is "us"?  If you mean you, say you.  I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But when you make a statement of opinion as if it were a fact, don't be surprised if you get called on it and/or asked to support it.

Do I "pick" on others?  I'm not picking on you.  Lose the persecution/martyr complex.  I'm picking on your argument.  You're headed for uni soon.  You might even find some of this useful if you can back up and look at what I've said objectively.

As for others, when I notice it, I try to point it out.  Just ask Alex179.


Us being the vast majority of people who do not have a long memory of how they came to every opinion they made, when I come to a decision on something I like to dump how I came to it, until a few years down the line when I reconsider it from afresh.

*sigh*  You're not getting it.  Stop speaking for more than yourself.

If you are picking on my arguement, feel free to do so, but dont do it as a gang with Lucifer and her friends. If she is as good as she says she is then there is no need for you to do so, is there?

How do you delineate the difference?  Multiple people can debate your claims without being in collusion.

When I sit exams I am prepared to back up my arguements, but I dont like to live my life like a constant exam.

"The unexamined life is not worth living."  -- Socrates
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Kosmonaut on September 03, 2007, 10:53:33 AM
i thought plato said that.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:53:54 AM
Yes I was abused but not one of those abuses you're thinking kids get when they need to be taken away and put into foster care. I'd say it was mild but I had a happy family and childhood despite the bullying I got from my friends and other kids. Parents make mistakes and mine learned as I got older.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 10:55:39 AM
i thought plato said that.

Nah, Plato siad: If there's 3 prisoners sitting in a cave, staring at shadows on the wall, who really gives a fuck??
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:58:09 AM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.

I think you're missing the point.

Were you abused as a young child??
I thought you were going to make it a call out...?


That's what I thought too so I was looking for it in the Call out board and the Main Event board too.


Gosh I didn't mean for this to turn into a drama forum and get concerns about my life. What was I thinking. :slaps head:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 11:09:56 AM
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.

Who is "us"?  If you mean you, say you.  I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But when you make a statement of opinion as if it were a fact, don't be surprised if you get called on it and/or asked to support it.

Do I "pick" on others?  I'm not picking on you.  Lose the persecution/martyr complex.  I'm picking on your argument.  You're headed for uni soon.  You might even find some of this useful if you can back up and look at what I've said objectively.

As for others, when I notice it, I try to point it out.  Just ask Alex179.


Us being the vast majority of people who do not have a long memory of how they came to every opinion they made, when I come to a decision on something I like to dump how I came to it, until a few years down the line when I reconsider it from afresh.

*sigh*  You're not getting it.  Stop speaking for more than yourself.

If you are picking on my arguement, feel free to do so, but dont do it as a gang with Lucifer and her friends. If she is as good as she says she is then there is no need for you to do so, is there?

How do you delineate the difference?  Multiple people can debate your claims without being in collusion.

When I sit exams I am prepared to back up my arguements, but I dont like to live my life like a constant exam.

"The unexamined life is not worth living."  -- Socrates
1. Fair enough
2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.
3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 11:17:35 AM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 11:35:04 AM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 01:13:37 PM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.

First, last, 42nd, what difference does that make?  Am I to hold my tongue simply because someone else has said it before I have?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 01:52:28 PM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.

First, last, 42nd, what difference does that make?  Am I to hold my tongue simply because someone else has said it before I have?
It makes a difference because then there are lots of posts saying the same thing that I am expected to reply to.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 05:24:08 PM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.

First, last, 42nd, what difference does that make?  Am I to hold my tongue simply because someone else has said it before I have?
It makes a difference because then there are lots of posts saying the same thing that I am expected to reply to.

:violin:

And that doesn't answer the second question.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: ANTON_UBER_ALLES on September 03, 2007, 05:35:42 PM
Damn, I didnt realize that you live in PDX  Spokane_Girl, not to mention that motherfucker lives over there in Forest Grove. :violin:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: ANTON_UBER_ALLES on September 03, 2007, 05:36:36 PM
I'll bet he's got a bitch complex and likes to get pegged with a strap-on :green:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Christopher McCandless on September 03, 2007, 05:38:11 PM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.

First, last, 42nd, what difference does that make?  Am I to hold my tongue simply because someone else has said it before I have?
It makes a difference because then there are lots of posts saying the same thing that I am expected to reply to.

:violin:

And that doesn't answer the second question.
It depends if you are going to come up with something totally different or not.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: mordok on September 03, 2007, 08:47:58 PM
1. Fair enough

Thank you.

2. Its how often it coincidentually seems to happen.

I am responsible only for my own views.  That others may share them and choose to express them at the same time is outside my control.

3. It doesnt mention constant examinination, I prefer the occasional type. There can be over examination, you know...

Fair point.  Again, I'm not asking you to justify everything you say.  But at the same time speaking in a "public" setting carries an amount of risk.
2. You were not the first one to express that line though, were you.
3. One of the many reasons I have a psudonym on here, and many other places.

First, last, 42nd, what difference does that make?  Am I to hold my tongue simply because someone else has said it before I have?
It makes a difference because then there are lots of posts saying the same thing that I am expected to reply to.

:violin:

And that doesn't answer the second question.
It depends if you are going to come up with something totally different or not.

So don't address each person separately if we're all saying the same thing.  Consolidate the quotes into a single reply.  It's not that hard in a message board setting.   Cut, Copy, and Paste are your friends here.

Additionally, it may be a minor difference.  But as far as I know, I have rarely, if ever, attacked you personally.  (Please correct me, if I'm wrong as it is also not my intention, necessarily.)  I'll rip your arguments to shreds if they're weak but that is largely my enjoyment of debate.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 09:22:34 PM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.

 :plus:  It could just be a kink it doesn't have to be the result of abuse.
maybe scrap is posting in the mirror?

No, if anything, I've been listening to too much Dr.Drew.  ;)
i was touched when i was younger.  wanna call me out?

By an angel?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 09:23:14 PM
Don't you understand that your
aunt may not be happy that you're
getting paddled by her husband?


My uncle doesn't hit me. My boyfriend does but it's just for fun. He doesn't hit me hard. It's just a swat and that's it.

Thanks for finally setting my mind to rest.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Calandale on September 03, 2007, 09:25:38 PM
Yes I was abused but not one of those abuses you're thinking kids get when they need to be taken away and put into foster care. I'd say it was mild but I had a happy family and childhood despite the bullying I got from my friends and other kids. Parents make mistakes and mine learned as I got older.

Not sexually though. I think that's what scrap was implying.

People don't realize the damage that mild forms of abuse can
do.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Scrapheap on September 03, 2007, 09:27:46 PM
I wasn't implying sexual abuse. abuse is abuse is abuse. It tends to halt development of the mind in some ways.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 10:05:56 PM
Damn, I didnt realize that you live in PDX  Spokane_Girl, not to mention that motherfucker lives over there in Forest Grove. :violin:


How dare you call my bf a nasty name.  :minusevil: Didn't you see my reply in your PDX thread? I guess not.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: SovaNu on September 03, 2007, 10:19:47 PM
well this was an interesting read.

Spokane do you want explain what you meant by abuse? i was also bullied and i suppose it's a form of abuse. was it physical or mental or both?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Alex179 on September 03, 2007, 10:50:15 PM
It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.

I think you're missing the point.

Were you abused as a young child??

That isn't the question to be asking in public imo.   She doesn't have to answer that, and I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't given how people treat others around here sometimes.   I don't think she was asking for psychoanalysis.   This isn't the area for people to ask for advice without being flamed either.   

Oh well back to being an adult for you SG.   Welcome back to the real world, where people treat you like an adult.   I wouldn't want to be treated like a child again personally.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Alex179 on September 03, 2007, 10:58:27 PM
I guess I am one of the rare examples of those who were helped by therapy Hadron.   There just might be very few therapists who are worth a damn.   I have seen quite a few in my time and only one was really good.   I have had plenty of bad advice come from therapists, but not all are bad and worthless.

Mordok criticizes a good deal of people's posts, but I see very little of his own opinions put out there for others to criticize.   Maybe I should just post wiki articles that back up everything I say, like I was doing when I first started posting here.   Google search sometimes is too much work for me while I am trying to study or actually working at my job it seems.   I like to speak from personal experiences and it is hard to trust statistics sometimes.   Sociology is also bullshit and just makes for stereotypes far too often.   I trust what I see with my own eyes more, though it is even a smaller sample size in most cases.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: ANTON_UBER_ALLES on September 03, 2007, 11:00:48 PM
Sorry about that Spokane_Girl. Actually, is he NT or no?
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 11:32:27 PM
I was abused at day care by my teacher but I vaugly remember it because it was bad. I was in trouble a lot and always punished and I threw lot of tantrums there. She was nice and then she was not off and on. I was abused by my nanny too when I was 5. She put my brother and I both in the bathroom as a time out and hold us in there. One time she got the door stuck and left me in there and I had to fight the door handle untill I finally pulled the door open and she even put us in there without turning the light on but I always turned it on when she put us in there. I can remember her yanking my arm real hard when she pull me and she would hit me too sometimes across the head. I learned to stay out of her way and I always hid in my parents closet whenever she come. My brother did the same. She yelled a lot too at my brother and I. My uncle saw it happening but he was dense about it because he doesn't know shit about how to raise kids so he didn't know what she was doing was wrong. My dad was too focused in his work to even notice what was going on in the household (he worked at home) and my mother didn;t find out till she hurt her back at work and had to stay home in bed and that's when she heard the yelling and seeing me and my brother hiding in her closet and it helped her figure out why we both acted so differently but she never knew about the bathroom incident till 6 years later when we were talking about her and that explained to her why my brother was afraid of the dark. I bet my brother was releaved to find out why he was afraid of the dark and it took him a few years to overcome it after he found out why. That also explained to my parents why I kept locking my brother in the bathroom when i was 5 and them punishing me didn't work. I had to get tired of the game to stop. I even did it to myself too for a while. The funny thing is my mother apologized in my teens for punishing me because she didn't know the reason why i was doing it and I must have been confused why I was in trouble. I told her I probably was. I just kept on doing it anyway not caring about the punishment. After it end, I move on not caring about it anymore. But I knew why I was in trouble though when I do it, it was for locking him oin the bathroom but I didn't understand why it was wrong. Took me years to figure out why, you don't put kids in bathrooms and lock them in there. I learn from reading, watching TV, talking to my mother about parenting and hearing what people say about other people raising kids.


I had emotional abuse too and what do you mean by mental?

I was taken advantage of and get in trouble by the teachers. Kids would even egg me to do things and wouldn't leave me alone till I did them and I get in trouble by the school staff. The kids must have enjoyed it.  They also let kids bully me too and tease me and said I just have to toughen up. Well I did and I get in trouble. But no their definition of toughening up was ignoring them and walking away. They follow me anyway when I walk away. I can remember they make up stories and I fall for them such as the time they made up a singer called Jack Off and were telling me about him and I thought he was real so one day I decided to look him up to find out more about him and I almost got in trouble for it but the kids did instead when I said I was looking him up because kids have told me about him and then my teacher wanted to know who told me so I did and the leader of it had to apologize.
I was called names like retarded, stupid, idiot, peanut brain, mean, rude, show off, and I was told I was those things too. The bullying was much worse when i was 12 and would have gotten more worse as I got older if my family stayed living there. But they have never touched me because they would have gotten in trouble if they did because of "Hands to yourself rule." That's why I always got in troiuble for defending myself because it was psyical. If I did it by words, then I wouldn't have. I can remember getting in fights with other kids and we both get in trouble because that other kid was kicking me back and I was kicking him back and we were hitting each other and the teachers wouldn't care who the bad guy was and who the victim was.
I also get in trouble too for not understanding the rules. I learn them and then get confused when I see kids breaking them and it confuse the shit out of me so I think it was okay after all to do and do it and I get in trouble. I didn't understand when to break the rules and when not to do it and other kids knew but none of them never told me or helped me. I just kept breaking rules I saw other kids breaking because I was fighting to be like everyone else and be normal and I never gave up. One time my mother had me videotaped in class and she saw the other kids doing goofy stuff and here was me being perfect not doing anything weird or funny but after lunch I started to act up and get hyper because my pills wore off and the school made a big deal out of me even though the other kids were caught on camera too but they were still mad about my behavior. Discrimination. I think treating a child differently than other kids is abuse and punishing a child for having troubles figuring out the rules is abuse. Makes the child feel they aren't normal and there is soemthing wrong with them and they have to try harder to be normal so they can get the same rights too and it makes them hate who they are. When I joined the autism forums I discovered I wasn't the only one who had that same shit, others were treated the same way too so NTs sure had a bad name and that's why there is NT bashing and I don't blame them.
They would also get in trouble for defending themselves too and it took me till my adulthood to find out not that I got in trouble for defending myself, it was the way i did it. If I have never touched them, I would have never gotten in trouble. We get in trouble for the way we handle our problems, not because we're autistic so I can't call that abuse anymore.

I remember I get in trouble for fighting with a little kid because they were upsetting me. I discovered other autistics were treated like bad guys too for fighting with their little siblings or other younger kids or for doing things to them because they were bugging them. My mom claims she abused me when i was little. i overheard her saying that to my shrink when i was 16. I never asked her how was I abused. I'm assuming she was talking about punishing me for my symptoms when i was little such as the time she got mad at me for misunderstanding her when she kept telling me to "stop that teasing" and I took it literal because I stop the teasing I was doing and do another one and she kicked me out of the car finally and drove off 50 feet and yelled at me to get back in.
She used to get mad at me too for whenever I have anxiety or whenever I cry. She say "Stop crying like a two year old" "Quit acting like a big baby" and she punish me for way i handle problems. I also had young emotions too and I get in trouble for it too and I always thought my mother was mean and I was being picked on. She just didn't understand till I was 12 and then she changed her ways because she was more patient and didn't expect me to know everything I should know because she learned I need concrete information and my mind works differently than other people. I also have anxiety too and she stopped getting mad at me about it. Things got easier after the diagnoses. My mother used to get mad at me about my obsessions too. Lot of parents do and some still get mad after their child is diagnosed. I have had aspie friends who even get in trouble for having AS. I see that as abuse. Makes the child feel bad about themselves and gives them low self esteem. I have seen that a lot on WP where kids go and they rant about their lives because of their abused families. They get punished for their AS behavior. I usually see that in The Haven.

IMO lot of aspies and auties have been abused. By their familes, their school system, other grown ups, etc. And what I mean by abuse is no support for their needs and they get in trouble for something that isn't their fault or for having AS/autism such as when they get sensory overloaded. But sometimes it's innocent because they didn't know but after their child is diagnosed or they find out what might be wrong, then they know better. I have forgiven my mother a long time ago because she didn't know. But when I was 16 she emotionally abandoned me because she started to get mad about my anxiety again and told me I was an embarrassment to the family because I embrasse my brothers. Took me till my adult hood to find out I am not an embarrassment to my family and that was before they understood me. I don't embarasse them anymore because they understand now and so do their friends. Took them a few years to figure out "The Beth rules" when they have lot of people over. But it never bothered me when my parents have guests over because they are neat and they don't move things and they don't get in my space or get real loud.


People asking me if I was abused is always a complicated question for me to answer because I don't know if I answer yes or no. Sometimes I say 'yes' sometimes I say 'no' depending on what I am thinking of the word abuse. There is different kinds of abuse.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Natalia Evans on September 03, 2007, 11:40:34 PM
Sorry about that Spokane_Girl. Actually, is he NT or no?



I'm not so sure. He has brain damage but he has like every AS symptom there is but he isn't textbook. Everytime he asks me if I think he is NT I say "I don't know."
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: SovaNu on September 04, 2007, 12:13:48 AM
thanks Spokane, that was a great reply. see, this is what i love about aspies, you get a thorough reply when you ask something.

i meant emotional by mental abuse.

i agree with everything you said.

it sucks aspies get abused a lot, it's almost bound to happen unless one's family is superunderstanding. my mom also changed toward me after i was diagnosed. she was more understanding.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: duncvis on September 04, 2007, 03:26:56 AM
 :plus: for SG...
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: DirtDawg on September 04, 2007, 05:23:28 AM


Brain damaged!!

:LMAO:
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: El on September 04, 2007, 06:48:11 AM
Some of us dont see the need to justify everything that we say. I hope you pick on every other person who does not justify their arguements like you seem to be doing here.

Wow!  A statement you yourself CAN back up! :minusevil:

It's a paraphilia.  I've not studied them much, but I know people can classically condition themselves to associate something with sexual arousal/gratification by masturbating in tandem/proximity with that thing ro a fantasy of it.  Only SG can know/say if she was abused.  For all I know she's just really really kinky.


I hope you're not mistaking me for having a sexual interest in children because I don't. I don't have anything to do with them. I don't even want to have sex with them. I would never let them do my fantasies with me.

Paraphilia, not pedophilia.  A paraphilia is a fetish (any fetish) that's not normally socially acceptable.  I don't think you're a pedo.
Title: Re: No no no no
Post by: Alex179 on September 04, 2007, 08:22:22 AM
I am sorry to hear you were abused as a child SG.   My dad used to like to lock me and my brother both in a dark closet when we were misbehaving.    He used to give "dummy slaps" when we made mistakes too.    Those are hardly good childhood memories.   As someone who was small for his age, I had my fair share of bullying as well.   I wouldn't be surprised if most of the people here had some similar experiences.  It is really sad that autistic/AS children are treated so poorly by adults who do not understand or even care to understand the circumstances.