Women are taking the power nowadays

[MVitaly5]

"Another person's family (or relationship) is a dark place!"

1). The main mistake of any third parties; friends, relatives, members of the public, to interfere in the relationship of an adult couple of people. Unless, of course, there are criminal acts involved. Third party interference, even well-intentioned, always only harms that relationship.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions!"
Adults should sort out their relationships themselves, without interference! Besides, the third party, always risks to be extreme (guilty) in the end, if he refuses from neutrality, with all the ensuing consequences, up to the loss of relations with one of the parties, or even with both. And a wise person should realize this.
2). The third party, no matter how close to any of the participants in the relationship, cannot know all aspects and nuances of their life together. And it is a mistake (or foolish self-confidence) of some to think that they can objectively judge any of the participants in this relationship. Accordingly, the third party, a priori is not objective, and this should be learned as a standard of behavior in such cases, namely the observance of neutrality as the most constructive approach!
3). In conflict situations of couples, its parties, being in a stressful state, in a state of resentment, characteristic vindictiveness, on emotions, can behave inadequately and irrationally! About what, already after the fact, many regret their behavior. And this should be understood by all witnesses of this! And as a conclusion, do not seek to "appoint guilty or not guilty". Don't be a judge. It does not take long to "label" someone, but such an initiative often ends badly for the reputation and moral image of the initiator.
4). Do not fall for the provocations of individuals who loudly start demanding, blackmailing, that someone condemn or justify someone, and at the same time demanding to join their "sect" of various passionary minorities who are very jealous in their initiatives. More often than not, people who advocate too zealously for the alleged defense of someone's freedom often neglect other people's freedom in other aspects of life. Moreover, such "activists" begin to put pressure on the justice system. This is the paradox and the problem of the whole system of morality and justice, that the latter is forced not to prove the guilt of the potentially "condemned" from the point of view of legality and criminalistic methods, but under the pressure of various minorities, often neglecting elementary evidence of guilt. And society has to live in such a system of morality and justice. But the paradox of such a system is that there are many different active minorities, and they all have their own views on this, often diametrically opposed. If somewhere it is allowed to have sexual intercourse at the age of 15, it means that some "minority" pushed through this legislative initiative, and another "minority" may not like it very much. That's what makes all this mess, misunderstanding and uncertainty. And justice always swings between imposed morality and aspects of legal law, which often contradict each other. And this happens because it is not the majority of people who rule, but various minorities, because the latter are more passionate and active in their activities, in promoting and imposing their ideas.

[PIERRE WOODMAN]

OK Vitaly it's easy to say but at the end of the day the lives of people are in danger sometimes only because the people in charge of the law are not able to react with intelligence !!!
It's valid in both cases when girls are victims and not considered has victims but also when a man is accused of harassment or rape etc and he did nothing ...
Look on Netflix the "Outreau case" and see what a shame for a nation the justice can be sometimes ...

PW

[Jean]

Le récit sur Ricardo est frappant ! Tu lis ça, tu te dis Putain , le mec à déconné grave, il est descendu très très loin, dans sa descente aux enfers, même XXX (Stéphane Pacaud) sur LP , avait pris le temps de lui adresser un message de "compassion", face à sa souffrance d'avoir perdu Cayenne Klein, c'est dire !!!

[MVitaly5]

OK Vitaly it's easy to say but at the end of the day the lives of people are in danger sometimes only because the people in charge of the law are not able to react with intelligence !!!
It's valid in both cases when girls are victims and not considered has victims but also when a man is accused of harassment or rape etc and he did nothing ...
Look on Netflix the "Outreau case" and see what a shame for a nation the justice can be sometimes ...

PW

Do you and I have any contradictions in this, I don't understand you?

[PIERRE WOODMAN]

No any contradiction just telling you it's not a simple thing to deal every day with the actual world !!!

même XXX (Stéphane Pacaud) sur LP , avait pris le temps de lui adresser un message de "compassion", face à sa souffrance d'avoir perdu Cayenne Klein, c'est dire !!!

Ah bon !!! Pas vu ou alors j'ai oublié mais Cayenne n'a jamais vraiment été avec Ricardo. Il l'a utilisé un temps pour son business puis elle a épousé Nicolas Guccione ( raison pour laquelle il a été sympa avec Ricardo à une période puis l'a laché aprés que ses 4000 $ soient partis en drogue et alcool !!!
Ensuite Nicolas a emmené Cayenne à New York ce qui est normal vu qu'elle était devenue sa femme ...


PW

[MVitaly5]

No any contradiction just telling you it's not a simple thing to deal every day with the actual world !!!


PW

Do you think that I am simplifying everything or just blabbering? I wasn't born yesterday either, and I can give you a hundred and more examples from real life....
It's not a question of "easy to say". It is not easy to talk about it, because many people are simply afraid to talk about it, because they are afraid to offend or anger some minorities, connected with artificially imposed false sense of tolerance and tolerance to various manifestations of freedom of others. I am not saying that these feelings are inappropriate in all cases, tolerance and tolerance to the behavior of others, sometimes appropriate and diplomatic, shows both the culture of upbringing and civility. But not when it; 1). Happens unilaterally, in which your rights, or the rights of most people are infringed. 2). Everything turns into a "theater of the absurd", against all logic and common sense. 3). The elementary laws of Nature are questioned or spat upon, and attempts to elevate man above certain limits of morality, behavior and freedom of his will.
Therefore, it is also necessary to talk about it, at least to show our attitude to everything that is happening. Because it is the amorphous and indifferent behavior of the majority of people for various reasons that gives an opportunity to various more passionate and active minorities to promote their ideas in society and the justice system, respectively.
And if we treat everything indifferently, thinking that we do not influence anything anyway, then the point is to whine and defend our rights when we ourselves will be affected by the consequences of all this....

[PIERRE WOODMAN]

You are making a very complicate statement Vitaly !!!
I am lost ...

PW

[MVitaly5]

You are making a very complicate statement Vitaly !!!
I am lost ...

PW

In this thread, you and other participants discussed specific people you know and various situations that have arisen with them. And there was a discussion with different opinions.
I don't know these people, and I am not informed about the situations these people got into, so I don't consider myself entitled to discuss these people and analyze these situations.
But after reading all the comments, I have expressed my opinion in the form of a philosophical and conceptual justification, which is closely intertwined with modern real life. At least as I see it.
It is clear that it is not always correct to adjust real life to some clear rules and recommendations, but to know these recommendations and use them as basic principles, I think it can save a person from some problems.
You, in fact, were provoked and demanded from you to clearly define your position on this issue and to determine whose side, as a third party, you take, which forced you, in fact, to justify yourself and state your position in detail. You expressed it as neutral, which in my opinion is absolutely correct position in such issues. And you also explained why you have such a position on this situation as a third party.
I wrote about it in my post in the form of philosophical and conceptual justification of human behavior in some life situations, at least in my opinion.

[TON618]

I'm going to give you a "philosophical" thought speaking as the father of two teenage daughters.

I thought this forum was a place to discuss porn, but I instead found a place where people are disrespectful of other members and now I find out that the owner (someone I up-to-now thought I respected) sympathises with diddlers ffs!!
There is no third person or remaining "neutral" in situations when you find out that your best friend abuses women and rapes children. You ditch them, fast, no questions.
I've spent some time today reading back about your relationship with this Belgian monster who incidentally has been to jail several times for raping children, so don't try to claim you didn't know about him, don't believe the stories or convictions etc.
That makes you in my book as sick as him and I'm amazed that nobody has told you that. Kids that are 15 years old are CHILDREN in any country, hell most of them are still kids at 21! Yet YOU condone the abuse of them by claiming to be a good supportive friend of one of these animals.

There is no excuse here, you've clearly stated what type of man you are by trying to cover for your "friend" who's now in JAIL AGAIN for abusing women and raping children. I hope the FBI look into this because I get the feeling this goes deeper.

Outta here.

[MVitaly5]

I'm going to give you a "philosophical" thought speaking as the father of two teenage daughters.

I thought this forum was a place to discuss porn, but I instead found a place where people are disrespectful of other members and now I find out that the owner (someone I up-to-now thought I respected) sympathises with diddlers ffs!!
There is no third person or remaining "neutral" in situations when you find out that your best friend abuses women and rapes children. You ditch them, fast, no questions.

Look, keep that hypocritical snot and emotion to yourself, okay?
Everyone here has daughters and no one approves of rapists and pedophiles!!!

I don't know the person in question and I don't know what he did! I was talking about these situations in general and any particular situation needs to be looked at individually.
I was simply saying that third parties do not always have the moral right to condemn or approve of someone, simply because they lack objective and truthful information to do so, and that their active intervention can only hurt.
It's just that there are a lot of blabbermouths around, like you, who think that they peeped through the keyhole when someone was raping or abusing someone. Again, I am not talking about the specific situation that is being discussed now, but about such situations in general.
No one can find anyone guilty until the court decides, and only the court can convict. And in your case, the court often passes biased and unjustified verdicts under the pressure of such "activists" as you.
You act here as a provocateur, in order to provoke a third person to make a biased choice in favor of some conflicting party!
And all your ostentatious, hypocritical indignation is nothing more than a provocative theatrical action to make an absolutely innocent person justify himself for the actions of others.