Paradise Split from LDS Scout Leader charged with several counts of criminal sexual conduct

[doubtingthomas]

Res, before I saw your reply, I was going to ask DT if this is what he has been building up to with all of the parsing and questioning. It all starts to make some kind of sense now, if that is the case - only DT can tell us.

Good Lord Jesus, I am speechless.

She is a young adult (of legal age when I was dating her). Her parents did give me permission to go out with her. Her parents thought I was a good boyfriend. But I'll admit, she was probably too young for me.

But if it is, DT, it seems as if you are depending on a bunch of mostly anonymous strangers on a message board for validation of your actions and/or self worth.

I am not look for validation. I do feel proud of myself. I have a high self-esteem

[malkie]

Res, before I saw your reply, I was going to ask DT if this is what he has been building up to with all of the parsing and questioning. It all starts to make some kind of sense now, if that is the case - only DT can tell us.

Good Lord Jesus, I am speechless.

She is a young adult (of legal age when I was dating her). Her parents did give me permission to go out with her. Her parents thought I was a good boyfriend. But I'll admit, she was probably too young for me.

But if it is, DT, it seems as if you are depending on a bunch of mostly anonymous strangers on a message board for validation of your actions and/or self worth.

I am not look for validation. I do feel proud of myself. I have a high self-esteem

Then I apologise again - it just seemed to me that you may have been trying to approach the essential question from multiple angles rather than coming straight out with it, and trying to find ways in which you could say we agreed with you and the situation was OK. That is what bothered me earlier.

[Res Ipsa]

Res, before I saw your reply, I was going to ask DT if this is what he has been building up to with all of the parsing and questioning. It all starts to make some kind of sense now, if that is the case - only DT can tell us.

Good Lord Jesus, I am speechless.

She is a young adult (of legal age when I was dating her). Her parents did give me permission to go out with her. Her parents thought I was a good boyfriend. But I'll admit, she was probably too young for me.

But if it is, DT, it seems as if you are depending on a bunch of mostly anonymous strangers on a message board for validation of your actions and/or self worth.

I am not look for validation. I do feel proud of myself. I have a high self-esteem

Then what’s the problem? You dated an adult. No one accused you of grooming or even implied that you are a groomer. In context, IHAQ’s reference to young people was pretty clearly to minors that we wouldn’t necessarily think of as children. Why would you think he’s referring to some reference you pulled out of an encyclopedia?

[doubtingthomas]

pretty clearly to minors that we wouldn’t necessarily think of as children

Not necessarily, the word "child" can mean "below the legal age of majority".

When you said, " intentional, non-violent conduct intended to result in illegal sexual contact with children" you didn't mention "young people".

Why would you think he’s referring to some reference you pulled out of an encyclopedia?

The reference is just one example. No one would disagree that young adults are young people.

As I said before, many people now believe that men who talk to younger women, are engaging in predatory behavior. The rhetoric is out there. That is the reason why I don't like the wording of IHAQ's reference. Does that make sense?

Then I apologise again - it just seemed to me that you may have been trying to approach the essential question from multiple angles rather than coming straight out with it, and trying to find ways in which you could say we agreed with you and the situation was OK. That is what bothered me earlier..

I understand.

I think it's helpful to limit the label "grooming" to non-violent behavior designed to lead to and conceal illegal sexual contact.

I honestly see some problems with your definition. Is it grooming when an 18 year old is secretly dating a 17 year old in the state of California? Or when the 18 year old travels to another state to see his girlfriend?

Would your definition of grooming apply in the Middle East? Because sex is illegal outside of marriage.

Does your definition of grooming apply in your state (Washington state)? The age of consent is 16 in your state. According to your definition, a 61 year old talking to a 16 year old, wouldn't be grooming.


Now, I don't want mention the laws (and the culture) in Mexico.

Can you please expand on what you mean by grooming?

[doubtingthomas]

I pointed out some of the serious problems with Res Ipsa's definition of grooming.

[Marcus]

I pointed out some of the serious problems with Res Ipsa's definition of grooming. Apparently, Res Ipsa believes grooming only happens when the behavior is designed to lead to illegal sex. Res Ipsa has a lot of explaining to do because not all predatory behavior is illegal.

Knock it off. You are twisting words.

[doubtingthomas]

Knock it off. You are twisting words.

"I think it's helpful to limit the label "grooming" to non-violent behavior designed to lead to and conceal illegal sexual contact" - Res Ipsa

So a behavior designed to and conceal legal sexual contact wouldn't be grooming? Does his definition apply in the middle east? Or on some of the other situations I pointed out yesterday?

We need clarification. Hopefully I am misunderstanding his view.

[Marcus]

Knock it off. You are twisting words.

"I think it's helpful to limit the label "grooming" to non-violent behavior designed to lead to and conceal illegal sexual contact. "

So a behavior designed to and conceal legal sexual contact wouldn't be grooming? Does his definition apply in the middle east? Or on some of the other situations I pointed out yesterday?

We need clarification. Hopefully I am misunderstanding his view.

Yes you are. And you are twisting meanings, in ways others have already noted several times. Start your own thread, please.

[doubtingthomas]

"I think it's helpful to limit the label "grooming" to non-violent behavior designed to lead to and conceal illegal sexual contact" - Res Ipsa

So a behavior designed to and conceal legal sexual contact wouldn't be grooming? Does his definition apply in the middle east? Or on some of the other situations I pointed out yesterday?

We need clarification. Hopefully I am misunderstanding his view.

Yes you are. And you are twisting meanings, in ways others have already noted several times. Start your own thread, please.

thumbs-up.

[doubtingthomas]

And you are twisting meanings, in ways others have already noted several times.

Sure Marcus.

But I am asking about Res Ipsa's definition.