+865 It's weird to think that a 17 year old and 20 year old can't legally have sex, but the day you turn 18 you're free to go have sex with a 60 year old, amirite?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually, in a majority of American states (and numerous countries) the legal age of consent is 16. And most states/countries have "Romeo and Juliet" exceptions for situations where the age difference is minimal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I thought age of consent just meant that you can have sex, but not with an adult (or someone within 3 or 4 years difference in age)?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah I just read that. My mistake.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

What's a Romeo and Juliet exception?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

http://www.amirite.net/571627 Plus the older becomes a "rapist"

by Anonymous 13 years ago

oh god lol that again? why would you promote that???

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I still don't understand how it's rape if both people want to do it.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's what I'm sayin...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If if a precocious seven year old consents to have sex with a 47 year old?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

In Australia it's 16. And, yeah, it is a little odd, especially since I've heard of people who wait until their partner turns 18/16/of age when there's a large gap. But, the law's the law. It's the same as, if you live in a country where the drinking age is 18, if you're 17 and 364 days old, you can get fined for drinking in a bar, yet the very next day, it's legal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If only there were some sort of way to test if a person is responsible. Then we could simply let people take a test at a certain age and if they pass they can then buy alcohol. Then some people would never be able to buy alcohol, and the young responsible people could.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

True, that would be ideal. But that would be like most things - it would cost too much money and be almost impossible to get a system in place to test how responsible people are with alcohol.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

in Canada, you can. Not only because of age of consent, but you can have 5 years between you and your partner before it's illegal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I dunno where in Canada you are but I believe here it is 3 or 4 years.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/clp/faq.html

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Hmm cool. I never really knew, though now I know my high school bf wasn't illegally with me.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Actually its when your more than six years apart, that its illegal. So a 14 year old couldn't do it with a 20 year old, but a 15 year old could.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Research your shit.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No, you research your shit. They're right. In many places in the world there are "Romeo and Juliet" laws that make a minimal age difference (varies between 2 and 5 years) legal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

My state has one, that it's not considered a crime if you're under 16 and over 10 (yes FUCKING TEN) also long as there's less than 2 years age difference between you and your partner. We're also the only state in Australia that has an age of consent difference between heterosexual sex (16) and male homosexual sex (18).

by Anonymous 13 years ago

still less than six

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Technically if two kids under the age of consent have sex, by law, they are raping each other

by Anonymous 13 years ago

And can be labeled sex offenders...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

which is just turrible

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Maaaaan, you a knuckwlhead fo reminded me of Charles Barkley

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's only in a select few places. Most states/countries have "Romeo and Juliet" laws that take care of that loophole.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's for people of the legal age though. You have to be the age of consent for that to apply (ie 16 and 18, not 14 and any age, assuming the age of consent is 16).

by Anonymous 13 years ago

No. "Romeo and Juliet" laws is an umbrella term for all age of consent exceptions. In most places, as long as two minors do not have a certain age difference (which varies everywhere), it is 100% legal for them to have sex.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah I just read that. Sorry.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Though apparently there are other laws for people under the age of consent. Ultimately it depends on where you are and what those laws are.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I've heard of cases where two underage kids had sex, and then one of their parents sued the other, and then the other parents counter-sued.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I just think it's creepy when the government intrudes on people's personal lives like that. Rape is rape, but if the 17 year old wants to do a 20 year old, I don't see why the law needs to interfere.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Because there needs to be something in place to prevent pedophilia. For that there needs to be some legal age of consent.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, but once you're over 16 or so, you're a bit old for a pedophile, right? I think I heard somewhere that pedophiles only like prepubescent kids?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, true, which is why the law in most places is 16. But, even though you're not a child at 15-ish, you're still not deemed to be fully aware of what you are consenting to. A broad generalisation I know, as many teens are aware of the implications of sex, but I think it's necessary.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

This is true. Fact is that kids are more prone to making mistakes because of a lack of understanding and knowledge. Not to say adults aren't capable of making mistakes when it comes to sex, just that kids are more likely to because they don't really know what they're getting into and thus adults need to do what we can to prevent problems especially with something as serious as sex and teens. Does that make sense?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Sex isn't a bad ol' boogeyman like some people make it out to be, but it is still something that requires maturity, not just to protect yourself physically (STDs, pregnancy) but emotionally too. I'm trying to find this old checklist for "Are you ready for sex?" and it has an emotional one "Will you still respect yourself after sex? Will your partner respect you? How will you feel if your partner breaks up with you after sex? Are you prepared to go to a doctors and get regular pap smears, STD check? etc." And a physical one "Have you considered all birth control options? Are you using birth control and a condom? Are you able to draw a picture of the external and internal female genitalia, and the external and internal male genitalia? (I found that question the most interesting, because if someone doesn't know the organs, then it would be clear they aren't ready for sex.) Do you know where to go if the condom breaks? etc."

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That sounds perfect and quite a bit like the questions I asked myself and my bf when I was sixteen. I think it is very important to be open with your partner about what you want and how you feel and the concerns you may have before ever having sex (I don't care what your age). If you aren't comfortable talking about sex then you shouldn't be having in IMO.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah. Like, I used to go to a transgender youth group, and when we had a sex ed day, and one of the main things they stressed was communication - and I think this applies for everyone, not just trans people - that is, sit down with your partner with your clothes on and talk about what you are and aren't comfortable with, what protection you'll be using, etc. It might be awkward, but it's far less uncomfortable than finding out with your clothes off.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You're trans gender? That's cool. I had several conversations with my bf before we ever did anything. I also talked to my mom about birth control. It was a good relationship that I've never had any regrets about even though it was years ago. Since then I was raped and have only had sex with one person after that. I felt like a virgin only more scared. The guy I was with was incredibly understanding and even convinced me to get counseling which was amazing for me. We always talked about what we wanted and how I felt. The whole thing renewed my faith in men and myself and sexuality. /offtopic

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's good that you can talk to your mum freely about things like birth control. I'm very sorry about you being raped, and your recovery since then. I was put on birth control at 10, because the rates of sexual assault where I live are so high, that the local council even recommended that females be on the birth control pill as soon as they start to menstruate. Thankfully, I was never sexually assaulted or abused. And, yes, I'm a transsexual man (female-to-male). I'm also a gay man, so I suppose there is a slight risk of pregnancy, even though I haven't menstruated in years, and I'm mostly top during sex.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's so cool. :) I don't think I've personally met a trans gender (I can't make it one word as my nee iPod hates me and I don't know how, sorry) person as far as I know but I think it's awesome that you know yourself so well and are comfortable. I love that I can talk to my mom about everything, including my most recent relationship. I wish everyone could have a mom like mine. So forgive me if this is an offensive question, but should I consider you a trans gender woman or a gay man? I should think gay man, but correct me if I'm wrong. Message me if you'd prefer a slightly more private conversation and I think I've gone quite off topic lol.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If you don't know the answers to these questions, it means you aren't "ready for sex" but it doesn't mean if you do have sex then it's rape. If you're 14 then you should know whether or not it's rape and you should be able to testify that you agreed to it. The age of the other person is irrelevant.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The questions were for people over the age of consent. If you're under the age of consent, then you can't legally give consent, therefore any sex you have is unconsenting. I understand that statutory rape is different from forced or violent rape, but someone under 16 is not deemed to know enough about sex to fully understand what they are agreeing to. And that is a broad generalisation - there may be some 14 year olds who are mature beyond their age, and do know and understand, but the law it put in place to protect minors.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If you give consent, then it's consensual. If you are 14, then nobody should stop you from having sex. If you get raped then you can charge them with rape, but if you have sex with someone too old for you, and you are not pre-pubescent, and you know enough about sex, then you should be able to tell the difference between consensual and nonconsensual.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

If you're under the age of consent, then you're not legally allowed to get consent. I'm not denying that a lot of 14 years old may know what they're doing, but they're if they're not legally allowed to give consent in their state, then it's still statutory rape.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Why aren't they allowed? If you're 14, why is a 16-year-old any less likely to be a rapist than a 27-year-old? And if they were a rapist, then the 14-year-old would press charges, just like an 18-year-old would.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

We are not discussing violent or forced rape here. We are talking about statutory rape, which is sex with a minor, regardless of whether they agreed to it or not. By law, a minor isn't legally able to consent to sex, therefore any sex they have is against the law, regardless of whether they agreed or not. They aren't allowed because they are underage. What are you trying to argue?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I thought it was obvious that I wasn't saying that's NOT the law, I'm arguing that it SHOULDN'T be the law. Rape by definition is forced sex, therefore rape that is not forced rape does not exist, and should not be punishable because it's not rape! It looks repetitive when you use the exact same phrase "Regardless of whether they agreed or not" multiple times. Go find a thesaurus.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Rape by definition is unconsented sex. Consent is a big issue, and there are blurry lines - for example, if the person has a mental health problem, and they agree to sex, are they truely aware of what they are agreeing to? If a person is under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and they agree to sex, are they in the right mind to know? If a person is underage, do they truely understand the implications? Mate, I was getting repetitive because I was stressing the same thing - a minor cannot legally agree to a sexual act.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Just try to word it differently so it doesn't look stupid. Do you really think a 14-year-old has the same mental capacity as a drunk woman, or a mentally disabled person? We took Sex Ed, we know the stuff, we understand the implications, we are aware of what we are getting into, we aren't old enough to do drugs. Why can't we have sex with an adult? And why is it any different if the other person is 4 years older than the minor or 40 years older?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I don't think that a 14 year old has the same mental capacity as a drunk person or a mentally handicapped person. I do however, think that they don't have the same mental understanding as someone who is 16, just like someone who is 16 doesn't have the same understanding as a 18 year old, who does not have the same understanding of a 20 year old, who does not have the same understanding of a 25 year old. I reckon 16 is a perfectly reasonable age of consent. I disagree that the majority of 14 year olds would be aware of what they're getting into. And, yes, two years is a small amount of time, but the teen years are when the mind develops most.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Teenagers are aware of whether or not they want to have sex, and if they don't like it then they press charges themselves. All they have to do is dial 9-1-1, and you are NOT going to try to tell me that this generation doesn't know how to use a phone. It's not a matter of knowing what they're getting into (BTW we are fully aware of the risks, we just don't care). Even if they're not prepared for the risk of STIs and pregnancies, that is their problem. If it doesn't harm anyone but yourself, you should be allowed to make the decision. I'n pretty sure one of the main reasons rape is such a big crime is because from what I hear, it hurts like hell. Maybe you've heard the saying "It's not rape if they like it." Pre-pubescent children are not physically capable of "liking it," and they don't know anything about it so they can be easily manipulated, so the above paragraph does not apply. The same cannot be said about 14-year-olds.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"Just try to word it differently so it doesn't look stupid." HAHA, I can't get over this. This is a tell-tale sign that you're losing! fail! Lincoln: And that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth... Noneoftheabove: Did you know you repeated people? you sound stupid. You should word that differently. Did you know I'm losing this debate?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How does me criticizing your grammar for ONE FUCKING SENTENCE prove that teenagers are prone to getting raped? Making Ad Hominen arguments is a telltale sign that you are failing epicly at this debate.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Repetition is not a matter of grammar, idiot. Nor did you criticize MY grammar. Nor am I debating with you. FAILFAILFAILFAILFAIL.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): I AM NOT CRITICIZING YOUR GRAMMAR!!!!!!!!!! I was criticizing Simon's repitition, I never said anything about your grammar.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

*Repetition, wise one. You never criticized my grammar? No shit. That's why I'm correcting you. Quote: "How does me criticizing your grammar for ONE FUCKING SENTENCE prove that teenagers are prone to getting raped?"

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I just got you and Simon mixed up. I wasn't criticizing your grammar, I said that by accident. Sorry, Simon.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh, and by the way, you should take your own advice. You saying that Simon's usage of repetition is stupid is "Ad Hominen", using your defintion. And saying that he used "drinking" twice in an earlier reply. But then again, I have no idea what "Ad Hominen" is. I do know ad hominem. You know, without capitalization and with an m. Go to school, scrub. Your life is a fallacy.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): I thought it was ad hominem too, but other people spell it ad hominen. So if you really think grammar is so irrelevant, why are we still talking about it? And there are no synonyms for ad hominem. As for your second point, he was comparing the right to have sex with the right to drive and the right to drink, and then he used the two in analogies. However, in his analogies, he said drinking both times instead of drinking once and driving once. That has nothing whatsoever to do with grammar, I was just pointing out he made a typo. Now, can we please go back to the debate? And since you claim you know what an ad hominem argument is, please stop making them!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nobody spells it "ad hominen" retard, own up to your mistake. I don't care about the debate. And he didn't make a typo. You just failed to comprehend rhetorical structures. Once again, own up to yout mistake.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes he did. In the first example, maybe it was "rhetoric," I don't give a shit anymore. But in the second example, it was clearly a typo. The first time, he was making two points that both required that idea at the end, but he should have worded it differently in the second sentence. The other time, he said the same sentence twice in a row, and I knew what he meant, I was just pointing out that he used the wrong word. Obviously he didn't mean t do that. Why would he say the exact same thing twice in a row on purpose? Why would he say the exact same thing twice in a row on purpose? However, I will own up to my mistake. It was a mistake to take you seriously.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're still insanely uneducated if you think his repetition was a mistake. That's my only point. It doesn't make him sound stupid, it makes you stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Will you just shut the fuck up and leave me alone? Not just because it makes you look like a 10-year-old playground bully with no respect for other people, but because this conversation, or argument, or whatever you want to call it, is absolutely pointless. We both know that you are under the dillusion that I am a mentally disabled person, and however wrong that may be, nothing I say will change your mind, and vice-versa. Therefore we have nothing to gain from continuing this. Think about it: If you "know" someone is an absolute idiot, and you know they will never agree with you on anything, then why would you waste this much time talking to them? Please don't bitch about me being a hypocrite.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Cry, if it helps you feel better. I'll play a sad song on a violin. And at least you know you're a hypocrite, so props.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't have the slightest idea if you're serious, but if you are, then I will tell you that I don't cry, I can't hear you playing the violin over the internet, and even if it was possible for my fist to touch yours through the computer, I would rather let it touch your face. By the way, I hope you realize that by calling me a hypocrite you called yourself an absolute idiot. Maybe you should have read a little more of my comment than just the last sentence before replying. Unless your brain couldn't handle the rest of my comment. Wouldn't want you to die in the middle of the argument... Okay, I lied. That is exactly what I want.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA! OH. GOD. TOO. MUCH. The idea that you had to defend yourself against my accusation of you crying is so ridiculous! You're such a child! I don't even have the time or energy to argue with you anymore. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Good luck at life. You're probably crying right now (I'M NOT CRYING, I DON'T CRY! YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS!), but please know that being an idiot is something that can be changed. With like, brain surgery.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't care if you're going to get brain surgery, you don't have to tell me indirectly like that. You say you don't have the time or energy to argue with me? Okay, then stop replying to my comments. By the way, you're not offensive enough to make me cry, but keep working on it. Stop praticing on me, though, because I don't have enough emotion. I'm sure there are some 6-year-old girls somewhere on the internet for you to troll. You definitely have potential, though. If trolling was an actual job, you would have a pretty good shot at employee of the month. Good luck! Sincerely, -noneoftheabove

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Changed my mind. I like how you're trying so hard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Repeating one or two words does make it sound better. Repeating an entire phrase does not.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Once again, proving your stupidity. I applaud your spunk, kiddo.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How does us having a difference of opinion when it comes to repetition provide evidence of my supposedly inferior inteligence? I haven't the slightest idea what spunk is, but I think that's the first time you've actually said something to me that wasn't insulting. Thank you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not a matter of opinion. That's like having a difference of opinion on where to place a question mark. (How? about here) You're wrong, the end. But you've learned to spell "repetition", so +1. If you leave others alone, I'll leave you alone.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's so weird how you still seem to think that I'm the mean, insulting one here, when I only briefly mentioned grammar, after you've just made like a million comments solely dedicated to calling me stupid. And yes, how stupid something looks is a matter of opinion. And for what is hopefully the last time, "you're wrong" is not evidence that I am wrong. It is only evidence that you think I'm wrong, which has been fairly obvious.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's like arguing with a child. There is no point, so I'm not. I'm just going to continue to antagonize you until you stop posting. When you post, I win. Simple.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(anomnomnomnomnomnom.): If I don't post, you win, because people will think I surrendered. If you "win" either way then it's not really a victory because there was no opposition. Fortunately you're wrong. I don't understand how my posting something at least moderately intelligent as a response to your random bullshit is proof that you are victorious. However, if you need things to be that simple, then keep thinking that. At least you give me something to do when I'm bored.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No. Unfortunately, you've got it wrong. The more you type, the more of an idiot you sound like. Which means you lose. "Moderately intelligent". WOW. WOW. WOW. You are deluded. But I'm just going to continue regardless because 1. It's fun to read you complain about how meannnnnnnnn I am, and 2. I mentor special needs kids, so I know how to deal with your kind, and 3. I never pass up the opportunity to work an idiot up. Should I use more "ad hominen"? You're getting what you deserve. You can dish it but you can't take it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

WHAT THE FUCK DID I DO TO DESERVE THIS? I really doubt that you're good with kids. Also, since you know, and always knew since this began, how to spell ad hominem, spelling it wrong makes you look stupid. I'm not that sadistic, and I doubt I enjoy this as much as you do, but I've got nothing else to do, so if you really want to, feel free to continue. I don't actually give a shit what you think, so by all means stick to your ridiculous beliefs.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Are you fully aware that I spelled it wrong to quote you, or are you just fully retarded? But aw, you finally learned how to spell it right. What a doll. You actually do are. Which is why you reply. And I love watching stupid things, like professional wrestling and the CW, so I reply as well.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I actually do are? Whatever that means, I think I know more about my motives than you do. I know you were quoting me, but it is prety unfair to quote something I said so long ago. Look up "Fairness" in the dictionary if you don't know what it means.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I know TV Tropes isn't an academic source, but this explains it more: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/Consent

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It says children "should not be forced to make take that kind of responsibility!" First of all, if they are forced to, then it's rape, no question. Second, teenagers are not children. They are not adults, but they are absolutely not children. Third, if having sex with that person is a bad idea, then it's the teenager's fault and the teenager's problem (unless it really is rape). And why would it be a worse idea based on how many years ago their partner's mother gave birth to him/her? Age is of importance, but has nothing to do with rape.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You make petty arguments, "you sound repetitive" HAHA, have you ever heard of rhetoric?! Simon 1, Noneoftheabove -3256457753. You fail.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That wasn't an argument, I was just pointing that out because it looked stupid. So does your scoring method.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Since when does rhetoric look stupid? Contrarily, I think failing to recognize rhetoric looks stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): What looked stupid is that he said the exact same thing twice. I was just being a grammar nazi: this has NOTHING to do with the debate.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

REPETITION IS NOT A MATTER OF GRAMMAR! If you're a Grammar Nazi, I'd love to see Grammar Hitler. Don't try to be a Grammar Nazi when you're A. Wrong about the issue, and B. Not dealing with issues pertaining to grammar. That's actually annoying. Or "noneoftheabove" (i.e. "stupid, idiotic, retarded, dumb, unintelligent, imbecellic, dim-witted, bone-headed dumbass".) Oh, and since we're on grammar, Nazi is capitalized.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

GRAMMAR DOES NOT MATTER!!!!! And by the way, repitition is a matter of grammar, but grammar is really irrelevant to this debate. Although, I commend you on actually acknowledging that there is an issue other than grammar, so why don't we use that to get back on topic. So, why shouldn't 14-year-olds be allowed to have sex with adults?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

*repetition, you mean. If grammar doesn't matter, why did you point it out?!?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Grammar doesn't matter to the debate I thought you were involved in. I forgot you were just being a bitch and had nothing to do with the argument, so I tried to reintroduce the argument and forget about grammar. Then I realized I would have remembered if someone this stupid was involved in an intelligent debate, and that you had no intention whatsoever of discussing the laws of consent. In that sense, I was stupid. Forgive me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, you're stupid in every sense. You're the one who brought up grammar when you decided to be a bitch to Simon. You can't just pick and choose when someone should be allowed to be an asshole. And once again, the intelligence in this debate was always one-sided, and that side is Simon. I'm just glad he stopped humoring your prepubescent mind.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I wasn't being a bitch. As I've been desperately trying to explain, I barely mentioned grammar. And I wasn't picking when anyone could be an asshole. Do you think it was my decision for you to be an asshole constantly? Don't you think I would have just picked that you would shut the fuck up? Wait... you don't think at all. Never mind.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Fail. I'm even going to dignify this one. Are you ever trying?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Trying to do what? Arguing with you isn't exactly hard labour.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Then why do you suck ass at it?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No reason. (FYI, something that isn't true can't have a reason for being true. Try to think about that before you ask any more stupid questions.)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That was the WORST comeback of all time. Try again. Redo. Then why do you suck ass at it?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You've been alive for all time? Maybe you're old fashioned; that explains why you attacked someone who said teens should be allowed to give consent (You said you don't care about the debate, but you could have done this to Simon instead). And you've never heard a worse comeback? You clearly don't get out much; that explains why you are so stupid. And why you have no respect for other people. However, when I tell you not to ask stupid questions, I can't explain why you would just ask the SAME stupid question again.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And by the way, this whole debate makes you look stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): Can you find me a thesaurus? I need another word for stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): If you need a thesaurus to find another word for stupid, then you are a stupid, idiotic, retarded, dumb, unintelligent, imbecellic, dim-witted, bone-headed dumbass. Just listen to what other people call you, that should give you a good list of synonyms.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You forget the best one: noneoftheabove. Get it?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, I will not use that in my series of insults towards you. Sorry, but I will not say that you are me, despite your wish for it to be true.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me. I don't want to you to be you either. Let's hug!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(ANOMNOMNOMNOM!): Will you please SHUT THE FUCK UP with your ad hominen arguments and tell me HOW I look stupid? If I say "2+2=712344567688686747," that doesn't make it true, I have to prove it to be true. Prove, or at least explain with examples, that I look stupid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Example one: ad hominen.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How is your inability to debate a sign of my stupidity?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

OK never mind, you were talking about my spelling it wrong. I'm not even going to ask how misspelling a word in a dead language is a sign of me being so stupid that my username is a synonym for it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Do you like your own comments when you think they're clever? I've noticed that. It's fine. People who are wrong tend to do it. OH, now you admit you are spelling it wrong! I thought some people spelled it that way! REPEATEDLY misspelling a word is a sign of stupidity.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I never said it was right, and I did see some people spell it that way. Despite your incredible stupidity, I will take your word for it that you spelled it right. But I didn't spell it wrong out of stupidity, I spelled it wrong out of ignorance, because I didn't know the right way to spell it. And why do you say "I've noticed that," when the thing you noticed was posed as a question? That implies you don't know (which you don't). Anyway, you're not going to deny that you repeatedly dislike my comments. But even if I did that, why would that mean I'm wrong? Liking my own comments just means I think I'm right, and has nothing to do with whether or not I am right. Of course, reasoning with you is pointless, because it's obvoius you don't care about who's right or wrong, you just like insulting me. I would ask why, but I know I wouldn't get a real answer.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

STOP USING AD HOMINEN IT HURTZ.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I already did, you retard. In case you didn't notice, I didn't even use that word, let alone misspell it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Does calling me a retard make you feel less retarded? If so, by all means. You're just trying sooo hard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not possible for me to feel less retarded. Some things just can't become negative. I hate liars with passion and I am bent on always telling the truth. That's the only reason I called you a retard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I love it when you try to defend yourself ("It's not possible!!!!!!!"). I hate retards, so I'm inclined to mercilessly flame those who try to pass themselves off as functioning individuals. And that's why I call you a retard.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nearly everyone tries to pass themselves off as functioning individuals, but I know you don't "mercilessly flame" everyone on this website (Even though you're anonymous, I would have recognized your very unique form of idiocy). However, I CAN pass myself off as a functioning individual, as can most people. It may be hard for you, but it's quite easy to pass as something you already are ("you" as in "any given person," not "anomnomnomnomnom"). If you love it when I try to defend myself, you must adore the way I succeed. So if I'm giving you so much pleasure, then why do you hate me so much?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"You must adore the way I succeed" JHAKJSEKJLGJKAGBA HAHAHAHHAHAAH! Sweet heart, you don't even make any sense! What in the HELL was that first part?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Try reading the first part. Then you'll understand it. In theory.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"In theory" You're not clever, so stop trying. In practice.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Stop trying to do what? You didn't describe me doing anything.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

And I quote, "You're not clever, so stop trying." Kinda of like, "You're not a ballerina, so stop dancing". Are you retarded, or something? Do you only speak Canadian English?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Don't be generous, you're ignorant AND stupid. Do you type because it makes you feel accomplished? Read a book. I made an observation ("I have noticed that") and I posed a question. I don't know if that was an attempt to make you look smarter, but you failed. I only dislike your comments when you like them, because it's hilarious how worked up you get. I like insulting you because I'm secretly fascinated about how a clinically retarded person like yourself can use the internet.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How could anything you say be MY attempt to look smarter? Of course, every key you hit on your keyboard makes me look smarter by comparison, but that isn't my fault. I knew I wouldn't get a real answer to that question. And it isn't "secretly" if you're posting it on the internet. You hate me for making one typo in an uncommonly used latin word, but you don't even know what secretly means. How the hell could you know how "worked up" I get, or whether or not I liked my own comments? Are you spying on me or something?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You just prove your stupidity with each post! You obviously don't know the definition of fascination and it's positive connotation. Let it be known, I am outwardly disgusted by your stupidity, yet surreptitiously captivated. It's just never-ending. Oh, getting defensive now, aren't we?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Call me slow, but I just realized that while I've been making inteligent arguments, you have just been sticking random words together and posting them. In that case, banana table mountain gorilla archaeologist cheesecake. Pencil flashlight sadness vagina philosophy couch. Articulation pear shotgun unicorn internet feces? Eraser sunglasses latin globalization death grass library, amirite?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's the most sense you've ever made. Or perhaps all the sense you have to begin with. Regardless, I totally agree. You're less than an idiot that I thought (but still an idiot, nonetheless).

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm less than an idiot that you thought? I'm not going to say anything. Mainly because I want this to end.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Aw, you learned something today! And to think, just yesterday, you couldn't spell repetition and thought "ad hominen" was a logical fallacy! You've graduated. Go and be free, little bird.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's unbelievable how you still haven't learned to actually read my posts thoroughly before replying. Saying I'm "less than an idiot" could be interpreted as being good or bad. And I don't know the "idiot that I thought" so I can't figure out how much you've actually complimented me. However, unlike your pitiful, stubborn self would, I will assume that was a typo.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

i dnt makew tyipos. I WAS complimenting you. Now I take it back. You're more of an idiot.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How does noticing your grammar mistake make me an idiot? It's obvious that we both care about grammar and spelling, and a while ago you wouldn't shut up about it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Correcting a typo is hardly correcting one's grammar. Misspelling words REPEATEDLY and pointing out a false "grammatical error" is another issue. Some care more than others, frankly put.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If that wasn't a typo, then that was a grammar mistake. Even if it is a typo, I still thought you should know you spelled it wrong. Misspelling words REPEATEDLY due to not knowing how it is spelled is not a federal offense. How could you be expected to spell a word correctly without knowing the correct spelling? If you had pointed it out the first time I would have spelled it right every other time. The second part of that sentence is absolutely irrelevant and occurs nowhere on my side of the argument. I remember saying I didn't care if you continued to disagree with me, but these grammatical delusions are getting to be a pain in the ass.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Did you not understand what I said? You are truly an idiot. A typo is not a grammatical error, but a typographical one, THEREFORE a typo. Moron. I might mistype something, but at least I can spell. Unlike some people who quote Napolean while making ad hominen arguments about repitition. Why do you use words you can't spell then? That hardly makes sense. Please learn the definition of grammar.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm sorry to troll, but this is too funny. I'm making screen caps and I want my caption to be just right. Noneoftheabove, have you ever had luck looking of "Regardless of whether they agreed or not" in the thesaurus? Can you share with us an alternative word?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well, instead of saying "Regardless," you could say "No matter," or "Even though" and reword the rest of the sentence. Or you could say "want to" instead of "agreed to," or say "the person" or "the teenager" or "the 14-year-old" or "he/she" instead of "they." You wouldn't look up the whole phrase in the thesaurus, fair enough, but you could word it differently. By the way, I never use a thesaurus, I don't need to, but if the concept of avoiding repetition is new to you, the thesaurus is the best place to start.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're obviously retarded if you missed the sarcastic, taunting tone. And repetition, I repeat, IS A FORM OF RHETORIC. In that context particularly. To amend my previous "Ad Hominen", Simon, you're arguing with a special ed 12 year old virgin elf.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

For the sake of not having to use some worn-out comeback, I hope you were kidding with that last sentence. The repetition did not help to get the point across better, or give the comment any poetic element. But it really doesn't matter. I was just being a nerd, I admit it. It is perfectly fine to be repetitive. Can we please move back to the actual debate now?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I was using ad hominen, just like you taught me! Rhetoric isn't poetic... It's rhetoric. Something you lack in your psycho rapist rants. And you're not a nerd. Nerds can tell when repetition is being used for rhetoric. Nerds also don't use " ad hominen" You weren't being a nerd, you were being an ass, and I'm just trying to show you how it feels. But I'm glad you realize you were wrong.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Believing that 14-year-olds have rights does not make me a rapist. And once again, misspelling a latin word is not a sign of utter stupidity. It is actually quite ironic. You are HELLBENT on defeating my attempts to have an intelligent, mature debate, and in the process you called me a mentally disabled child.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Wait, where was th intelligent, mature debate? Did I miss it?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, or maybe you didn't read it because you were too busy criticizing my brief comment on grammar in one of those comments.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Cue the sad violins. :( I'm doing everyone a favor. You were just fucking up the debate with your nonsense points.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What favour? All you've been doing is randomly insulting someone you don't know. And I thought we established there was never a debate between us.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Try harder.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

To do what? That's the disadvantage to making a vague, 2-word post: People are going to be too busy asking questions to actually argue. And if I don't argue, this is no fun for you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"Try harder" so vague. Oh, so vague. Just give up, you're just so incompetent.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm "incompetent?" Now you're just screwing with me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Sorry, that's a big girl word.Iincompetent: Inability to perform; lack of competence; ineptitude. See: noneoftheabove

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Shit, you're a Canadian. This all suddenly makes sense. Your inability to defend yourself, your incoherency, all of it. I'm not wasting my time here anymore. Have a nice day. And for the love of God, get a life. Eh. Love, Anomnomnomnomnomnomnomnomnom

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So now you're racist? Just one more thing that's wrong with you. Problem is, I don't think there's any more room on the list. I have no idea why you think I have less of a life than you, when we've both spent about the same amount of time here. I'm surprised you ended your comment with "Love," although it sounds like you aren't going to reply to this. I'll be waiting right here for when you do. Don't keep me waiting.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

CANADIAN IS A RACE?!?!?! OH MY FREAKING GOD. ASGBALALJGHALGKHJAGLJAG BLOWS MY MIND! IT ALL MAKES SENSE!! Wow. Don't keep you waiting? I know you're probably young and desperate, and, judging from your previous posts, longing to be laid, but I'm not into you that way :/ Wait forever. Wait until marriage. WAIT UNTIL YOU ARE 18! There you go. Back on topic. PLATONIC LOVE, Anomnomnomnomnomnomnom

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Now you are a narcissist, and you think I'm gay, and you are under the impression that I'm desperate. Good thing I'm not making an actual list.By the way, racism isn't just about skin colour; discrimination between countries is still racism.I don't give a shit about sex right now. I just don't like pointless rules. You make laws to protect people, not just because you're bored. However, I think we established you don't care about the debate and you were never in it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You are such an idiot, it's unbelievable. RACISM pertains to RACE. Canadian is not a RACE but instead a NATIONALITY. Therefore, a remark against CANADIANS is not RACIST.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I know what it means, you dumbass. What am I incompetent at? I thought I just told you to stop being so vague.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"WHATAMINCOMPETENTAT?!" Life, perhaps. Do you really want my approval that bad? You shouldn't base your life on my opinions. That reflects low self-esteem, bud.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

When did I say I care about your opinion? I'm arguing with you because it exercises my brain. It's harder to argue with stupid people than with smart people, because smart people will see where they went wrong and agree, but stupid people tend to be stubborn as well and wouldn't agree that I was 15 if I brought them back in time to the day I was born, making it very hard to explain their mistakes. Of course, if you eventually became intelligent, that would be cool too.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I only saidI was wrong was because I forgot you were just trolling and I wanted to get back to the debate. However, I was wrong about something: I did not know that briefly commenting on someone's grammar was considered being an ass. I thought an ass was someone who insults people repeatedly, criticizes their grammar to death, and repeatedly downvotes their comments to make them feel bad. My apologies. (PS: It didn't work. All it did was lower my opinion of you, not myself.)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I like how you liked your comment :) And I'm sure you like how I disliked it :) OH SHIT, HER OPINION OF ME IS LOWERED! Either that, or I'm getting under someone's skin :)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm sure you get bored as shit when I keep saying the same thing over and over, so suck it: How could you possibly know whether or not I liked my comment? Of course, I didn't know that you dislike my comments, I just figured you probably did, but now you've told me I was right.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Actually, you admitted first that you liked your comments. You iz dummer then i thot.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

When did I "admit" that? By the way, bad spelling doesn't make you look any smarter. It's kind of stupid that you would do that after your big pile of pointless comments on ONE WORD I misspelled.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You are so STUPID. You get all worked up and type out full-blown paragraphs that make NO SENSE. Why are you letting me win?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If I was letting you win, then it stands to reason you would be winning. Ignoring my comment and then stating it makes no sense does not equal winning. And once again, how do you know how worked up I get? "Worked up" is not an easy phrase for which to find a synonym because it is a figure of speech. Fuck you for forcing me to be repetitive.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I knew it was a rhetorical question, and the point of it was to make me realize there was no answer. That's why I answered it. Duh!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It wasn't a rhetorical question. I was making fun of you. Answering just feeds the bully. Didn't you go to grade school? Or you're probably still in it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You were making fun of me. That doesn't mean it wasn't a rhetorical question. And answering it proves you didn't think your insult through before you said it. Your math must be terrible if you think that a 15-year-old would be in grade school. If you must know, my average is 88% right now. I doubt you can count that high, so just imagine your 10 fingers (thumbs count as fingers for the sake of the discussion), and then imagine that there are eight more people's fingers. Now imagine you're biting off one person's middle fingers. The number of fingers still attached to hands is the number of percent that I have. It's out of 100, which means your fingers plus 9 other people's fingers, and none of them are missing. What does this have to do with the debate we used to be having?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply" Mine wasn't. By answering it the way you did, you prove that you're stupider than I thought. How is my math stupid if I don't know your name? (This further proves my retard hypothesis). Regardless, Regardless, Regardless, Regardless (since you hate the word), I assumed you were 5. OH MY GOD, HE-SHE'S AVERAGE IS 88! FUCKING GENIUS!!! WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LIFE?!? Go play in traffic with your 88%. We were never having a debate, smart one. In case you haven't been paying attention, I've been pointing out how stupid you are and you've been proving the point. But since you've made about 5 "let's get back to the debate" attempts (another telltale sign of losing), I'm going to leave you alone to your thoughts. Or lack thereof.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The last part of your definition is true, you didn't expect a reply. You were trying to prove that it was stupid for me to tell someone to look in the thesaurus to reword a sentence. And I never said I hated the word regardless. And I never said anything about you not knowing my name, you said I was in grade school and I said many times I was 15, and therefore you were either saying I was so stupid I failed multiple times, which is why I said what my grade was, or you were just being retarded. Now that I look back, you were never part of the debate, so what the fuck are you doing here? And how does wanting to continue a debate prove I'm losing? If I was losing, I would want everyone to forget about the debate so I wouldn't feel stupid. Anyway, I don't know much about trolls, but if you're supposed to rate them based on how annoying and insulting they are you get infinity/10. Congratulations!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You must be 12 years old. If I ask you what color is your underwear and I don't expect a reply, is that rhetorical? Go back to school. My question has no rhetorical purpose, and by logic, it was not a rhetorical question. And I'm not reading the rest of that, because you never make any sense.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Not every question where you don't expect a reply is rhetorical. It's only rhetorical if it is supposed to imply something. Your question was implying "There is no synonym for that, you idiot!" and by answering, I was proving you wrong. Anyway, these pathetic insults about school, and how old I am, are getting really old. What the fuck does a pathetic analogy about questions have to do with how many years ago I was born?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply"

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You were trying to persuade me to relize I was stupid for thinking you could find another way to say that phrase. You did not expect an answer because you believed there wasn't one. By answering it, I proved I was right for thinking that, and that you were wrong in thinking it couldn't be answered.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Wait, what's relize?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That was a typo. It's good to know that's the only thing about my comment that you can criticize.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No. It's the only part I'm willing to dignify. After that, I couldn't even bear to read the rest. Made my eyes vomit.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If being right is nauseating to your eyes, then why didn't you say something before? If I had known it was a medical issue, I would have stopped. Here, I'll make it up to you: The sky is orange with green polka-dots. Pigs can fly. E = mc cubed. Napolean's first name was Jimmy. Feel better?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"IF BEING RIGHT IS NAUSEATING TO YOU EYEZZZ" Well done, haha. I'm having a riot over here. You are just trying so hard, it's unbelievable.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You're right. I hate you, I shouldn't be putting in an effort helping you to feel better. By the way, just because you're not trying to make any sense at all doesn't mean I'm just going to type some random shit.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

By the well, you misspelled "Napoleon". And I bet you did it "on purpose" because you're never wrong :)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I have yet to meet someone who has never made a spelling mistake. You said "By the well" instead of "By the way."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Everyone makes typos. Stupid people can't spell words.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I think I saw your picture on this website: http://www.nsopw.gov/Core/Portal.aspx. Hide ya kids...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

(A. Dodson): I clicked the link and it didn't show any picture. However, I'm not stupid, and I can guess who that picture was of. Please tell me how thinking 14-year-olds can tell the difference between having consensual sex and being raped just as well as 18-year-olds makes me a serial rapist. If a 48-year-old rapes you, it's just as obvious that it's rape as if a 17-year-old rapes you. Rape is rape. BTW I'm 15. I will bet a thousand dollars that whatever sonofabitch was in that picture was older than me considerably.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yes, obviously if sex is forced upon anyone, it is rape. But a 14 cannot legally give consent. Just like a 14 year old cannot legally drink, or a 12 year old cannot legally drive. A 14 year old CAN give consent, but it's not legal. A 14 year old CAN drink, but it's not legal. A 12 year old CAN drink, but it's not legal.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You said drink both times, but whatever. Drinking before you're a certain age could damage your body and stop you from growing, and could shorten your life considerably. But having sex is no riskier at 14 than at 41. Anyway, if you drink before you're 19, you get in trouble. If you drive before you're 16, you get in trouble. If you have sex before you're 16 (I'm Canadian, by the way), you are the victim. You are not guilty, you have been raped. If you are the victim and you are at a somewhat mature age (e.g. FOURTEEN), you should be able to choose not to press charges.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The thing is, under 16 isn't a "somewhat mature age". If the legal age is 16, then that is the minimum age that your state has decided a person can fully be aware of what they are consenting to, that the person has enough knowledge and maturity. Yes, it is a generalisation - but it's a generalisation put in place to protect minors. Also, in the majority of cases, the court won't charge a person for having sex with a minor, depending on the details.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Okay, the state has decided you have to be 16 to be "fully aware of what they are consenting to." That means the state is wrong. It does not protect minors. It limits the rights of minors, and it does so unjustly. A 14-year-old should be able to press charges if they do not like it, they are fully capable of calling the police, so having the government do it for you without even asking you is not only pointless, but unfair. If when you say the court "won't charge a person," does that mean they will be found not guilty, or they won't even go to court? If the former, then the person's life is still ruined. People will think they got out by fluke, or that they raped an 8-year-old but bribed the judges, or something. If the latter, then what if they really did rape an 8-year-old? Then it's a problem. However, this argument is about 14-year-olds, so if that is the case we can just end this debate.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh, you're fifteen? This changes thing. Here's your gpoy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolita Hide ya grandmothers, hide ya grandfathers, hide ya great-uncles.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(A. Dodson.): Did you just completely ignore the rest of my comment? We aren't talking about 12-year-old girls who haven't hit puberty yet, we're talking about 14-year-old girls who were paying attention in Health class and are already having their periods, and are probably already having sex. Why does it matter the age of the person she is having sex with? (It matters in terms of attractiveness, but if they're already having sex, then either she likes him anyway or it really is rape; I think she would know the difference.)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The rest of your comment was actually retarded, so I just imagined the ending in my head. What's the difference between a 12 year old and an 14 year old? They all love nail-polish, Justin Bieber, and McDonald's kids meals.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(A. Dodson): First of all, I would be surprised if 14-year-olds liked McDonald's kids meals, but if they do it's so they eat less, not because they're actually kids. Anyway, 14-year-olds are probably already having sex, so why can they have sex with 17-year-olds but not 25-year-olds? (BTW how much of my comment did you actually read?) Are you saying it is retarded that a 14-year-old girl can tell whether or not she's getting raped as well as a 20-year-old woman? Chances are, neither of them have ever gotten violently raped, how could one be more experienced than the other?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I was joking, I got your point.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not a matter of age difference, but rather a matter of being mature enough to use better judgement and give concent. Of course, that makes the assumption that age is a proxy for maturity, but it's the best we got.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I always joke with my girlfriend by calling her a rapist, because she's so much older than me. She's thirty-two and I'm fifteen. But, I mean, it's okay, cause she's my teacher.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

at first at I was like "woah", but then I was like "ohh."

by Anonymous 13 years ago

To all the comments saying it's stupid if it's called rape, it isn't stupid. What if the guy actually did rape the girl, but he forced her to say she wanted to because 'or else I will kill your family'. Therefore they can't trust when a person says 'I wanted to', there's no proof.

by Anonymous 12 years ago