Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Werd wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 5:32 pm
"California allows a 19 year old to ass rape a 9 year old if the child consents."

WHERE IN THE BILL DOES IT LOWER THE ALREADY ESTABLISHED AGE OF CONSENT THAT IS 18 IN CALIFORNIA? WHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE NEW BILL THAT A 9 YEAR OLD CAN LEGALLY CONSENT TO SEX? WHERE IN THIS NEW BILL IS THE POWER/ABILITY TO OVERWRITE PRE-EXISTING AGE OF CONSENT LAWS IN CALIFORNIA THAT PUT THE AGE OF CONSENT AT 18?

I didn't write "California allows a 19 year old to ass rape a 9 year old if the child consents." and after further research it is clearly inaccurate. However, SB 145 is designed to chip away at California's age of consent laws as I said in my post above.
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Gay consent at 16 becomes law

Image
The battle over the age of consent went on for years

A new law allowing the age of consent for homosexuals in Britain to be reduced from 18 to 16 has been forced through Parliament.

Home Secretary Jack Straw must now decide when the new law comes into force under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act.
According to the Home Office, Mr Straw wants to do so "as soon as possible".

The House of Commons Speaker Michael Martin announced earlier that the government would use special powers to push the measure through Parliament.

The Speaker told MPs that the rarely used Parliament Act had been invoked to get the measure onto the statute book.
Full article here


“"This is a piece of legislation driven by Metropolitan, London attitudes and is completely out of step with the rest of the country," ~ Baroness Young
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

Werd
Posts: 10317
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Werd »

Charles Traynor wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 5:45 pm
Werd wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 5:32 pm
"California allows a 19 year old to ass rape a 9 year old if the child consents."

WHERE IN THE BILL DOES IT LOWER THE ALREADY ESTABLISHED AGE OF CONSENT THAT IS 18 IN CALIFORNIA? WHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE NEW BILL THAT A 9 YEAR OLD CAN LEGALLY CONSENT TO SEX? WHERE IN THIS NEW BILL IS THE POWER/ABILITY TO OVERWRITE PRE-EXISTING AGE OF CONSENT LAWS IN CALIFORNIA THAT PUT THE AGE OF CONSENT AT 18?

I didn't write "California allows a 19 year old to ass rape a 9 year old if the child consents."
Indeed. It was a random comment posted by someone at the bottom of this picture.
and after further research it is clearly inaccurate.
My topic on SB 145 has also indicated that such a comment is incorrect.
However, SB 145 is designed to chip away at California's age of consent laws as I said in my post above.
How? If it doesn't lower the age of consent laws to something like 9 years of age, then how does it "chip away" at age of consent laws at all. What is meant by "chip away"?

Also, regarding Britain, what is the hetero age of consent law? Was it also 16 while the homo age of consent was still 18? Were they just bringing homos and heteros in line with each other?

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Werd wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 5:55 pm

However, SB 145 is designed to chip away at California's age of consent laws as I said in my post above.

How? If it doesn't lower the age of consent laws to something like 9 years of age, then how does it "chip away" at age of consent laws at all. What is meant by "chip away"?
Turnagain already explained it to JeffK quite well here and here.

The homosexual community contains by far the largest group of paedophiles in California. By giving homosexuals the same legal slack as heterosexual paedophiles hundreds of thousands more children are being put in danger. But as far as I can see, you and Jeff1970 seem to be concentrating on the equality angle for paedophiles and forgetting their child victims.

Why don’t I ever hear the likes of (((Scott Wiener))) or Jeff1970 calling for the repeal of the act which enabled heterosexual paedophiles to avoid going on the sex offenders register?

By allowing these amendment bills to give judges discretion in allowing paedophiles to escape the paedo registry the age of consent laws are being slowly chipped away at. The Jews are taking this slowly. They know most decent people would be up in arms if they attempted to call for decriminalising sex with children now. Give it another five years though and I think there is little doubt someone on the far left like Jeff1970 will attempt to introduce a new bill lowering the age of what is considered to be a “consenting” child still further to twelve and maybe widen the age gap to fifteen years from the current ten. And so it will go until there is no longer an age of consent in California.


SB-145 changes the law to allow judges the same level of discretion over whether certain people must register as sex offenders for consensual anal and oral sex as they already have for consensual penile-vaginal sex.

According to its Senate Floor Analysis, the legislation "exempts a person convicted of nonforcible sodomy with a minor, oral copulation with a minor, or sexual penetration with a minor, as specified, from having to automatically register as a sex offender."

Though it removes the "automatic" requirement, "a person convicted of one of those specified offenses may still be ordered to register in the discretion of the court."

It's also applicable only if the adult was within 10 years of age of the minor at the time the offense, and the minor was at least 14 years old – provisions known in some states as Romeo and Juliet laws.

Before SB-145, an 18-year-old male convicted of having oral or anal sex with a 17-year-old male would be required to register as a sex offender, while a 24-year-old male convicted of having penile-vaginal sex with a 15-year-old female would not be automatically required to register – it would be left up to the judge.

Garrett-Pate said SB-145 creates parity regardless of sexual orientation.

"The current law says that for penile-vaginal sex, it's up to the judge to determine whether or not that person should be placed on the registry," he said. "Under current law, however, the judge has no discretion if it's oral or anal sex. That means that LGBTQ young people end up being treated differently than their non-LGBTQ peers."

Jackie Lacey, the Los Angeles County district attorney who drafted and co-sponsored the legislation, told USA TODAY the legislation "brings much-needed parity to California’s sexual offender registration law."

"This bill allows judges and prosecutors to evaluate cases involving consensual sex acts between young people, regardless of their sexual orientation, on an individual basis," she said in a statement. "I drafted this bill because I believe the law must be applied equally to ensure justice for all Californians.”

Notably, SB-145 does not apply to intercourse of any kind with minors who are younger than 14. In those cases, mandatory sex offender registration is required by law.
Full article here
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Around 15 years ago all the television channels in the UK began writing homo/lesbo characters into their soaps, etc. I don’t watch television at home so I find out what’s new in normie world when I am out and about or reading the headlines of articles when browsing UK news sites. I remember one article telling us viewers weren’t taking to the new gay characters as well as the TV companies had hoped. What the Jews and liberal left were doing with these homosexual characters was desensitising the viewing public (which unfortunately pretty much amounts to everyone these days). In the end though, their attempt at social engineering by desensitisation was successful and the depravity of homosexual marriage became legal in the UK a few years ago without too much opposition.

Today the Jews and the liberal left have begun the process of desensitising the population to sex with children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7FiVdrBXUk

Hasbro was founded by the (((Hassenfeld))) brothers. Its current CEO is (((Brian Goldner))).
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Jews are deliberately sexualising our children.


Furious parents say popular kids dolls may be wearing underwear when dipped in water

Parents have taken to social media to complain about L.O.L Surprise! dolls with some revealed to be wearing adult-style underwear when wet - which manufacturers MGA Entertainment admitted were "inappropriate"

Image
Parents have been left gobsmacked by the L.O.L Surprise! dolls discovery (Image: Getty Images)

Furious parents say the current must-have kids doll appears to be wearing lingerie - which is only revealed when the toy is dipped in water.

The tiny L.O.L Surprise! dolls - which come with accessories, including shoes and different outfits - are a best-seller in Britain - but a secret addition has left many disgusted.

Social media has become rife with reports that soaking some of the figures in cold water reveals adult-style underwear - with one mum claiming the makers are "encouraging the sexualisation of children".

Lorraine Hardy's eight-year-old daughter Isabella has been collecting the dolls - which cost around £10 and are just a few inches tall - for years.

But when the former social work manager, 40, decided to put social media claims to the test she was left horrified and demanding answers.
Full article here


Image

The head of MGA Entertainment responsible for the LOL dolls is (((Isaac Larian)))
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

(((Isaac Larian))) was also responsible for the controversial Bratz doll range.



Image
prostitutes

What sort of parent buys this shit for their children?
What type of society would allow this shit to exist in the first place?


The example I’m going to use are Bratz Dolls. Yes, the infamous Bratz. Scantily dressed with far too much makeup on their faces, and clothes in their closets that scream High Maintenance.

Bratz dolls are bright and colorfully dressed girls who love to shop do their hair and makeup and essentially be the “hottest” dolls in the toy box. When children are in their developing stages, 4-11, and old enough to play with such toys, these dolls leave a lasting impression on them. Their brains, like sponges, are left with an image of what society has deemed acceptable. And if it so happens to be that Bratz dolls are what they’ve grown up with since youth then they may hold themselves to such a standard.

Of course there is the occasional witty person who mentions how our generation grew up with Barbie and yet we don’t compare ourselves to her. However to fully analyze this comparison I feel as though Barbie needs an equally harsh judging.

Barbie’s appearance is so far from realistic that it’s almost painful. Her dresses were short pink and flirty and her legs were far too long. However the extras that could be purchased for Barbie weren’t exceedingly superficial. Barbie could be a nurse and help others, she could be a veterinarian and tend to wounded animals or she could pursue a career as an animal trainer. There was an idea surrounding Barbie, an idea that created her identity. Barbie was a strong female who could choose her own path in life, even her name is commonly used, Barbie – Barbara. If we take a deeper look at Bratz and define the title the word, as per the New Oxford American Dictionary, means: Badly Behaved Child, Spoiled, Rascal.
Full article here
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

Jeff1970 in almost every post he has made in this thread has attempted to mislead our readership by declaring the deliberate sexualisation of children and the mainstream liberal effort towards decriminalising sex with children as just fantasies. We’ve been subjected to sorry excuses like: Oh, it’s just some lone nut on the Internet making that statement or, he’s just is an attention seeker or, he just represents himself, etc., etc.

Well Jeff, are you now also going to declare the long running mainstream effort of the Jewish media and entertainment industry and Jewish toy industry to sexualise our children as a random one off unconnected occurrence?
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Mark Caine
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Mark Caine »

Charles Traynor wrote:
Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:05 pm
(((Isaac Larian))) was also responsible for the controversial Bratz doll range.



Image
prostitutes

What sort of parent buys this shit for their children?
What type of society would allow this shit to exist in the first place?


A dying society which has foolishly allowed itself to be completely infiltrated by Jews. :(






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CbPL0t ... =FOX10News


I am looking forward to Jeff1970 apologizing for deliberately down playing the threat posed to our children by paedophiles, homosexuals and Jews.

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Pedophiles are sharing grooming manuals online

Post by Charles Traynor »

It is good to know not everyone shares Jeff1970’s sympathies with the lefts pro paedophile agenda. Please note (((Reed Hastings))) is the boss of Netflix. Netflix also fund the BLM terrorist group. Andrew Anglin did a very good article on the Cuties story which can be found here.



Image
This is not satire. This is paedophile desensitisation.

Netflix drops in shares and subscribers after ‘Cuties’ controversy

People are cutting the Netflix cord after the platform’s release of the French film, “Cuties.”

According to FOX Business, numbers gained by research firm, YipitData, show a significant increase in users who chose not to renew their subscriptions after the movie’s premiere. The streaming behemoth even saw a 1.3 percent drop in shares on Monday.

“Cuties” (or “Migonnes” in its original French) follows the story of Amy (Fathia Youssouf) who seeks to escape her family’s traditional conservative ways by joining a dance group. While this may sound like a lighthearted coming-of-age story, audiences became outraged over the sexualized nature of the film, particularly that of its core cast of 11-year-old girls.

Those defending the film, including Netflix itself, point to the fact that this sexualization is satirical and intended as a social commentary of how underaged girls are very much put into situations in which their bodies are inappropriately put on display. But many just aren’t buying that excuse, fervently getting behind the “#CancelNetflix” trend.

The cries for pulling “Cuties” from the platform don’t appear to be quieting down any time soon, either. Several petitions calling for the film’s removal have surfaced, each touting between 300,000 and 650,000 signatures as of the writing of this article.

Netflix has changed the original description and marketing photos used for the film without commenting on whether or not the company will pull the film in its entirety.
Full article here
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests