nursemuscle said[quote][cite]Sincityfan said[/cite]
Are older RJers allowed to voice their disgust or will hottjoe and company be calling hypocrite. Is there a maximum age beyond which no comments will be acceptable to the twink-minded?
Why are older RJers being asked about this? Rape is rape no matter the age involved. Perhaps I'm reading this wrong but it sounds as if sincityfan is accusing anyone 40 and over of pedophilia for dating or being interested in anyone younger than them of legal and consensual age.
Well, besides that there are many ageists on RJ, I don't know what the sincityfan poster had in mind. Don't recall reading him before so I don't have much to judge. Looks like he's saying it disturbs him but it is legal & I don't know if he's commenting on how aesthetics seem to him or if he's being judgmental of others. Not sure why he commented on my post. Could be he didn't know the
backstory to my comment which can be found here http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4110540
In any case, the story in the OP certainly did not sound as if it was about a legal, consensual relationship, particularly about the kid chained to a bed, I think it said. Yikes.
I'd have made for a bad soldier because I'd either have violated orders and saved the kid or have them shoot me as deserter because I can't imagine seeing that and allowing it to continue as if I didn't see it.
I guess this is an aspect of war. That in order to fight the greater evil, the Taliban or Isis or whatever, the Americans allow allies a leniency--for lack of a better word--for a horrible act that we'd never put up with on our own soil without interfering, protecting or at least protest. I don't know how soldiers come out of that intact. I don't think I could do that; I can't imagine myself turning my back on that, not without shooting myself in the head.
Chains? Seems a slight violation of the prime directive.