There are a bunch of holes in this defense of the AssHat Troll.Quote from hughb:
BTW, in Afghanistan there is a subculture where middle-aged men take young boys for sexual partners and it's a source of pride to have a "boy toy". They dote on thier "twinks", (as they are called here in the US), with money and gifts. The "twinks" are usually late-teens to early twenties. I don't know what happens to them when they hit their late 20's and their sugar daddy throws them out. I doubt they have many job skills.
1. You must have missed the point of the thread. Just because it's 'sub-culturally acceptable' doesn't mean it's moral. That's the point of the thread.
2. The case you cite is totally different. How are 18-25 year-olds 'young boys'? They're not. This thread was about girls age 10. If the story had been about Muslim men agitating for the right to sexually penetrate 17 year-old girls, there would be no thread. It's not. It's about their claim to the right to sexually penetrate children.
Amazing that you couldn't see the difference.
Turn your argument about 'twinks' around. If the Afghani men were taking 10-year old children as their twinks, would you be running to their defense, claiming that since it's a tradition of their sub-culture (the pedophile sub-culture) it's morally acceptable? That's exactly what the Fuckwad Alcoholic-Troll-in-Relapse is saying.
I personally don't think there's anything in this thread that constitues an indictable offense (sorry, Mom0, I wish there was). On his hard drive? That's another story.