Cameroni

No the 45 year old Foreman couldn't run anywhere. But he could fight.

Yes, well done, the law exists. But it creates artificial constructs that do not reflect reality, like the fiction that a 17 year old cannot consent to sex, when we all know they can in actual reality. The fact that many jurisdictions around the world allow 16 year olds and even 15 year olds to consent to sex, should tip you off that the law you speak of is not an objective reality. It's a legal fiction created by the law for policy reasons, to curtail certain behaviours. But everyone knows a 17 year old can consent to sex, even if the law claims the opposite.

Well, even if Casandra Ventura was a victim of domestic assault, Coombs compensated her with 20 million dollars for this assault in which she sustained very minor injuries. What else did he do? Potentially he slept with a 16 year old, so statutory rape and possibly another sexual assault/rape with a 3rd woman. Now, these things, if all true, are bad clearly. However, this man's life is completely ruined and he could potentially rot in jail for offences, which other men, would have got relatively light sentences for. And let's not forget, this kidnapping charge by the prosecution is total fantasy, clearly trumped up. To some extent Coombs is the victim of trumped up charges here. Yes, he committed an assault, he paid 20 million USD for it, possibly two more sexual assault, and he lked to party and paid prostitutes. But to ruin his whole life, and lock him up for 20 plus years for this? How is this justice? Surely Coombs is a victim here, whereas Casandra Ventura made 20 million off of Coombs and then disregarded the agreement and became the star witness of the prosecution. Coombs already paid for that assault, now he has to face huge prison time and have his life taken away? For some relatively minor transgressions? Doesn't seem fair.

Actually you're talking garbage. You fail to understand that in reality Gardner could and probably did consent. It's only a legal fiction which makes it a rape, the law declaring that you can't consent, even when you did. It's a legal alternate reality that's arbitrarily constructed

No, it's a legal construct. Even if the 16 year old consented the law draws an arbitrary line and says she can't. When in reality she did consent. The fact that the age of consent is 16 or below 16 in other jurisdictions should top you off that this just a legal construct. A legal fiction.

Feminist comes to Thailand and is offended to see beauty. All should be ugly. Because as feminists know, beauty is the enemy.

Stop repeating legal fiction as if it is a reflection of reality. Of course in reality a 16 year old can consent to sex. Why do you think the age of consent is below or set at 16 in some countries?

What was her answer?

No he didn't, it was Julius Streicher in Der Stürmer who used the rat cartoon. Streicher was derided even by Nazis as an extremists, Görign for instance hated him and forbade his staff to read the Stürmer. In no way can that cute rat cartoon be equated to the depictions Streicher used in his antisemitic cartoons. They are very different.

Not legally, but morally it is quite a difference if you're talking about an 8 year old who truly cannot consent properly, or a 16 year old who normally would have a very clearly idea that banging a rapper in a foursome is not a good idea. Whilst I personally think Coombs probably did have sex iwth Gardner when she was 16, that event happened 30 years ago. To prove it would be nigh on impossible. It'd be her word against Coombs. Much like in the Trump trial.

As a legal fiction, yes, but in reality no doubt Gardner consented then cried rape aftwards. After she participated in a foursome gangbang with her best friend and Coombs' best friend.

Of course a family always asking for money, mother or sister. Another red flag.

Oh I see. What an interesting test.

Yes I am amazed at how little gold digging is an issue. When a girl does ask it's usually for 2000 or 1000 baht. It's very modest. There are exceptions of course, but on the whole gold digging is not an issue.

I think you're looking for excuses to discredit this very sober and rational speech against Zionism. Yes, the speech was an attack on Zionism, but not on jews. The speaker was very careful about that. There is no proof whatsoever that this cute rat cartoon was meant to depict jews. It was under the word "zionism" so at most it was used to depict Zionists, not jews as a whole. In no way was this video antisemitic, yet Lineker still had to apologise and take it down professing he's not an antisemite. The modus operandi of the Zionist apologists is clear to see for all and has been the same for years. It's amazing it still works.

No, I think it's spot on. Whatever the reason she's a single mother, a man who takes on a woman and raises her child from another man is effectively cuckolding himself. He's spending his resources to raise the DNA of another man. A child is a massive liability. How is that not a red flag? It surely is. Not for me, if that's what some men want to do, okay, it's their life. But it's a massive red flag for a normal guy.

All that plus cheating, lying, texting the ex-boyfriend, refusing to do simple things for you, emotional and physical coldness, depression, narcissim, and especially the lying. All the lying. Suddenly disappearing. So many.

Could be any number of reasons, somebody thought the rat is cute perhaps, it's kind of a cute rat photo, not a nasty one like the one in the Nazi cartoons, as shown in the link above.. I think that rat has a tear in its eye. Maybe the author was born in the year of the rat and is studying Chinese astrology. And yes, maybe they were having a dig at Zionism by putting the rat cartoon under the word Zionism. Who knows. Either way, it's perfectly ludicrous to claim that woman's very articulate and balanced speech in some way equates jews to rats, or that rat drawing is the same as the very nasty Jew-rat cartoons of the Nazis. It rather seems to me that apologists of Israel want to discredit this very reasoned attack on Zionism by crying "antisemitism" and indeed they have yet again, in 2025, succeeded in doing so and got Lineker to take it down and apologise. For the innocuous image of a rat. It really is ludicrous.

Don't be ridiculous, who in their right mind would go to Israel on holiday? I'm not insane.

I thought the "Every breath you take" Remix came out quite catchy.

That's not true though. The video is a very reasoned, articulate and rational attack on Zionism. In no way does the speaker in the video equate Jews with rats in her speech. As always you have to turn to the Daily Mail for the real facts. The article below has the image of the rat. That rat pic is no way comparable to the Nazi cartoons of jews as rats, which the Daily Mail article also shows https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14706167/Gary-Lineker-fire-posting-pro-Palestine-video-featuring-rat-emoji-known-antisemitic-slur-Jews.html

Only as a legal construct, in reality we both know both parties most likely consented. Coombs could have taken a plea deal, but he chose to go to trial and insists all sex was consensual and he never "trafficked" women. Obviously he never "kidnapped" any women, as the prosecution claims. I note you stay compoletely silent on this false allegation, so obviously you do not believe it either. It now came out that Casandra Ventura took 20 million of Sean Coombs' money in their first agreement. Now she completely ignores that and acts as star witness for the prosecution. Talk about shameless. It's sad to see Sean Coombs will be yet another addition to the very long list of men brought down by their appetite for women. Even if you're a billionaire, a woman can still ruin your life. It's a lesson for all men watching this spectacle. I suspect Sean Coombs will not be the last man brought down by his appetite for women.

I am sure marriage too can become tedious and boring, like all relationships. Yet it's still the best of all worlds, the least bad choice. Alwyas provided, as you say, you have a suitable woman. One should really only marry after 7 or 10 years, thereabouts, so well done there. My problem is I'm finding more red flags than at a Communist party rally.

There are times when it does get tedious and repetitive. Sure. But you'are making the most important contract in your life, it would be churlish to complain about a little repitition. I guess one should look at it as "due diligence". Which is always boring and tedious, but very necessary.

It's a video of a very articulate and smart Palestinian woman tellling the truth about life in Israel. I didn't see any rat emoji.