|
Posted by Joey on 8th November 2009 at 01:56 AM Pornography
We must censor pornography, especially in the Internet, to safeguard the psychological and moral health of society.
It is now a known fact that the increase in the number of underage rapists is linked to pornography: its effect is powerful as they are more receptive to the pictures. Just to mention the city of New York, in one year the number of rapists under the age of 15 increased by 200%. In Brittany (France) a group of 11 young men, 8 of them underage, raped a 14 year old girl for two months. It was subsequently known that they were constantly viewing porno films and that they wanted to experience what they had been seeing. In this respect Ted Bunty, a rapist who also murdered 28 women stated “This happened little by little. As a porno enthusiast I wanted to see material which was more and more violent and explicit. As with a drug, this provoked an insatiable excitement reaching a point where pornography could no longer go any further. This is when I jumped beyond in the belief that acting out would be more fulfilling than just reading and watching”. Also, The Spanish Audiovisual Law will permit the watching of porno films late at night and on pay channels only, this will stop many children watching pornography on the TV set in their own rooms.
Ana Coronado
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Carvath keeps company with sexy women?. Would any like to log in and declare their affections for this buffon?.
Thought not. Keep on writing in though Richard it always bring a smile to my face to read your multi personalited delusioned ramblings. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
We can just read what HE has written here without having to read the garbage he's written elsewhere. And just how the hell does he know what he's talking about since by his own admission he's never had a serious relationship that has resulted in co habitation or marriage. And neither is he a woman or teenage girl so how the hell does he know what they want to wear or is his whole "conclusions" based on a few women he "knows" (or are some of his multiple personalities women) |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
That's not what Carvath's about at all. Read "the Missionary Position" (chapter 22 of his book) where he talks in detail about the equality of men and women, the different gender characteristics and the virtues of modesty in heart (and in behaviour, such as outward dress) and chivalrous attitudes and gentlemanly conduct. The sexiest women are those who are confident enough not to feel the need to put their bodies on public display for men to lust after. Mature, sexy women attract men (and keep them) without having to dress or act like tarts. Carvath keeps company with lots of sexy women - he knows what he's talking about. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
So we've learned that female flesh on display is pornography as far as Mr Carvath is concerned whether it's on our telly's in Baywatch or out on a Saturday night. Perhaps we could have police with measuring tapes checking girls skirts for length and tops for cleavage on display? Come to think of it thats a great idea and I'll be happy to volunteer for that duty. Go Ricky/Roxy go |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
He's not a politician or author either but that doesn't stop him pretending he is does it ? x |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Foul mouthed little think aren't you "Roxy" with all your Dhead and motha's talk, careful or you'll be sent to your room for 50 hail Mary's by Mr Carvath |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Of course you are sweetheart, when will Richard be back in charge of the body do you know in and can we talk to him then please? xx |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
I'm Roxy you cheeky mutha! |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Carvath has posted on his own blog and on here so we know he's online and now this mysterious "woman" appears at exactly the same time with equally fanatical views. Coincidence I suppose. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Thought so , Roxy R you are Richard Carvath. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
I thought they were a bunch of silly misguided slappers. Getting their tits out in public reflects badly on all women; it makes us look stupid - as though we are nothing more than sex toys for boys. I mean do me a favour, the idea they had to get their boobs out to raise funds for our boys. It was a stupid publicity stunt - for the girls, not for the boys. Boobs do not need public display to help our heroes. Grow up girls and get some self respect, you make the rest of us ashamed to be women with your silly antics. Roxy R x |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Hooray I was right it was the I'm not telling you excuse! What did you think of the girls in bodypaint marching recently then Roxy, a good publicity raising fun event or disgusting pornography that should see them all being locked up?? |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Grow up dhead! I don't make things up and neither do I answer to you. The Cambridge Doc is real and he's not the only person to appreciate Richard. If you think Richard's book is rubbish - where's your counter-Carvath book? Roxy R x |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Private circulation and momentum is building lol lol well I suppose that three people reading it as opposed to just two is momentum isn't it!! I do hope that you've been given a list of what is appropriate for you to and not to wear by Richard just in case you put something on that he doesn't approve of and find yourself excommunicated!! Oh and please feel free to include the imaginary Doctor from Cambridge University's name so tat he can be independently contacted to confirm Richards bull.. sorry claim. (anyone want to place a guess on what excuse exactly we'll get for not supplying the name? My money is on "I don't have to tell you anything") |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Carvath's book is a masterpiece, and what's been published so far is really just a rushed out first draft. None of the anonymous d/heads attacking him here have ever done anything like as good or great a work. The book is mainly in private circulation at present, momentum is building and Richard will hopefully get round to refining it next year. Richard's book most recently received recognition from a Doctor of Cambridge University - not bad for a lad who's never been to uni! There's a lot more to come from Richard between now and the election; over the coming weeks we'll get a much better picture of the man. Roxy R x |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
He has NOT written a book, he has posted some garbage that HE and only HE calls a book. It has never been published and never been reviewed or praised by a single authoritative figure ever. In fact Richard Carvaths candidacy the definitions of his "better than post graduate education" are all backed up by .... what he thinks and not a single other person. His views on what is pornography as illustrated here by lumping girls who wear revealing clothes as whores and prostitutes and Baywatch with hardcore porn sites in the fact he wants to see all of them banned or heavily censored shows just how far this man is out of touch and just how impossible any sort of sensible debate is with his involved. Is it any wonder that he is banned from some sites and his comments are removed from so many others regularly (including this one when he launched a foul mouthed tirade not so long ago). He is getting more and more detached from the reality of everyday life and is clearly in need of help. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
As if Mr Carvath is an authority, just because he has written a 'book'. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Ah I see dressing how they want de-humanises women and Carvath just wants to save them from themselves be deciding for them what is suitable. Carvath is right of course any women that dress revealingly obviously deserve to be treated like prostitutes and he correct when he says that women that have sex outside of marriage are all whores. Go Ricky. (Please just go anywhere) |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Carvath's writings, especially his book, testify that he considers men and women to be of equal worth. Carvath does not view women as in any way lower than men. Pornography and prostitution dehumanises women and makes them into sexual objects - Carvath opposes this, unlike presumably the people who attack him here. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
We do get some twits on here! However hard you try to misrepresent what Carvath says or his motives for saying it, there's no getting away from the truth: he's a good bloke with a good attitude towards women and with women's best interests at heart. Most women agree with Carvath about dressing decently in public, pornography, prostitution, abortion and marriage. |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Has Richard Carvath really just said that women who wear tight fitting or revealing clothes are dressed like prostitutes and used to be treated like that, and he thinks it's a good thing and wants to go back to that way of thinking ? What next, girls in short skirts or revealing clothes are asking to get raped? Is the man insane? |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
The following comment made by Richard Carvath gives a very strong clue on his true views ......."I would not allow a teenage daughter of mine to go out dressed - let's be honest - like a tart. Nor would I have a wife who so dressed in public"..... A non sexist man might well have said I would hope that my wife would respect my feeling enough to not dress in clothes that I would be uncomfortable with her wearing or a daughter of mine would have been brought up to not want to dress like that. But if you read Carvaths comment he says "I would NOT ALLOW" and "I WOULD NOT HAVE a wife who dressed so in public". Very very different meanings Carvaths language clearly shows that he would expect the woman to do as she's told and the same goes for his child in his comment and he clearly sees feamales in a subserviant role to men. In part thas why he wants everything HE sees as pornography or pall laws to MAKE women cover up |
Comment by Guest 12th November 2009
Thats because you ARE Carvath and you can't see past your own huge ego! |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
So girls you heard it here first the Yashmak will be THE thing to be seen in after the next election !! And I really love this bit........"I would not allow a teenage daughter of mine to go out dressed - let's be honest - like a tart. Nor would I have a wife who so dressed in public".... Newsflash Richard it's 2009 not 1909 and women can dress as THEY SEE FIT and the days of them being controlled and told how to dress (especially for older teenage girls) is long long gone you sexist prat. Get used to checking out porn "for reaserch" because it's the closest you'll get to the real thing with your attitudes. Note to Editor the types of views that this man expresses are the exact reason why so many threads turn to be about him. |
Comment by Richard Carvath ( member ) 11th November 2009
In reply to (I assume) RB, I do know such a country, it's called. . . the UK [within living memory]. Prior to the beginning of the collapse of censorship and the steady watering down of our laws on obscenity - which protected us from exposure to pornography in any form in public - which commenced in the early 1960s, the UK had exactly the laws and the censorship which I advocate. In reply to the person commenting about women's dress in public - i.e. [some] girls who go out with barely anything on - the underlying moral principle and my opinion is the same as that for pornography. According to the hsitory books, the first bikini was worn in public in the UK by Maisie Dunn in 1946. Mini skirts were first worn in the 1960s - and were extremely controversial at the time - and hotpants came along in the early 1970s, with a similar reaction. Until the 1960s any woman dressed like a prostitute - i.e. wearing tight-fitting or revealing clothing - would've been treated like one. We used to have laws on public indecency, which were enforced in this country within living memory, which saw women dressed like [some] girls dress today arrested for public indecency. Topless Page 3 started in The Sun in 1970. Since then our country and our culture has been heavily 'pornographised.' It's hardly surprising that [some] girls pretty much go out topless or wearing a belt for a skirt when this in in our popular 'newspapers' and on TV and the internet every day: it is considered 'acceptable' and 'normal' - but it is not acceptable in a civilised and moral society. I would not allow a teenage daughter of mine to go out dressed - let's be honest - like a tart. Nor would I have a wife who so dressed in public. And do I think I have the right to seek to legislate to reintroduce public indecency laws which would cause women to dress a little more decently? Yes. What are the social consequences of our culture of pornography and indecently dressed women in public? When you acknowledge the extensive negative consequences, then you realise that sensible legislation is welcome. |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
Reading the comment about pictures of scantily clad women being classed as pornography by Mr Carvath and his wanting to ban them I have to wonder what is his view on what some girls wear out these days then? I am in Deansgate most weekends and it is very very common to see girls in tiny hotpants or micro skirts and virtually no tops or see through that leave very little to the imagination and they very often have less on than the pictures he wants to ban? |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
So we'd end up with what a 3m 12sec episode of Baywatch and one scene in a shoe shop from Sex in The City ? Do you know of ANY countries with laws as strict as you propose Mr Carvath? The answer is simple only those under Shriah law any anywhere near what you propose. They also have laws on what happens to women who have sex outside of marrige that you and you talk of them being "whores" might approve of (and before you even think of denying that you've said that I can sow you a tread where you reply to a comment that someone would support his children to make their own decisions about becoming sexualy active when at an appropriate age whether married or not with a comment of "Well you can raise whores if you like") Have you ever considered a change of faith (and country, I hear Afghanistan is nice you'd fit in well with the Taliban) because I can't see the rest of us wanting to watch endless re-runns of Songs of Praise on a Friday night anytime soon. |
Comment by Richard Carvath ( member ) 11th November 2009
Hmm, I have observed this thread with growing disdain and it is now, I suppose, necessary to comment. . . For the record I’m 33 (born ‘76) and I am unmarried. With regard to the issue of virginity my status is not in the public domain. My SalfordOnline policy, which has been stated and re-stated, is that I only consider questions posed by persons who are registered with and logged into SalfordOnline. Life is nothing if not interesting: as an unmarried public advocate of ‘chastity before marriage and fidelity within’ women regularly ask me for sex! It seems to be a sort of ‘occupational hazard.’ I must clarify something regarding pornography too. . . I am absolutely opposed to pornography - as is stated in my manifesto - and I have written extensively on this unpleasant subject in my book Definitely Sexy (2009), mainly in Chapters 6 to 14. In my book I identify three broad types of pornography: (1) Glamour pornography [i.e. general nudity of women, scantily clad, topless, e.g. Page 3, Nuts, Zoo]; (2) ‘Soft’-core pornography [i.e. explicit nudity of women in graphic, gynaecological detail, with close-up focus on genitalia, e.g. ‘top shelf’ material such as Fiesta, Escort or Mayfair magazines]; (3) Hardcore pornography [i.e. man/woman sexual activity, visible penetration, e.g. half the internet]. I am opposed to all three types - I am opposed to pornography full stop - but the distinctions I draw are of practical use for various reasons, one of which I’m about to demonstrate. . . I seek to very straightforwardly ban what I define as ‘Soft’-core and Hardcore pornography. I also seek to ban Glamour pornography. It is no problem to identify, for example, Page 3 as Glamour pornography and say, “OK, we can legally define it - let’s ban it.” But Glamour pornography is the pornographic category which presents legal problems over definition and the drafting of legislation to ban it: what does and does not constitute Glamour-pornography? For example, plenty of TV programmes and films today contain scenes within them which do unquestionably fall within my definition of Glamour-pornography - but most of the programme or film is not glamour-pornographic and nobody (including myself) would suggest for a moment that overall the programme or film is pornographic. So, what would I do? Well, I wouldn’t ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’! I would NOT ban whole TV series or mainstream films as some seem to think, rather I would simply censor glamour-pornographic scenes within a film or programme (and if such censorship was re-introduced, new productions would largely cease putting in such material in the first place). I would NOT ban whole series of Baywatch or Sex And The City as some misrepresent my position - but I would censor scenes within them. |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
For my money the first issue that needs addressing is what is pornography and then how to curb certain types to certain groups. (an example would be that most of us who have kids would not like them to be watching hardcore porn but most of the sensible parents realise that it's impossible to shelter teenagers from everything and so things like MTV or American Pie type films tend to be regarded as expectable). The reason that this debate mentions Carvath is because of his religious draconian views that he has expressed on here (The Fanny Gaugh blog for example where he calls the girls who marcher to raise awareness of the soldiers plight "prostitutes"). His stated view is that page3 and even tv shows with sexual content (ie Sex and the City, Baywatch etc) should all be banned and the women who model are prostitutes. If you allow those types of views on here then it's inevitable that there will be rebuttals and that it will carry over to other blogs. Fortunately the new law on causing hatred based on sexual orientation has taken a step closer to being ratified in the last few days and that probably means that Carvath will either have to not rant about his favourite topic or he will be removed from society for a holiday at her majesty expense in the near future and that should solve everyone's problems. |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
Not heard that expression, "still got the cellophane on" for years, marvellous. Anyway Richard the ball is in your court, this should prove interesting, no doubt several "girlfriends" will be leaping to your virile defence. Or as a gentleman does one not discuss such genteel matters, only preach them?. Curious Yellow. |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
If I have this right Carvath is 36 and unmarried, he states that sex outside of marriage is sinful and a disgrace etc, therefore can we assume that you have not taken the cellophane off yet Richard?, i.e. you are a virgin.
Now this is no bad thing however you seem to be obsessed with sex and pornography, is there some kind of frustration in you that unleash in your rants on these pages and on your deplorable blog page. This is a serious quesion not a wind up. |
Comment by Editor ( member ) 11th November 2009
Please do not digress from the topic of this article. If you wish to explore another subject please create another article or use the Blog page. |
Comment by Guest 11th November 2009
Says Carvath. Richard EVERYONE would be scared to be next to you just in case whatever causes your delusions might be catching. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
I don't think Salford Lib Dems are going to convince anybody that what everybody thinks is that Carvath is a joke just by saying so and because that's what they want everybody to think, no matter how many times they repeat the same old lines! The very fact that Carvath isn't a joke - but is actually a strong contender - is the very reason why Salford Lib Dems are so desperate to make out that he is. Put Carvath next to Owen and you'll quickly spot why the Lib Dems are running scared. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Heaven help us ?? Comedy hour again on Salford Online and yes we ALL know its you commenting Richard. Get it into your head that most people just see you as joke and nobody "fears" you other than in your own imagination, serious politicians ignore you and dismiss your drivel as the ravings of a religious nutter and thats why they don't answer you not because they are not scared. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Carvath was on classic form at the Claremont and Weaste Community Committee tonight. A bureaucrat from Salford Royal gave a presentation to the meeting, during which he referred to the need for lowering costs in the NHS. Carvath warmed up, mentioning how there are now more managers than beds in our hospitals, and then asked the bureaucrat whether significant cost savings might be made at Salford Royal by getting rid of non-job bureaucrats. That went down very well, and that's why so many people like Richard, including me. It's pretty obvious somebody set up this article and thread just to have a go at Carvath but unfortunately for Salford Lib Dem activists - lots of people like and respect him. He is a man of vision and integrity. It'll be great if he becomes our MP. Heaven help you if he bothers to come on this thread and put the pratts in their place. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
He said that lots of impressive names would agree that he's an expert but have to keep the fact a secret due to the "sensitive nature" of his work. Convenient, huh? (Yes Richard, I have the link to where you said that if you're going to insist on a direct quote) |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Oh how obvious is it the comment that calls Carvaths "book" a definitive work is written by Richard Carvath. Firstly it's not been published he's just put in on the internet and it's mostly an anti gay rant anyway and secondly when you talk about it being a definitive work then please give us JUST ONE well know or well qualified "expert" who has read this and has praised it or at least referred to it as definitive?? Seriously Richard you can not just decide your a respected author or expert it takes study and/or achievement and the acknowledgement of your peers to make such claims and not look like an egotistical moron for doing so. Look at the people that work here and how they progress and improve and some of the compliments and respect that is directed at their body of work BY OTHER PEOPLE IN THEIR WORK etc, how daft would it be if Tom or Tony write an article that get slated by the readers then declares said article a work of genius because they said so? Real praise from real people Richard, self praise (even anonymous self praise in the third person) is no praise at all. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
I wonder if Richard took out a subscription to that site in the course of his "research" |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
lol. I'm going to have pleasant dreams tonight after seeing those pictures *sarcasm* |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Swirlie Girls?, what on Earth is going on, where did this come from, some dodgy viewers logging on here. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Get it right Carvath only registers in when it suits him, you can spot a Carvathism by the way he refers to himself in the third party, Richard this, Richard that etc..Salford Red. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Make that the third last one. Richard posted another comment while I was typing. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Regarding my last comment (the second last one), it's probably obvious from the context, but I meant "got caught with" rather than "got with". |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Swirlie Girls is an extremely revolting and depraved form of hardcore pornography which is freely available on the internet - including, of course, to children - in which the women are abused and humiliated with their heads forced down toilets. Richard Carvath aims to ban such evil filth. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Rather pathetic anonymous attempts to smear Carvath. Carvath is an anti-pornography activist. The chapters in his book (Definitely Sexy, 2009) about pornography are definitive on the subject, a fact acknowledged by all who read it. Carvath's work is a reference for anybody with a serious interest in fighting to get rid of pornography from our society, and it is very clear that he is absolutely opposed to pornography. It looks suspiciously as though this article was posted on SalfordOnline as a pretext to set up this thread for the purpose of attacking Carvath. Any political activist will necessarily research and present evidence of that which they oppose - otherwise they'll be accused of making things up or of not knowing what they're talking about. Carvath's work is so useful and powerful as a weapon in the fight against pornography precisely because it is meticulously researched and provides in-depth analysis of the subject. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
If someone got with child porn on their PC, it wouldn't be considered a viable defence for them to claim they were just looking at it to say how awful it was or that they intended to report it. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
It's interesting how RC is such an expert on porn and must have spent a lot of time looking at obscure types of porn just to say how awful it is. Before he did his big spring clean of his blog, he had a post about "swirly girls" where the female porn star gets her head flushed down the toilet while, hmmn, you know... I asked around (because I know people who look at the darkest and nastiest stuff on the internet) and nobody had heard of such a thing. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Try Googling a sentence out of this article - it's plagiarised from koreatimes.co.kr and Ana Coronado is from Barcelona. It's a copy-and-pasted article. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Paul Foster, why don't you register with and log into the SalfordOnline website (like Carvath)? If your name's Paul Foster, you could register with SalfordOnline as Paul Foster! My name's Phil Foster. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Give us your name then, to prove it. I'll start. I'm Paul Foster from Didsbury. Nice to meet you. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Carvath only posts on SalfordOnline when logged in under his own name. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Carvath it's you again pretending to be somebody else!, have you no ovens that need de-greasing, away with you, you idle neer do well!. Salford Red |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
No such article exists on SalfordOnline in which Carvath makes a retraction of any sort. Either your memory is poor or you are deliberately fabricating. Anybody who checks out the student calender thread will see that Carvath conclusively won that one, and he's quite right in everything he's said about the dangers of the HPV vaccine, which is documented as being responsible for several deaths and many cases of serious side effects around the world. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Does Carvath have the monopoly on the blog page?, the last five out of six blogs have been posted by the "Prospective Parliamentary Candidate For Eccles". Ah well give the twerp enough rope and he will hang himself eventually, literally speaking of course Dickie!. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
The article on here where he talks about what it means to be British and blames Islamcs for terrorist attach on British soldiers and people in this country as an indicator of not being British then had to retract when it was pointed out that the vast majority of the attacks in recent times where actually carried out by the British Christian IRA was a proud moment for him too I thought. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
The one where he declared victory over the Advertiser in the vaccine row when that poor young girl died but then ignored the fact that it was later revealed that it wasn't related and refused to apologise was a good one too. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Try reading the "Students strip for charity" story on the MEN for one (Just google Carvath and Students) and read the bit where everyone else calls him a muppet but he still declares a stunning victory (Don't you Dickie) |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
It's a shame you can't supply any evidence of these Carvath thrashings you talk about! Your "examples" don't exist! |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Carvath can barley manage a sausage sarnie for breakfast never mind anything else. Ian Lindley just ignored him as he isn't of enough significance to warrant answering. Carvath regularly gets slaughtered then claims a stunning victory when everyone else sees it very differently, the web is full of examples of him getting a verbal thrashing then deciding he's won and flouncing off (probably to check out more disgusting sites to warn us about in his book) |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Carvath Jesus Rocky O Hara is a god and does not fear you mere mortals (see Richard, we can pretend not to be you too) |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Dangerous! Carvath would eat you for breakfast if he came on here and fired an anti-porn broadside! Don't you remember how Carvath massacred Iain Lindley on the web over pornography? (Carvath repeatedly challenged Lindley to state his position on porn, and Lindley didn't dare to pick up the gauntlet). |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
As a man of god he'll want to give you all the help he can in avoiding such sites surely. Like Jesus before him Richard has suffered (ok no exactly but he's read tough and watched all this disgusting porn) so that we can be protected. God bless RC |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
I'm not sure how wise it is to attempt to incite a response from Richard Carvath! If Carvath gets his way the internet will become a porn free zone. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Ricard Carvath says in his "book" that he has made an intensive study of the hardcore porn that is available on the net so if you Emailed him I'm sure he could supply an extensive list of all the "worst" sites so that you could avoid them obviously. |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Well I could but thats mostly because I've never looked for any (The fact that my wife uses my computer occasionally has nothing to do with it btw) |
Comment by jerry ( member ) 10th November 2009
While it's not the best written piece I've ever read, who can honestly say they're not a little shocked by the severity and graphicness of the porn you can watch for free online nowadays? |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Do you share a therapist with Richard Carvath by any chance Ana? |
Comment by Guest 10th November 2009
Do something else with your life Ana, as writing just isnt your thing. |
Comment by Guest 9th November 2009
Wow - if you were going to plagiarise an article, you certainly picked a rubbish one to plagiarise. "Ted Bunty"? lol. Is he related to Ted Bundy? |
Comment by Guest 8th November 2009
One can only assume that this is no more than a personal opinion, for as an argument it lacks substantiation, relies on generalisation and errs upon the incoherent. |
Due to problems with spam only SalfordOnline members can now leave comments. Becoming a member of SalfordOnline only takes a minute, just hit the red Join Us button at the top right hand side of the page to create your Personal account.
|
