1,756
edits
WikiIndex talk:Prohibited content: Difference between revisions
→Controversial sites
m (sp) |
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
::::However, if you just look and react to what you think "boylover" would mean, I can easily see why you would think BoyWiki was highly offensive. This much is clear. "Boylover" is ''not'' a term for sexual preference. On the other hand, some with a pedophilic male sexual preference might call themselves "boylovers." Many "boylovers," apparently, to the contrary, condemn unlawful behavior, including sexual contact with children. Some may not. Leucosticte has shown no sign of being either kind of "boylover," his agenda is always disruption and debate, especially where he thinks standard thinking is wrong. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 20:31, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::However, if you just look and react to what you think "boylover" would mean, I can easily see why you would think BoyWiki was highly offensive. This much is clear. "Boylover" is ''not'' a term for sexual preference. On the other hand, some with a pedophilic male sexual preference might call themselves "boylovers." Many "boylovers," apparently, to the contrary, condemn unlawful behavior, including sexual contact with children. Some may not. Leucosticte has shown no sign of being either kind of "boylover," his agenda is always disruption and debate, especially where he thinks standard thinking is wrong. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 20:31, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boylove&oldid=70544713 This] is the most recent WP article on the topic. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | :::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boylove&oldid=70544713 This] is the most recent WP article on the topic of boylove. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||