Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.usenet.ovh!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: will.dockery@gmail.com (W.Dockery)
Newsgroups: alt.arts.poetry.comments,rec.arts.poems
Subject: Re: The Lime sock on Stephan Pickering and NAMBLA
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 20:00:51 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <b62de335af6b1afd1205b4b62f38c6aa@www.novabbs.com>
References: <31c157534183ddc0956f4b7fafb50192@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3318665"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="Vf9CM7g99yqfGvzEHTw0bhrjcIfvzYBBhUuRma0rLuQ";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$hRaA2FhWCvRRpviGTgPpIuUk4qhcgwbBCFOCpcumm1pOqEm4aSLmO
X-Rslight-Posting-User: acd0b3e3614eaa6f47211734e4cbca3bfd42bebc
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0

On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 13:06:00 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> Since MMP is trying to disrupt his psychoanalysis by attemptint to
> change the subject to whatever he can think of, and since I don't want
> to let his attempts pass without comment, I'm being forced to open new
> threads on some of it.
> From: https://www.novabbs.com/arts/post.php?id=255645
>
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:42:11 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MPP) aka
> "HarryLime" wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 5:55:00 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>>>> It seems that Senetto took the lead in attempting to drive Stephan
>>>> Pickering from the newsgroup though, but that may have been fueled by
>>>> Senetto's obvious Antisemitism.
>>>
>>> Thanks for reminding me. It was actually MMP who did that by bringing
>>> NAMBLA to the group. That triggered Jim, just the way MFH triggered him
>>> after he was told that it was really about child molesting.
>>
>> Why do you lie so much, George?
>
> Why do you project so much, MMP? (That's a rhetorical question. As noted
> in
> your psychoanalysis, you are playing the preemption game you learned
> from
> Peter J. Ross.)
>
>> (That's a rhetorical question, as you've already intimated that your
>> pathological lying stems from you having been abused as a child.)
>
> No, Lying Michael: I have never said, or even "intimated" (!) that I was
> pathological, lying, or
> "abused as a child".
>
>> When Pickles joined the group, he simply posted ongoing entries in a
>> proposed bibliography of some Magnum Opus he had been working on for
>> years.  To the best of my recollection, this tome-in-progress was an
>> attempt to tie all of literature, culture, and history together via
>> Jewish themes explored in Bob Dylan songs.  Suffice to say that Pickles
>> had gone off the deep end decades before.
>
> Anyone who engages in deep scholarship on a subject can appear to have
> "gone off the deep end" to someone who knows nothing of the subject.
>
>> I attempted to engage Pickles in several conversations regarding his
>> posts, but he either ignored them, or spat back some angry, and
>> impolite, remarks.
>
> Similarly anyone who engages in deep scholarship on a subject cannot be
> expected to appreciate having a total ignoramus on the subject trying to
> explain it to him. So while I don't condone his impoliteness, I can
> fully understand it.
>
>> Since I didn't relish the idea of getting into a
>> flamewar with another nutjob (he reminded me of the 50s group's nutter,
>> "PhillyGuy"), I took to ignoring his posts.  Since he only posted once
>> or twice a week, ignoring him required little to no effort.
>
> You handled that well, IMO. "Skip and ignore" the posts and posters
> you don't like; as long as they stay out of your face, everyone wins.
>
>> At some point Jim and Pickles got into a flamewar regarding Ginsberg.  I
>> don't recall who started it.
>
> Well, allow me to refresh your memory. Jim and Stephan first got into
> flamewars after you formed Team Monkey with him and NastyGoon (NG), a
> Pickering
> troll. The first thing you did was invite NG into Jim's Sunday Sampler,
> where
> they (NG's preferred pronoun) would write trollpoems about Stephan. The
> result would be Stephan jumping into the Sampler, which would result in
> JIm
> flaming him and others (for example, Richard Oakley) also being turned
> against Jim. I doubt that either Jim nor STephan realized that you were
> manipulating them for that outcome.
>
> After Jim and Stephan became engaged in a prolonged flamewar, both on
> and
> off the Sampler, the second thing you did was start flooding the group
> with
> a nasty, libellous document that NG had written.
>
> The third thing you did, a month or so of that, when Jim and Stephan
> were thoroughly
> engaged with each other, you went deep diving outside the group for
> information on NAMBLA, and found a quotation from Allan Ginsberg
> ("I have never had sex with anyone under 15" or WTTE), which you began
> posting here, calling Ginsberg a "pedophile" (or predator); and then
> when others objected to that (like Stephan, Will, or myself), you began
> calling those people "pedophiles" as well.
>
>> Most likely Jim had condemned Ginsberg as
>> a child molester, and Pickles (who worshipped Ginsberg) spazzed.
>
> That is a fair summary of what I just said, though you left out that you
> (and Jim)
> were calling Stephan a child molester as well. No one appreciates being
> called names like that by cowardly trolls on the internet.
>
>> Their
>> fight had been going for what had become a fairly large-sized thread
>> when I decided to see what all the bruhaha was about.
>
>> (As I said, I'd
>> been ignoring Pickles' threads, and having no interest in Ginsberg, had
>> been avoiding this thread as well.)
>>
>> When I read Jim's accusations, I google Ginsberg and discovered that
>> he'd openly discussed having had sex with minors, hinted (as strongly as
>> possible, considering that statutory rape is a criminal offense) at
>> having had sex with boys aged 14 or under (he said that was the age when
>> boys were most desirable), was a member of NAMBLA and had been serving
>> as that organization's poster boy, publicly championing them and their
>> agenda (to legalize sex between adults and children).
>
> Indeed, Ginsberg and Camille Paglia both "championed" NAMBLA's right to
> free speech on that contentious subject, and in fact led their
> counter-parade when they were kicked out of NY's Pride parade.
>
>> I was appalled that a public figure was able to be a member of NAMBLA,
>> and to speak about having had sex with minors, and was somehow not only
>> a free man, but was still considered a renowned poet and even a cultural
>> icon.  I therefore joined in the argument, backing Jim.
>
> Actually, as I remember, you did not merely join in their flame wars,
> but began disrupting every thread Stephan was on (chiefly with Will), to
> flame him about it - which of course turned Will against you as well.
>
>> I don't know if I was the first to introduce NAMBLA into the group.
>
> Not at all. That was Chuck Lysaght years before that. He was roundly
> spanked by
> jr sherman, who pointed out that all Ginsberg championed was their (and
> Ginsberg's) right to talk about the subject, and it died off. AFAIK, you
> were the first to revive it.
>
>> I'm
>> sure that it must have come up once or twice in the 15 - 20 years of
>> flame wars before my arrival -- but whatever.  I'm pretty sure that I
>> was the one who'd introduced it into that particular argument.
>>
>> In an attempt to defend Ginsberg, Pickles told us that he had been to
>> NAMBLA meetings, listened to speakers at NAMBLA conventions, and taken
>> NAMBLA members out to dinner on several occasions, and could attest that
>> they were all good people.
>
> Stephan said a lot of things, on memory and without check, some of which
> were demonstrably untrue. (For example, his alleged dinners with NAMBLA
> were said to take place during Dylan's Rolling Thunder tour, which was
> years before NAMBLA was even founded.) there was no reason to trust
> his memory of any ot that.
>
>> NancyGene quoted posts Pickles had made in another forum, wherein he'd
>> argued that "legal age" was a meaningless concept, that the majority of
>> civilizations and cultures had no such age, that incest was not only
>> common in other cultures, but was a desirable thing.
>
> Yes, through all this NG continued to troll Stephan, and posted a lot
> of scurrilous claims about what he'd said (real, misprepresented, or
> completely
> made up). I didn't bother to check them, but (having been trolled by NG
> myself) I would nt vouch for their accuracy.
>
> IIRC, Ginsberg said that "legal age" was an arbitrary concept, which of
> course it is (just look at the USA, where the age of consent is
> different from
> state to state). he did not say that there was no age of cnnsent in
> other
> states, just that it varies. (For example, in much of the the Moslem
> world,
> the age at which a girl can be married is 9.) As for incest, NG found
> and
> quoted a statement Stephan made ridiculing "rape" charge laid aginat  a
> mother
> who'd had sex with her 17-year-old son.
>
>> Pickles not only defended his stance in said quotes, but further
>> informed us that he'd had sex with 14-year old girls (impregnating one
>> of them), and told us that he felt it was perfectly fine to have sex
>> with a 13-year old...
>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========