Malou_uuu

The News of the big TV stations you can watch with subtitles on youtube.

If you would be interested in it you could get a feeling for it, you can translate the articles and you can have a look at the reactions. I don't think that's your main ambition. To stick with your narrative you don't need to, you can save your time.

No need to tell, it's obvious that you don't like to read and to know.

You're already giving away the correct answer. So what i am wondering, where are you buying your generalizing statements, must have been really cheap.

What does it have to do with him. May be your problem is the believing. I might even assume you really want something good. But if you go to a place to discuss it you need arguments backing up your claims. You don't have those. Maybe you go looking for something you can really help somebody with than excausting yourself.

You are wrong again, nothing of this that was happening was right and it doesn't even has to do somthing with the outcome. Imagine sometimes it's even possible that two things could be wrong at the same time. Yes you are very helpful person. The question is, who wants that? I really don't know because i can't know but i am pretty sure that Kim Saeron wouldn't be very happy about what happend after her sad and helpless decision.

Sorry to tell you i am not a pedodefender. Therefore there would be the need of a pedo i defend. It took a long time, many struggles, and many sacrifices before certain criminal offenses were incorporated into legal systems. People who naively or willfully misuse these terms for their own purposes are more likely to cause long-term harm to certain groups. Those who want justice must be precise, otherwise they rather will cause harm. In your answer yo offer what it`s mostly about my... my... my.... I wish you to find peace but without damaging others.

Your fantasy is more reliable. Just keep on going as it is not the real live only for your victims, you don't need to fear consequencenes. Keep on fantasizing that you are an angel helping others.

The problem is that you write about something where you don't know anything about. To be inaccurate won't help to prevent anything.

There is not a single hint that he did what you are describing in your answer. So what to answer. You should know what you know and what you not know, you obviously can`t handle that. But you throw mud on others perfectly. The damage done here is imense and he is not the onlyone. The good thing now ist that especially such extremistic and unreflected behavior like yours at this point and fron now on will work rather for those harmed in this mess because it shows how dangerous this was.

I hope the best for you, but you don't seem like somebody enyoying his live. But probably i am wrong.

Your behaviour is much closer to criminal acts than anything that is known about him so far. (FYI: Knowing doesn't mean sick fantasies) What you are doing only helps you to stay in your bubble and sleep well it won't be helpful for anybody else.

I mean if that would be your oral exam and they asked you for a summarizing statement to this case. Than in the exam you follow the structure: claim, reason and evidence. Either the examiner would take a pity on you, or you would fail miserably.

This comment is so selfdestroying.

This was my answer to Farefareast and i think you´ve got it wrong or my english is not good enough.

There is no need to debate the fact that the world is full of injustices. Nor is it disputed that there remain countries and regions where women, in particular, are treated differently—and more poorly—than men. But does this mean that we should simply pass sweeping judgments on specific events? You are commenting on a very specific case; and—regardless of the opinion one has formed, or the degree of care taken in reaching it—I find it difficult to understand why anyone should be condemned wholesale simply on the basis of their gender. This is precisely the kind of behavior you are attempting to combat when it comes from the other side. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that such generalization and lack of nuance are actually detrimental—even to the very people you are trying to protect.

Of course not. Even the ones we know well, there will always be unknown secrets. But this fact doesn't change wether it is a female or male person. Undifferentiated perspectives are rarely the friend of justice.

This is confusing me. It doesn't sound "examined fairly, freely and objectively". To judge something is right or wrong because of the gender has nothing to do with justice. I rather stand with human beeings.