The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Discussions in this subforum are hidden from search engines.

However, they are not hidden from automobile engines, including the newer, more "environmentally-friendly" electric and hybrid engines. Also, please note that this subforum is meant to be used for discussion of the actual biographical articles themselves; more generalized discussions of BLP policy should be posted in the General Discussion or Bureaucracy forums.

5 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Sex by surprise
LessHorrid vanU
post Sat 11th December 2010, 11:54pm
Post #41


Devils Advocaat
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu 11th Oct 2007, 9:56pm
Member No.: 3,466

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 7th December 2010, 10:58pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Tue 7th December 2010, 1:30pm) *

Having sex with an unconscious person amounts to rape.


So I take it you don't agree with Linda Ellerbee's solution on how to handle a marriage where both partners are employed in wage-earning jobs?

"Sex: the rule is that both of us don't necessarily need to be conscious at the same time."

With my unconscious body, I thee worship....

Hmmm. I can only conclude that this second babe must be a VERY heavy sleeper, since it was morning and no allegations of drugs or alcohol are involved. Or else she is not a very anxious type. Or maybe she has narcolepsy? ermm.gif

Good God, I've slept with women who normally woke up enough to comment, when *I* woke up quietly to do something as unbothersome as reach for a empty bottle of wine "Mmmm, sorry I drank the last of it..." Then go right back to snoring. So where the hell do they get these zombified Swedish babes? Not that any of this interests me very much, but it sure is not anywhere near any of my own experience with women. Men, by contrast, do sleep like the dead. Not that I've ever tried to violate one to put this to the ultimate test.

See, this is why we need human juries, and computers will never work. ermm.gif


"Let. Me. Tell. You about Sweden.
Only. Place. Where the clouds are interesting' "

The Stranglers - Black and White album "All Quiet on the Western Front"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Adversary
post Mon 13th December 2010, 3:03am
Post #42


CT (Check Troll)
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 801
Joined: Sat 20th May 2006, 12:09am
Member No.: 194



Well...laws on sex are a bit different in Scandinavia, than in most other places. Say, if a guy comes to Scandinavia and buys sex from any of the zillion Nigerian prostitutes who walks the streets, and she then, afterwards demand more money...he better pay that extra money. Because otherwise the prostitute can go to the police and tell them that he bought sex ...and that is a serious crime. The guy will get arrested. But: selling sex is not a crime! So the prostitute walks free......

Just one little part of living in what one despairing male once called "The First Vaginal State" of the world! biggrin.gif

Having said that: the Assange case stinks. Big time. A "bad sex night" (or two dry.gif ) is still not a crime. And when the females in question didn´t "figure out" that Assange had committed anything wrong before several days later: it stinks.

I seriously dislike this case/females: it/they trivialize sexual offenses. And if would never have happened if Assange wasn´t who he is. hrmph.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
anthony
post Mon 13th December 2010, 4:53am
Post #43


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,034
Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 1:31am
Member No.: 2,132



QUOTE(The Adversary @ Mon 13th December 2010, 3:03am) *

And when the females in question didn´t "figure out" that Assange had committed anything wrong before several days later: it stinks.


There's a difference between "anything wrong" and a crime worthy of reporting to the police. From what little information has been released it sounds like the police were the first to use the term "rape".

QUOTE(The Adversary @ Mon 13th December 2010, 3:03am) *

And if would never have happened if Assange wasn´t who he is. hrmph.gif


A reckless individual who thinks he is above the law?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KD Tries Again
post Mon 13th December 2010, 5:26am
Post #44


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun 10th May 2009, 2:45pm
Member No.: 11,730



Is there anything here so far which shouldn't be in the off topic forum?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 13th December 2010, 11:36pm
Post #45


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(The Adversary @ Sun 12th December 2010, 10:03pm) *


Just one little part of living in what one despairing male once called "The First Vaginal State" of the world! biggrin.gif



Up to now most nation states have acted like real dicks.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mr. Mystery
post Mon 13th December 2010, 11:46pm
Post #46


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat 28th Jul 2007, 5:06am
Member No.: 2,106



Seems he is inclined towards unprotected sex: http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison

This post has been edited by Mr. Mystery: Tue 14th December 2010, 5:09am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 14th December 2010, 6:21am
Post #47


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(KD Tries Again @ Sun 12th December 2010, 9:26pm) *

Is there anything here so far which shouldn't be in the off topic forum?

Not a damn thing. Perhaps the mods are overwhelmed with deleting Christmas spam?
You know, selling stuff like this?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am
Post #48


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Mr. Mystery @ Mon 13th December 2010, 4:46pm) *

Seems he is inclined towards unprotected sex: http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison


This just in from today. Such sweetly crafted justice for a Wikileaker:

QUOTE
LONDON — Julian Assange, the founder of the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy organization who was released from a British jail late last week, is facing a new challenge: the leak of a 68-page confidential Swedish police report that sheds new light on the allegations of sexual misconduct that led to Mr. Assange’s legal troubles.


Leaving aside the fact that Mr. Assange's personal habits and court cases are going to be all over the web, what do we think about this?

Suppose a man and woman agree to have sex, and the woman's demand is that the man wear a condom. And let us suppose he agrees, then later in the night tricks the woman into sex in which he isn't using one.

Now-- what should be the penalty. Stipulate no harm but psychological done-- the woman does not get pregnant nor catch a disease. Is this, or should this be, a felony?

Turn it around. A man and woman agree to have sex, and the man's demand is that the woman should be taking birth control pills. She promises that she is, but and lies. She does get pregnant. She also says she's never been treated for an STD, but has, and in this case gives the man a rather nasty one, albeit not a fatal or incurable one.

This has happened a number of times, and courts have decided that the man in such situations is basically out of luck. He has to pay child support if the mother decides to have the child. His STD is his own problem, unless possibly it's Hep C, herpes II, or HIV, in which last case he can sue for willful endangerment (in some places).

Now, isn't all this rather a double standard? How much should people who make passionate promises be held to keeping them? Always? As a civil matter? As a criminal matter? Only if physical harm is done? Only if the "victim" is female?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Sun 19th December 2010, 4:35pm
Post #49


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 4:35am) *

QUOTE(Mr. Mystery @ Mon 13th December 2010, 4:46pm) *

Seems he is inclined towards unprotected sex: http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison


This just in from today. Such sweetly crafted justice for a Wikileaker:

QUOTE
LONDON — Julian Assange, the founder of the WikiLeaks anti-secrecy organization who was released from a British jail late last week, is facing a new challenge: the leak of a 68-page confidential Swedish police report that sheds new light on the allegations of sexual misconduct that led to Mr. Assange’s legal troubles.


Leaving aside the fact that Mr. Assange's personal habits and court cases are going to be all over the web, what do we think about this?

Suppose a man and woman agree to have sex, and the woman's demand is that the man wear a condom. And let us suppose he agrees, then later in the night tricks the woman into sex in which he isn't using one.

Now-- what should be the penalty. Stipulate no harm but psychological done-- the woman does not get pregnant nor catch a disease. Is this, or should this be, a felony?

Turn it around. A man and woman agree to have sex, and the man's demand is that the woman should be taking birth control pills. She promises that she is, but and lies. She does get pregnant. She also says she's never been treated for an STD, but has, and in this case gives the man a rather nasty one, albeit not a fatal or incurable one.

This has happened a number of times, and courts have decided that the man in such situations is basically out of luck. He has to pay child support if the mother decides to have the child. His STD is his own problem, unless possibly it's Hep C, herpes II, or HIV, in which last case he can sue for willful endangerment (in some places).

Now, isn't all this rather a double standard? How much should people who make passionate promises be held to keeping them? Always? As a civil matter? As a criminal matter? Only if physical harm is done? Only if the "victim" is female?


If the full extent of Assange's misconduct is that he renegaded on the terms of fluid exchange it should be no more than a misdemeanor or low grade felony. No more than a couple years of prison and eligible for probation-only sentence but no problem with criminalizing the conduct. Nothing about the charge, even as a serious felony, is so unfair that he should not be extradited.

Once again you are the "bad winner" who wants to bitch about unfair treatment and "inequality" while maintaining privileged. The reality is different. Women bare the brunt of the consequences for pregnancy and children. Woman get STD from men (I can already anticipate your response here... but go ahead.) But why should you be any better on matters of gender than race or social class?

The most troglodyte of your suggestions is that a man should skate on child support if he was "had." That is nothing short of monstrous. But as usual when you project your own concerns into a thread it will probably be heading south quickly enough. Maybe some other mod might want to remove this and what follows to an OT thread sooner rather than latter.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
anthony
post Sun 19th December 2010, 5:04pm
Post #50


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,034
Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 1:31am
Member No.: 2,132



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

Leaving aside the fact that Mr. Assange's personal habits and court cases are going to be all over the web, what do we think about this?


We're certainly leaving aside the Assange case, since there is no mention of how the man "stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs". And that's the woman he's *not* accused of raping. To cover the rape allegation we'd have to talk about a woman "waking up to find him having sex with her again".

I'm going to point out that these are all just allegations, and that Assange has not yet had a proper chance to respond to these allegations. I'm not saying they're true, just that they're worthy of investigation.

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

Suppose a man and woman agree to have sex, and the woman's demand is that the man wear a condom. And let us suppose he agrees, then later in the night tricks the woman into sex in which he isn't using one.

Now-- what should be the penalty. Stipulate no harm but psychological done-- the woman does not get pregnant nor catch a disease. Is this, or should this be, a felony?


Probably not a felony, but it's clearly assault, no? It's a misdemeanor at the least. Do you have any evidence that it *is* a felony?

Say a pizza delivery man does nasty things to someone's pizza. Stipulate no harm but psychological done--the pizza eaters don't get pregnant nor catch a disease. Is this, or should this be, a felony?

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

Turn it around. A man and woman agree to have sex, and the man's demand is that the woman should be taking birth control pills. She promises that she is, but and lies. She does get pregnant.


Not assault. I don't see any crime at all, in fact.

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

She also says she's never been treated for an STD, but has, and in this case gives the man a rather nasty one, albeit not a fatal or incurable one.


Assault and battery.

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

This has happened a number of times, and courts have decided that the man in such situations is basically out of luck. He has to pay child support if the mother decides to have the child. His STD is his own problem, unless possibly it's Hep C, herpes II, or HIV, in which last case he can sue for willful endangerment (in some places).


Show me a court case where a woman has stipulated, or have been found by a jury to have said that "she's never been treated for an STD, but has, and in this case gives the man a rather nasty one, albeit not a fatal or incurable one", and the court has held that no crime was committed.

As for the child support, that's an interesting question all to itself, which I'd love to discuss in another thread. If the mother can't support the child on her own, and don't think the father should be forced to, then who do you think should? The taxpayer? Or should children be taken away from parent(s) who can't support them? Interesting questions, but for another thread, no?

What if the woman dies, and the woman's parents are awarded custody of the child. Then should the father owe child support?

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sun 19th December 2010, 9:35am) *

Now, isn't all this rather a double standard? How much should people who make passionate promises be held to keeping them? Always? As a civil matter? As a criminal matter? Only if physical harm is done? Only if the "victim" is female?


A broken promise is a civil matter (EDIT: correction, it's a breach of contract matter, which is generally different from a civil tort). Fraud is a criminal matter. The difference between a broken promise and fraud is whether the lie is about the future or the present.

Granted, in the case of the woman not taking the pill there is fraud, but there is no direct harm, except upon the woman herself. Maybe you could come up with a crime which has been committed, but I can't think of one. It's not assault or battery.

This post has been edited by anthony: Sun 19th December 2010, 5:39pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Sun 19th December 2010, 11:44pm
Post #51


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE

Julian Assange is an all around piece of shit.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Mon 20th December 2010, 1:25am
Post #52


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 19th December 2010, 3:44pm) *

I can't comment on whether Mr. Assange is a piece of shit, but in reading the linked Daily Mail article, I thought to myself, "this is just the sort of tabloid journalism which should never, ever be used as a source in Wikipedia BLPs." Then, out of curiosity, I went to Julian Assange (T-H-L-K-D), and sure enough, there it was (although not that particular article. Not yet, anyway.)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RMHED
post Mon 20th December 2010, 1:30am
Post #53


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 936
Joined: Fri 8th May 2009, 8:48pm
Member No.: 11,716

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 19th December 2010, 11:44pm) *

If The Daily Mail doesn't like him, he can't be all bad.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Mon 20th December 2010, 1:49am
Post #54


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



No, just bad enough to be an embarrassment to freedom of speech.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RMHED
post Mon 20th December 2010, 1:56am
Post #55


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 936
Joined: Fri 8th May 2009, 8:48pm
Member No.: 11,716

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 20th December 2010, 1:49am) *

...to freedom of speech.

There's no such thing, it's never free there's always a price to pay.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 20th December 2010, 2:08am
Post #56


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 19th December 2010, 8:49pm) *

No, just bad enough to be an embarrassment to freedom of speech.


Well if freedom of speech can survive the Hollywood ACLU honoring Courtney Love despite giving journalists and reviewers death threats I guess it will survive this too. Mind you I love the ACLU and figure that those folks in Hollywood and The Free Kulture Reich are just some kind of aberrations.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dogbiscuit
post Mon 20th December 2010, 10:17pm
Post #57


Could you run through Verifiability not Truth once more?
********

Group: Members
Posts: 2,972
Joined: Tue 4th Dec 2007, 12:42am
From: The Midlands
Member No.: 4,015



After stripping this down through the layers of mis-information, it is a most peculiar case, but then Mr A is a most peculiar person.

It seems a number of women, on the basis of very little personal contact, decided that they fancied a shag - it all seems in the grand tradition of groupy-ism going back to the 60s and the various pop stars of that era. Their casual approach to sex lowers the expected standards of behaviour in my book, so my initial reaction is that I don't have a lot of sympathy.

However, if it did turn out to be true that Mr A deliberately and deceptively did things like damaging a condom and initiating sex whilst asleep (though there is something rather odd in the telling which makes it sound as if she never woke up, which then brings up the question of whether there was drink or drugs involved) then it does turn the situation into something more akin to a deliberate assault. I think in the modern age, it is understood that the basic standard of casual sex, especially based on such a fleeting meeting, is that it is appropriate to have protected sex. In fact, it seems rather reckless of Mr A that he should seek to risk catching something interesting, given his predilection for casual sex - perhaps a sign of some self-destructive tendencies.

The whole casual sex arrangement of the groupies giving service to their anointed one is rather cultish, and it is that imbalance of power that makes me uneasy, though it seems to me that these were mature women taking conscious decisions.

The lack of self-control and ego does make a convincing story in the context of previously revealed splits in WikiLeaks and the determined release of diplomatic tittle-tattle that is damaging without there being a perceived benefit. Convincing story? Well, it also seems to be the case that it is not a fabrication but too well founded in actual events to be a CIA-style plot.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TungstenCarbide
post Mon 20th December 2010, 11:04pm
Post #58


Allegedly shot down by stray Ukrainian missile
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,405
Joined: Sat 14th Mar 2009, 6:12am
Member No.: 10,787

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Mon 20th December 2010, 10:17pm) *

After stripping this down through the layers of mis-information, it is a most peculiar case, but then Mr A is a most peculiar person.

It seems a number of women, on the basis of very little personal contact, decided that they fancied a shag - it all seems in the grand tradition of groupy-ism going back to the 60s and the various pop stars of that era. Their casual approach to sex lowers the expected standards of behaviour in my book, so my initial reaction is that I don't have a lot of sympathy.

However, if it did turn out to be true that Mr A deliberately and deceptively did things like damaging a condom and initiating sex whilst asleep (though there is something rather odd in the telling which makes it sound as if she never woke up, which then brings up the question of whether there was drink or drugs involved) then it does turn the situation into something more akin to a deliberate assault. I think in the modern age, it is understood that the basic standard of casual sex, especially based on such a fleeting meeting, is that it is appropriate to have protected sex. In fact, it seems rather reckless of Mr A that he should seek to risk catching something interesting, given his predilection for casual sex - perhaps a sign of some self-destructive tendencies.

The whole casual sex arrangement of the groupies giving service to their anointed one is rather cultish, and it is that imbalance of power that makes me uneasy, though it seems to me that these were mature women taking conscious decisions.

The lack of self-control and ego does make a convincing story in the context of previously revealed splits in WikiLeaks and the determined release of diplomatic tittle-tattle that is damaging without there being a perceived benefit. Convincing story? Well, it also seems to be the case that it is not a fabrication but too well founded in actual events to be a CIA-style plot.


Assange is a vile animal, plain and simple. He's benefited greatly by the laws of society and a standard of living built for him in the western world, while tearing down the institutions that brought him that life and hiding behind its civilized laws. Reading this story in particular, he sounds like he has no conscience. The article dings at least 10 of 15 traits of a psychopath;

*Glibness and Superficial Charm
*Manipulative and Conning
*Grandiose Sense of Self, Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
*Pathological Lying
*Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
*Shallow Emotions
*Incapacity for Love
*Need for Stimulation
*Callousness/Lack of Empathy
*Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
*Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
*Irresponsibility/Unreliability
*Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
*Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
*Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility

This post has been edited by TungstenCarbide: Mon 20th December 2010, 11:07pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dogbiscuit
post Tue 21st December 2010, 8:18am
Post #59


Could you run through Verifiability not Truth once more?
********

Group: Members
Posts: 2,972
Joined: Tue 4th Dec 2007, 12:42am
From: The Midlands
Member No.: 4,015



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Mon 20th December 2010, 11:04pm) *

Assange is a vile animal, plain and simple. He's benefited greatly by the laws of society and a standard of living built for him in the western world, while tearing down the institutions that brought him that life and hiding behind its civilized laws. Reading this story in particular, he sounds like he has no conscience. The article dings at least 10 of 15 traits of a psychopath;

*Glibness and Superficial Charm
*Manipulative and Conning
*Grandiose Sense of Self, Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
*Pathological Lying
*Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
*Shallow Emotions
*Incapacity for Love
*Need for Stimulation
*Callousness/Lack of Empathy
*Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
*Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
*Irresponsibility/Unreliability
*Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
*Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
*Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility

It is that the story is in the Daily Mail which unfortunately means that I have to dismiss it - the Mail is a very right wing, uncritical paper which is a propaganda sheet for the Conservatives. Its speciality is apparently plausible stories that allow the unthinking nation to nod in agreement and fume at the injustice of the world.

Before this story broke, it was clear that there was something not quite right in the world of WikiLeaks. That being said, when your fact gathering is through the media, you have to be entirely suspicious of why you are being told what you are being told. I have a rule that you should treat a subject you know nothing about with the same scepticism as those you know about: simple example, when have the press ever managed an accurate story about Wikipedia that shows that they know what they are talking about, so why should we think that the press is helpful in understanding Assange?

I'd like to know on what basis Assange thinks he will not get a fair trial. His team have been running a fairly strong propaganda war yet they have not been denying the underlying basis of the story. I wonder if Assange knows he did what he did and simply doesn't see why it should be considered a crime.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Tue 21st December 2010, 1:48pm
Post #60


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Mon 20th December 2010, 5:04pm) *
The article dings at least 10 of 15 traits of a psychopath;

*Glibness and Superficial Charm
*Manipulative and Conning
*Grandiose Sense of Self, Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
*Pathological Lying
*Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
*Shallow Emotions
*Incapacity for Love
*Need for Stimulation
*Callousness/Lack of Empathy
*Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
*Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
*Irresponsibility/Unreliability
*Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
*Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
*Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Wait, I thought we were talking about Assange; why are you listing Jimmy Wales' traits?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th 9 17, 9:22am