- Joined
- Jan 15, 2014
- Highlight
- #1
Arguments with Tom have this tendency to go in circles where he’ll deny being a pedo. I thought it might be handy to have a thread where we have the actual evidence and counter-arguments, so that when he starts pulling his usual shit, we can direct him here. Many good people have taken the trouble to dig his confessions up, which is much appreciated. If there’s anything to add, let me know.
There are two major reasons why we call Tom a pedo. The first is that he is sexually attracted to minors. He confesses to masturbating over children as young as 8 in this video:
And he gives his reasons in this post (dug up by @Easy J:
The second, and perhaps most notorious reason is what is known as “the Sabrina incident.” Here, Tom explains it:
It should be noted that Tom’s version of events has varied over time, whether because he’s realised how bad it makes him look or because he genuinely doesn’t remember. A number of details remain unclear, and no version of events sounds totally plausible.
His usual counter-arguments are:
“She was mature and had been making her own decisions since the age of 9.”
Obviously this means nothing - legally she was below the age of consent, and if anything, this version of her life indicates that she was a vulnerable child with a history of being abused. Tom was well aware of her age.
“It was 40 years ago.”
The length of time makes no difference. Tom holds grudges against people for things that happened when he was a child.
“It’s legal in 2/3 of the world.”
The events in question took place in California, where it was certainly not legal.
“No harm was done.”
We have not heard Sabrina’s side of the story and do not know what became of her. Tom has stated that she is now a grandmother, but it is not clear how this is meant to demonstrate that she was unharmed by the traumatic experience of having this gurning goblin on top of her. In any case, Tom is a highly unreliable narrator.
“I didn’t get below her breasts.”
As I said, the exact amount and nature of physical contact varies between tellings. However, even if he got no further than hugging and kissing (per some variants of the tale), every retelling includes the detail that the other woman stopped him before he could go any further. It is clear that it was his intention to progress things further.
“You’re taking things out of context!”
It is true that these are clips from longer videos, because Tom has a tendency to leave the camera running in the mistaken belief that watching an old man peering myopically at a screen is quality content. However, it is not clear what context would justify the things he is saying. When challenged on this, he is unable to provide a relevant response.
“It was a work of erotic fiction!”
Tom has repeated the tale in many different circumstances, both in writing and on video. Not once has he presented it as fiction, and even after giving the above excuse, he has continued to tell the story as if true and to defend himself as if the events genuinely took place.
However, if one takes Tom at face value, there are further questions. Why did he choose to “publish” this story on public forums instead of on a website dedicated to erotica? Why does the story change so much? And most importantly, why did he think a story about a minor being ineptly molested by him would be considered erotic by others?
“I’m not a threat now!”
Nor is Ghislaine Maxwell.
A third piece of evidence for Tom’s uncontrollable lust for underage girls is his desire to lower the age of consent (or “aids of consent,” as he pronounces it). Here he states his original position on the matter:
The reasons he gives in general are:
- That some girls are sexually active below the age of consent.
The fact that laws are broken is not a fault with the law.
- Some cultures do allow for a lower age of consent.
Irrelevant in the USA. There are many parts of the world where the cultural norms would dictate Tom’s execution.
- Many innocent men are led astray by underage girls.
This mostly seems to be Tom’s masturbation fantasy, as he is never able to provide specific cases. The circumstances necessary for these events to occur are extremely unlikely, and therefore there is no need to change the law for the benefit of a small minority.
- It’s to enable queer kids to escape abusive families.
It is not clear what this has to do with the age of consent, and it seems likely that Tom is confused with the age of majority. However, he has also indicated that he sees himself as a mentor to trans youth and that his ideal sexual partner would be a man with a vagina, so take that as you will.
EDIT: Tom has now admitted that what he did with Sabrina was a “sex crime.”
As you can see, this is the entirety of his post. It has not been edited, nor taken out of context.
Thanks to @BlueArmedDevil for digging these two up:
Archive (with thanks to @RedRocket69 for assistance)
There are two major reasons why we call Tom a pedo. The first is that he is sexually attracted to minors. He confesses to masturbating over children as young as 8 in this video:
The second, and perhaps most notorious reason is what is known as “the Sabrina incident.” Here, Tom explains it:
His usual counter-arguments are:
“She was mature and had been making her own decisions since the age of 9.”
Obviously this means nothing - legally she was below the age of consent, and if anything, this version of her life indicates that she was a vulnerable child with a history of being abused. Tom was well aware of her age.
“It was 40 years ago.”
The length of time makes no difference. Tom holds grudges against people for things that happened when he was a child.
“It’s legal in 2/3 of the world.”
The events in question took place in California, where it was certainly not legal.
“No harm was done.”
We have not heard Sabrina’s side of the story and do not know what became of her. Tom has stated that she is now a grandmother, but it is not clear how this is meant to demonstrate that she was unharmed by the traumatic experience of having this gurning goblin on top of her. In any case, Tom is a highly unreliable narrator.
“I didn’t get below her breasts.”
As I said, the exact amount and nature of physical contact varies between tellings. However, even if he got no further than hugging and kissing (per some variants of the tale), every retelling includes the detail that the other woman stopped him before he could go any further. It is clear that it was his intention to progress things further.
“You’re taking things out of context!”
It is true that these are clips from longer videos, because Tom has a tendency to leave the camera running in the mistaken belief that watching an old man peering myopically at a screen is quality content. However, it is not clear what context would justify the things he is saying. When challenged on this, he is unable to provide a relevant response.
“It was a work of erotic fiction!”
Tom has repeated the tale in many different circumstances, both in writing and on video. Not once has he presented it as fiction, and even after giving the above excuse, he has continued to tell the story as if true and to defend himself as if the events genuinely took place.
However, if one takes Tom at face value, there are further questions. Why did he choose to “publish” this story on public forums instead of on a website dedicated to erotica? Why does the story change so much? And most importantly, why did he think a story about a minor being ineptly molested by him would be considered erotic by others?
“I’m not a threat now!”
Nor is Ghislaine Maxwell.
A third piece of evidence for Tom’s uncontrollable lust for underage girls is his desire to lower the age of consent (or “aids of consent,” as he pronounces it). Here he states his original position on the matter:
The reasons he gives in general are:
- That some girls are sexually active below the age of consent.
The fact that laws are broken is not a fault with the law.
- Some cultures do allow for a lower age of consent.
Irrelevant in the USA. There are many parts of the world where the cultural norms would dictate Tom’s execution.
- Many innocent men are led astray by underage girls.
This mostly seems to be Tom’s masturbation fantasy, as he is never able to provide specific cases. The circumstances necessary for these events to occur are extremely unlikely, and therefore there is no need to change the law for the benefit of a small minority.
- It’s to enable queer kids to escape abusive families.
It is not clear what this has to do with the age of consent, and it seems likely that Tom is confused with the age of majority. However, he has also indicated that he sees himself as a mentor to trans youth and that his ideal sexual partner would be a man with a vagina, so take that as you will.
EDIT: Tom has now admitted that what he did with Sabrina was a “sex crime.”
As you can see, this is the entirety of his post. It has not been edited, nor taken out of context.
Thanks to @BlueArmedDevil for digging these two up:
Archive (with thanks to @RedRocket69 for assistance)
Last edited:
