sexeducation:

YOU ARE ONE PATHETIC SICK FUCK!

Never read such a load of utter crap in my life!!

As for your "advanced section"... yep, sure is advanced by any normal standards of decency.

:321GFY

This is getting old...pissing match is over...let this thread DIE:BangBang: :BangBang:

whew 600 posts. I like the domain name. I will put up $100 toward buying sexeducation.com and donating it to Planned Parenthood.

Any one else will to put a few dollars toward moving the domain to someone who can me good use of it?

Maybe "Dad" will take the money and move on with his life?

I did it. I read 'em all.

Up until now I haven't really commented on Mr. John Beacock or his site. I've been happy to hide behind Lady M's skirts and make occasional snipes. Fact is, anything I have to say has been said already, and probably more succinctly. And no matter how well it's been put, it's been completely ingnored by Beacock. (Or has sunk in TEN FUCKING PAGES LATER.)

But I won't be able to sleep with myself if I don't say something. "Dad," you have problems. It's painfully clear in the archive posted a few posts back that you have extraordinary issues with sex and sexuality. The archive of your site shows evidence of an individual who is extraordinarily hung up on the concept of sex as "sin". I'd wager you've never had a healthy relationship with sex, and that in mental self-defense you've gone to the dark side in an effort to make typical sexual relations feel "normal" to you. You wallow in the world of torture and child pornography so that simple intercourse (which you feel so compelled to remind yourself and everyone also means, essentially, interaction) seems less dirty.

Your self-proclaimed aversion to bodily fluids is further evidence that you find sex nasty and filthy. You probably get a perverse (in your mind, anyway) thrill just by typing the words - why else would you bring them up so often?

What makes you truly frightening, to me, is that you honestly seem to feel you are in the right. You truly do live in your own world. George Orwell would have had a field day with you. So would have Freud.

You know what marks a terrorist, or a dictator? A blind, all-consuming belief that his/her truth is the one and only truth. Add a dash of righteous indignation (eg, your supposed opposition to female genital mutilation) and you have the makings of a very dangerous individual. Mr. John Beacock, I believe you are a dangerous individual, and I do hope that you are stopped before you can do serious harm. I salute every individual here who is working to bring you down.

If there is even one shred of truth in your self-righteousness, I hope you will take a long, hard look in the mirror and try to understand why so many people here hate you so very deeply.

and not one typo :thumbsup

BRAVO! I read them all, too... and Mishi, you captured my sentiments exactly!

Good morning everyone.

I had an interesting phone call last night as I was just signing off from GFY. This phone call was from one of the most respected and known individuals on GFY.

And in one sentence - he explained to me - where I was going wrong with my thinking.

"John - you are confusing the rights of free speech that PRINT newspapers & magazines have with the Digital Millenium copyright act - the laws are different for each medium."

He went on to explain that although - in print - I may be able to do some of the things I was trying to defend as a "right of free speech" - that on the internet - the laws are completely different.

You see - to me ....television is just broadband internet. To - me there is no difference between reading a newspaper and reading usenet or this group.

To me ... this board ... as I have called it often ... is just a newsgroup. A different source of news. No different then a newspaper. A blog board really.

So I am happy to report - solely because of that one phone call ... a calm rational discussion ... without swearing and slander and libelous statements ... and without personal attacks ...

that I am ....

A) reading up on the Digital Millenium Copyright Act/s ?...

B) removing the ONE nude picture of a minor on my website.

C) will review every page ( grrr...there are hundreds) for compliance with UK, Canada and USA legislation.
...
C) considering a PRINTED version of the same website which would comply with all OFFLINE news media laws - ... (but first will do some non-sexual research ...and fix what is required..)

Thank you Sir ...
For the phone call.
What you explained, what you have requested....

It shall be done - immediately - and expeditiously.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

ADDENDUM: Sir ...
I did not mention your name as you did not specify whether I could or not. But I do not mind - if you make it known it was you.

:)

I have no aversion to bodily fluids. More slander, fluff & fodder.

It is a scientific fact that in order to prevent disease transmission then you must prevent the transfer of any type of body fluid.

If you do not understand this - then you fail one of the intellectual requirements necessary for having partner sex.

Oh ... I understand more then you think about why in this particular community they "hate" me. Way more then you think ...

I have been researching and dealing with sexual hypocrisy for years....years.

Yes - the master suite of domains ...
SexEducation.COM, SexEducation.NET, SexEducation.ORG and SexEducation.TV is for sale to an organisation that could more professionally develop it.

Until then ...
I will continue to develop the brand ...
SexEducation.com and [email protected]

A) I have never published any images or video of children engaged in sexual acts. THAT IS A LIE - A COMPLETE - FABRICATION.

B)I am not sure yet whether the Digital Millenium Copyright act forbids me to scan a cover of a magazine and then discuss it's graphic. However, I have been made aware there is a difference between the rights of an online magazine and an offline magazine and require more research into this.

C) Yes ... please send this URL of where you say all my content is.
My ICQ is 32315652 ... no authorization required.
Or you can phone me 1-403-619-2739 and leave a voice mail if I do not personally answer.

Apparently you aren't very "up" on science then. As someone who's made various forms of biology and scientific study a huge focus of my life for many years, I would have to tell you you are WRONG. There does NOT have to be a transmission of bodily fluids in order for one to aquire a sexually transmitted disease through sexual contact. Herpes, Genital Warts, Syphilis and a ton of other STDS that I can think of off the top of my head simply require skin to skin contact, not an exchange of fuids... Apparently there's a lot YOU don't understand. ANd if you've spent SO LONG researching "sexual hypocracy", why didn't you spend that time also researching the FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE to go with it? I've read your articles, pal, and at least 70% of them contain "facts" that are COMPLETELY WRONG.

You wonder why people "hate" you, perhaps you should actually READ what people are saying. You have a persecution complex of the highest degree, and you need some serious mental help. MANY people here actually extended GOOD advice, and your continuing ignorance of what they said has angered a lot of them. That's not even going into the scope of the other things that many of us have seen with our own eyes that have sickened us right to our very core. You are doing yourself NO good here. Every time you post you put another nail in your figurative coffin, and I sincerely hope you really seriously seek some help. YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO TEACH.

Yes - SexEducation.com contains my mistakes of the past. I left them to show my own past sexual hypocrisy. I will not be removing those mistakes as it shows how sexually prejudiced I was when I began the SexEducation.com project.
The evolution of my knowledge is part of the "magazine"... the good, the bad, the mistakes - its part of the magazine.

QUOTE: "Herpes, Genital Warts, Syphilis and a ton of other STDS that I can think of off the top of my head simply require skin to skin contact, not an exchange of fuids..."

Skin to skin contact causes cells to break & blood vessels to burst.
Just touching someone may (not likely) ...but may transfer bodily fluid. You are completely and utterly wrong.

You do not get Herpes when there are no lesions. You get herpes when there are sores and the fluid of the sores is absorbed into your skin.

Yes ... some people in here ... upon reflection .. gave some good advice ... however - I must have been blinded by the personal attacks and fabrications of "convicted child molestor" - which is a complete lie - and that advice did not fully register.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN INTERVIEWED, QUESTIONED, PHONED BY THE POLICE, OR INVESTIGATED, CHARGED, CONVICTED OR ANY OTHER THING ... WITH REGARDS TO CHILD MOLESTATION. PERIOD!

ANY STATEMENT OF SUCH IS LIBELOUS SLANDER - AND A REFLECTION OF THE PERSON MAKING THE COMMENT AND NOT MYSELF. COMPLETE FABRICATION.

UPDATE:
Okay ...
Several directories were deleted.
I am still not compliant yet.
But will be within 5 minutes of my domain turning back on.
The site will be disabled at the end of tour and every single page will be gradually moved to a new directory which has public viewing permission.

For those who are reviewing my content directly on the server.
Please remember that - it contains my research - a reflection of my desktop - and those images will NOT be available to the public.

I still need to use the server as a backup to my hard drive until I get another computer. But even that practice will be terminated as soon as I can - and therefore even "suspicion" of wrong doings will be terminated.

All tour graphics will be switched to Swoit.com licenced graphics as soon as full access to my domain is re-enabled.

I looked at several content suppliers and upon "micro-expression" analysis of the free LICENSED content of Swoit.com - I am currently recommending them as a graphics supplier.

Other galleries (no I will not name names) I was not comfortable in using for the purpose of explaining "how to have sex."

"Micro-expression" analysis as defined by Dr.Paul Ekman of the University of California Medical School is a suggested tool when deciding whether or not you wish to use a particular content supplier.

I am confident his research can be used in the prosecution of a new form of rape - called "Audition Rape" - which legislators need to become aware of.

So your site will still show nude and/or sexual pictures? If so, are you still going to solicit minors to access these pages?

Ok so you are saying you are leaving INCORRECT information, information people may take as the truth online? That's totally irresponsible.. And as for herpes, you are WRONG. There are people who can pass the disease WITHOUT lesions. They are called "shedders". Do your research, pal.

Here's a little preliminary reading for ya
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/stdherp.htm

Stop talking like you know your shit.

As for the rest of your rant here, well I'll leave that matter for now between you, whatever god you believe in, and the authorities.

IF your website ever gets turned on again.

And why the "warning" to those going through your server? If you have images there that you would never publish, what are they doing there in the first place? Why are you trying to explain yourself? As for using "swoit" graphics, why on EARTH are you continuing to try to make a profit on this? If you are really doing this in the best interests of learning and research, why would you be using something like swoit to make a profit? Does Swoit GIVE affiliate content?

And instead of trying to explain to people "how to have sex" why not try doing some of your own research.. your garbage about females not having vaginal orgasms and all that crap is simply WRONG. Not sure when you grew a vagina and tried, but they are a FACT. You have to seriously do a lot more research and stop relying so heavily on how you THINK things should be. Unfortunately you can't pull the wool over people's eyes here, because in most cases, because there are a lot of HIGHLY educated folks around here that know better. My worry is that some person who is HONESTLY seeking answers to honest questions might stumble on your bs sites and take what you say for truth. And it's not. You can't even get your facts straight. You wanna start doing some research? I have YEARS of research on anatomy, human sexuality, sexual psychology, etc, and I would be glad to share them with you, just to set your facts straight.


And as for your "audition rape" bullshit, dude, you aren't even IN this industry. How the FUCK would you know up from down as far as the adult industry, let alone this "insider information" you seem to have about this "horrible activity". Here's a clue for you. Bad shit happens EVERYWHERE all the TIME. However, 90% of adult webmasters/photographer/sponsor programs work VERY HARD at learning and staying within the laws. They don't want to go to jail. In most cases models are treated WELL, and in the cases where they aren't, either the perpetrator goes to jail, or she's one of those girls who LIKES that kind of thing, and I assure you, those kinds of girls are out there. Until you are in a position to actually KNOW, I would seriously shut the FUCK up right now. Because you don't know.

I'm not afraid if people know I called you and explained the difference in the law.

If your site becomes compliant with the laws due to the phone call then all is good and everybody can move on.

"And why the "warning" to those going through your server? If you have images there that you would never publish, what are they doing there in the first place?"
As previously explained - the server is my backup to my local hard drive.

As for using "swoit" graphics, why on EARTH are you continuing to try to make a profit on this? If you are really doing this in the best interests of learning and research, why would you be using something like swoit to make a profit?

SexEducation.com is an adult magazine of sexual intercourse.
It will contain real graphics of sexual events - to combat the - unrealistic (on average) for the free tours of many websites. Yes - I intend to make SexEducation.com financially self supporting. Hopefully - one day - that would include a return of the money I invested - and a reasonable salary.


Does Swoit GIVE affiliate content?
Yes - AND - upon review of that content, in comparision with other content suppliers - I am currently satisfied that "grey area" practices of getting that content - did not occur - at least for what they are licensing for their free content. I do not know Swoit.com other then a review of their free affiliate content.

QUOTE:"And as for your "audition rape" bullshit, dude, you aren't even IN this industry. How the FUCK would you know up from down as far as the adult industry, let alone this "insider information" you seem to have about this "horrible activity".

That is correct. I am not in the industry yet. However, I have been watching the industry for years. I am not going away - get used to it.

QUOTE: "However, 90% of adult webmasters/photographer/sponsor programs work VERY HARD at learning and staying within the laws. They don't want to go to jail. In most cases models are treated WELL, and in the cases where they aren't, either the perpetrator goes to jail, or she's one of those girls who LIKES that kind of thing, and I assure you, those kinds of girls are out there."

I would say the percentage of those adult webmasters (In Canada, the UK and the USA) are doing things within the law, both morally, and according to the spirit of the law - are even HIGHER then 90%. Once again - you keep displaying this "absolute" thinking of yours. The ENTIRE adult industry is not abusing it's models. Abuses do ocur at a higher rate then in other non-sexual industries though. Still however, the rate of "honest" adult webmasters is HIGHER then 90% ... probably 99% .. and even higher. I am not against the adult industry.

Hey LM...read this..

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...72#post2014472

The guy shows how far from an expert he is daily. He states that since most women cannot have a vaginal orgasm that vaginal orgams is a lie. Isn't a lie a complete false? He proves that he is spreading false information and wants people to believe what he does.

It would be funny to have a shrink check him out. They would probably find that he has never given a women a vaginal orgasm and thus why he is spreading this false information....to cover for his own inabilities.

You're using the word "expert" I am not.
I am just a Father of a teenage son - who writes a global magazine which discusses sex. One of the conclusions of that research for the magazine is that vaginal orgasm is a lie.

The word "lie" is specifically used because of the attention it gets. It delivers the message exactly as I intend it to and is the antithesis of the "hollywood" type impression of penis insertion sex being portrayed on television.

Okay ... lets split hairs.

There must be an exchange of organic biological material for disease transmission to take place.

For the rest of us ... in more common layman terms ...

An exchange of bodily fluids.

You are admit you are spreading false information instead of trying to teach the truth? If you wanted to teach the truth, you would write about how the majority cannot have a vaginal orgasm and point to studies and polls done on this. By spreading a lie like you are, you are just contributing to false information about sex....the same exact thing you are saying you are trying to do.

You are against "hollywood" spreading lies about sex. I agree with you there, to some degree. But instead of trying to tell the truth about sex and intercourse, you go to the complete other side of the spectrum and tell lies yourself and use words for your own meaning. Don't you realize when someone reads that something is a lie, they think it is a complete false. They don't know your made up fucking meaning of it.

You are the one making yourself out to be the expert because you are the one telling people what to believe, and give advice and (false) facts. You are the one claiming to help people.

I know you won't get this because you believe what you want, and others have to believe it to then. You won't understand this because you leave false information on your site, by your own admission, to show that you are wrong sometimes. If you are wrong, and have a site trying to educate people..then you take down the false information...if you don't, you are just spreading false information. People will believe what they read. People will unfortunately believe what they read on your site. And unfortunately, you use the wrong words like lie instead of majority can't.

You want to know why the world is messed up to some degree when it comes to sexual issues. Because people like you push lies to them as facts.

Well unfortunately people might believe you are an expert, and the fact is, you don't KNOW the facts. Vaginal orgasm is NOT a lie, I've had them, I am NOT unusual, a LOT of women have them. If you are inept or the woman you are with has physical problems or somesuch, maybe you might be using this as some kind of excuse.. but your "research" isn't very thorough. You don't know squat, and until you can grow a vagina and prove me wrong, I'll go with what I know, and having had MINE all my life, we know each other pretty well. I might be able to fake orgasms, but it CAN'T.

You need help, you need to do a *LOT* of research. A *LOT* and start putting REAL facts in your "magazine". Because as far as I can see, most of what you have in your articles is fabrication, conjecture and sheer sophistry.

You are really hung up on this bodily fluids bs.. Apparently you aren't aware of the microscopic particles of skin and genetic material that slough off your skin every second of every day, and have NOTHING to do with bodily fluids. Ok. You definitely need to do some reading.

His facts on this matter (if you didn't see) are video clips. LOL!!! Funniest shit I have read in a long time.

And he admits using lie instead of the majority can't have vaginal orgasm.

UPDATE:
Screw having a backup.

EVERY GRAPHIC ON SEXEDUCATION.COM is in the process of being deleted.

EVERY GRAPHIC!
Whether licensed from TOPBUCKS.COM, DAVIDLACE.COM, HUSTLER.COM, SWOIT.COM and the many other places I do have licensed content from ....

all of them ...
It'll be easier then moving all the content ... I think ...

The graphics are irrelevant to the most important part of SexEducation.com - the tour.

Someone summarize this thread in one paragraph and email it to me. This is longer than War and Peace.

I did not know that there was a difference between freedom of speech online and freedom of speech offline.

I made mistakes - and they have been corrected.

Most of the other stuff is just unfounded personal attacks - fluff & fodder - because neither side could see the others point of view.

[PLUG]
Feed the world and you feed peace - how many do you want to feed?

And that took one phone call from a person on this board that is well respected - and well known.

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

Where is the proof of the opposite.
Provide a link ...

Go to http://www.DrMirkin.com a syndicated radio talk show and and look up "premature ejaculation".

The rumblings of what I am saying is starting to happen in the academic community. Vaginal orgasm is a lie - it does not happen for the highest majority of women - regardless of your "porn" shots and television. It is not true.

My job as the Webmaster of SexEducation.com is to investigate and discuss sexual truth.

That's what I intend to do - that's why on the world's busiest adult webmaster newsgroup - I put forth my - research/experience for critique.

Have at it ...
I'm doing my best.
It's all fun ... bring it on ...bring it on.

Dad@

sexeducation

Why do you keep bumping this thread...

No one had replied to your last post - what 30 mins ago?

And all due respect to JP for taking the time to call you... but you were given plenty of info and facts about what you were doing wrong... LM, malakajoe, webby to name but a few even took the time to post links to relevant sites. Which seems you couldn't be bothered to research this info further.

Great, you're fixing your site - but many avs services (if any will) will still not accept it because of the site's content and it's discussions.

I am not "bumping" anything ...
The record of ALL my posts everywhere - proves that.
I could have taken many of the posts and broken them down for continous "bumping" - I have not ... so give me a break ...

But you have nailed exactly what occured.
It's NOT the graphics - it's what I say.

Right?
The graphics are irrelevant - it's my opinion - this WithHunt - witch ultimiately showed me I was making mistakes - was reall y about what I have been saying.

All the other crap is just because you don't like what I am saying?
Correct?

I've known that from the start.


NO AROUSED GENITALS OR REPRODUCTIVE BODILY FLUIDS ON ANY DIRECTLY ACCESSED DOMAIN NAME ....


GET THE FRIGGEN POINT...

IT IS A VIOLATION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD TO REASONABLE INFORMATION AGE ACCESS ...

nailed ...
roflmao

It is/was both.

No AVS would accept your site with pictures of minors - (and you're domain is probably banned now at any avs you've tried to submit the site to...) Ok, you've fixed that....

No AVS would accept your site with graphics you do not hold the license for : eg obvious copyright infringement - 'because they are responsible as well as you for copyright infringement.' If they approve your site, they can be sued. OK, you 'say' you've fixed that... I was more concerned with the 'underage' topic.

It's DOUBFUL if any AVS will accept your site even without the above because most services have a BANNED WORDS/TOPICS policy which forbids discussion/stories/content featuring rape, incest, CP... that's one you are still not complying with and doubtfully will. No avs will accpect you with a legal discalimer which says to the effect that 'maturing adults' are allowed access...

At the end of it - you should have an ADULTS only site which complies to all aspects of the law and follows the policies of the AVS you are trying to submit to.

It is nothing to do with freedom of speech and as you can't afford an attorney, I wouldn't even try that arguement...

YES - I understand the graphics part now.
I truly thought - I was under my interpretation of "fair use" - it seems I made a mistake about that. And ALL EVERY - EVERY SINGLE GRAPHIC - has been deleted. When I review each page and make each page public again - they will be purely licensed content.

SexEducation.com will be adujsted to fit the global community standards of all AVS communities.

I might use SexualBloggers.com to discuss the more controversial subject. I am not sure yet how to handle those.

Well - I believe - its more then just the "law". You need to be compliant to the community in which you are joining. Not just the law. But fit within the community morals of appropriateness that you are joining.

I am currently in the process of creating AdultSexTechniques.com which is being written with Google alogorithms in mind. It pushes the boundry of what I "preach" but - I too need to pay for servers etc etc....

I think though we all can agree that there should be no aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on any directly accessed domain. Most consumers are now expecting to click on a "OVER AGE 18" link now anyways. IMO

whats sick is that is such an amazing domain, which must get a lot type ins. its a shame that it isn't being used responsibly (sp?) with a clean up-beat look, and a with perhaps content with articles, information etc produced by professionals who are in the business of providing sex education.

Considering Sex Education indeed a every day thing and is taught all over, it does have its place on the internet, but it could be a better resource for such information.

Above all of that, it could be producing a hell of a lot of advertising revenue for big companies given it be a proper site.

You're telling me that? Somehow I think I might have already known that... don't ask me why....

Claiming it's a lie says it doesn't happen at all..you are contradicting yourself by saying "majority" of women.. shouldn't that be all? Half of the reason that women are LESS likely to have vaginal orgasms is not their fault, but actually the lack of knowledge on the part of their lover (or themselves). They can also have physical problems that prevent it.. Want to compare research? Believe me, the knowledge I have in my homely little head would blow your fucking mind.. I've spent over 12 years of my life studying sex, sexual anatamy, sexual technique, tantric sex, sexual psychology, etc, and I am by far not a "newbie" to the subject.


Most of the things you claim to be truth are not. I'm sorry but that is a fact, plain and simple.. you want resources, I will give you more LEGITIMATE resources than you could POSSIBLY imagine.. With REAL scientific research to back it. With REAL doctors, psychologists, biologists, and experts to back it up. Not conjecture and "Oh I found this on this webpage and it looked good so I'll believe it". The blind leading the blind ends up with everyone falling into a pit.. Please stop attempting to "teach" people when you yourself exemplify naivity with every word out of your mouth.

I know you are being fecitious ...
but I have tried to do that - while - discussing these extremely controversial subjects ...
I have tried ...
really....really truly tried.