The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

'Eunuch-maker' case: Male escort jailed for removing man's genitals

So he was not jailed for not being a qualified and registered surgeon.
 
"Consent is not a defence": like "you are not a woman because you carried or used to carry a penis from birth", or "he has already paid his due to society, [screw the dead person and his people]".

That is, law is NEVER EVER about right and wrong, or harm and protection, but about how "the powers that be" feel about this or that, and are more or less passionate about ENFORCING THEIR OWN BELIEF (or lack of it).
 
I don't know what to say.

It raises the question around the limits of extreme body modification by unqualified 'surgeons'.

The pay for view is a new twist.
 
belamyi said:
"Consent is not a defence": like "you are not a woman because you carried or used to carry a penis from birth", or "he has already paid his due to society, [screw the dead person and his people]".

That is, law is NEVER EVER about right and wrong, or harm and protection, but about how "the powers that be" feel about this or that, and are more or less passionate about ENFORCING THEIR OWN BELIEF (or lack of it).
Click to expand...
* about PURELY (or fundamentally) right... etc.
 
rareboy said:
I don't know what to say.

It raises the question around the limits of extreme body modification by unqualified 'surgeons'.

The pay for view is a new twist.
Click to expand...
Don't. say. anything, then.

Why mix up EBM with unqualified practice?

Is anyone going to jail for this, or to any worse hell than enjoying life with all that on them? :cool:

Body-modifications-split-image_tcm25-683661.jpg


70999439-12084905-image-a-9_1684147669115.jpg


1705358269924.jpeg
1705358283415.jpeg


Since when is PPV 'a twist'? Since 1994?
 
The article stated the Court did not view the video. It is not my justice system, but I absolutely believe the Court should have been forced to watch it.

It's bad enough to have the crime occur, but the severity of judgement should have been fully informed, not merely read up on it.

Imagine a murder where the judge or jury didn't see the crime scene or the wounds. Not really fair justice.
 
NotHardUp1 said:
The article stated the Court did not view the video. It is not my justice system, but I absolutely believe the Court should have been forced to watch it.

It's bad enough to have the crime occur, but the severity of judgement should have been fully informed, not merely read up on it.

Imagine a murder where the judge or jury didn't see the crime scene or the wounds. Not really fair justice.
Click to expand...
I would imagine the Judge would view the video before sentencing
I really don't think the jury would HAVE to view it to decide guilt or otherwise
 
I doesn't read as if there was any material dispute about what happened. It was just a matter of which laws were broken and by whom. I don't see what "value" watching the video would add.
 
I'm not familiar enough with the UK to know who decides sentencing in a case like this. It would be very germane to sentencing.
 
Whenever I see people like that, my first thought is always about them going through a space-time warp back to Medieval Europe... why Europe and not America or Asia? maybe because of their European genetic ancestry :mrgreen:
 
belamyi said:
Don't. say. anything, then.

Why mix up EBM with unqualified practice?

Is anyone going to jail for this, or to any worse hell than enjoying life with all that on them? :cool:

Body-modifications-split-image_tcm25-683661.jpg


70999439-12084905-image-a-9_1684147669115.jpg


View attachment 2342198
View attachment 2342199


Since when is PPV 'a twist'? Since 1994?
Click to expand...


I'm just grateful that JUB's Hot Topics forum doesn't allow pictures of circumcized dicks.




#:>​
 
belamyi said:
Whenever I see people like that, my first thought is always about them going through a space-time warp back to Medieval Europe... why Europe and not America or Asia? maybe because of their European genetic ancestry :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
My thought is always that they have body dysmorphia. Which is usually correct
 
LeicsDom said:
My thought is always that they have body dysmorphia. Which is usually correct
Click to expand...
You mean like the average gym junkies, roid accidents waiting to happen, or those who put on wigs, false lashes, hair transplants, dye their hair(s), rub/peel off their skin color, the addicts to surgery, vigorexics...

I would say they are bigger show-offs than dysmorphic cases.
 
NotHardUp1 said:
I'm not familiar enough with the UK to know who decides sentencing in a case like this. It would be very germane to sentencing.
Click to expand...
LeicsDom said:
The Judge decides on sentencing
In some cases the jury can request a sentence but the judge doesn't have to accede
Click to expand...

The judge decides the specific sentence on conviction based on seriousness and mitigation, but within the statutory sentencing parameters set for each offence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top