BoxRec

JCS wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 13:07 She has always looked a little older than she actually is, but Broner is still an idiot.

I've never heard of her but she doesn't look 16. No defense for that stupidity though

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

gilgamesh wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 23:47 Oh Good Lord. Broner tried to send a girl a message. He didn't actually touch her or nothing, but he tried to talk to her. Somebody lock him up immediately this is important.

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Past the moral compass, this about billions dude has to hit the web for women?

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

gilgamesh wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 23:47 Oh Good Lord. Broner tried to send a girl a message. He didn't actually touch her or nothing, but he tried to talk to her. Somebody lock him up immediately this is important.

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Its a joke. The girl acts like a 30 year old trash women, raps 80 % profanity, but than acts like this innocent 16 year old litle girl, texting what broner wrote her, playing the victim and than rap about "fu;_&k this fu;!k that".

She couldve just wrote broner "i am 16, dont text me again", instead of making that fake drama to seek attention.

KiwiRider wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 16:12

Stuarty wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 15:48 She's proper jail bait!!

She is now 16, isn't that legal in Scotland?
Or do you guys go by a tooth count, like we do here with sheep?

16 is legal here mate but a grown man humping a 16 year old would still be frowned upon Bit sketchy

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 05:47

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Its a joke. The girl acts like a 30 year old trash women, raps 80 % profanity, but than acts like this innocent 16 year old litle girl, texting what broner wrote her, playing the victim and than rap about "fu;_&k this fu;!k that".

She couldve just wrote broner "i am 16, dont text me again", instead of making that fake drama to seek attention.

Yes, it should definitely be the 16yr old to set the old man straight. I see boxing isn't your only expertise.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 07:33

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 05:47

Its a joke. The girl acts like a 30 year old trash women, raps 80 % profanity, but than acts like this innocent 16 year old litle girl, texting what broner wrote her, playing the victim and than rap about "fu;_&k this fu;!k that".

She couldve just wrote broner "i am 16, dont text me again", instead of making that fake drama to seek attention.

Yes, it should definitely be the 16yr old to set the old man straight. I see boxing isn't your only expertise.

My fan again, who follows every of my posts.

She is 17 (in 3 month), old enough to make money and rap about profanity, but not old enough to tell a 30 year old to back off?

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 07:51

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 07:33

Yes, it should definitely be the 16yr old to set the old man straight. I see boxing isn't your only expertise.

My fan again, who follows every of my posts.

She is 17 (in 3 month), old enough to make money and rap about profanity, but not old enough to tell a 30 year old to back off?

That's pretty much the definition of victim blaming.

If a grown man messages a child, in what's an obvious request for a sexual encounter - in what way is it the child's responsibility to to tell the grown man that he shouldn't be asking her?
The fact that this child likes to swear a bit doesn't mean that she has the responsibility to warn off any sexual advances from adults.

I find it quite unsettling that your biggest issue is how a child reacted to (what amounts to) a request for sex from an adult, than the request from the adult.

KiwiRider wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 16:12

Stuarty wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 15:48 She's proper jail bait!!

She is now 16, isn't that legal in Scotland?
Or do you guys go by a tooth count, like we do here with sheep?

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:03

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 07:51

My fan again, who follows every of my posts.

She is 17 (in 3 month), old enough to make money and rap about profanity, but not old enough to tell a 30 year old to back off?

That's pretty much the definition of victim blaming.

If a grown man messages a child, in what's an obvious request for a sexual encounter - in what way is it the child's responsibility to to tell the grown man that he shouldn't be asking her?
The fact that this child likes to swear a bit doesn't mean that she has the responsibility to warn off any sexual advances from adults.

I find it quite unsettling that your biggest issue is how a child reacted to (what amounts to) a request for sex from an adult, than the request from the adult.

First of all she is no victim. Calling her a victim over a text message is downplaying the term victim. She 1 year away from being 18, a adult women. Lets not act as if she 13 years old. She is close to being 17, acts like a sl;t and got a simple text message. Nothing more. Adrien made a mistake, he backed off. End of the story. If he wouldve continued when he knew she was 16, thats a different situation. Than i wouldve said he is mentaly abusing her stalking her etc. But since it wasnt the case and ge backed off than there is no problem.

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:17

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:03

That's pretty much the definition of victim blaming.

If a grown man messages a child, in what's an obvious request for a sexual encounter - in what way is it the child's responsibility to to tell the grown man that he shouldn't be asking her?
The fact that this child likes to swear a bit doesn't mean that she has the responsibility to warn off any sexual advances from adults.

I find it quite unsettling that your biggest issue is how a child reacted to (what amounts to) a request for sex from an adult, than the request from the adult.

First of all she is no victim. Calling her a victim over a text message is downplaying the term victim. She 1 year away from being 18, a adult women. Lets not act as if she 13 years old. She is close to being 17, acts like a sl;t and got a simple text message. Nothing more. Adrien made a mistake, he backed off. End of the story. If he wouldve continued when he knew she was 16, thats a different situation. Than i wouldve said he is mentaly abusing her stalking her etc. But since it wasnt the case and ge backed off than there is no problem.

She's 16, FFS.

When you say 'she's nearly 17, which is a year away from being an adult', it make you sound a proper wrong 'un.
She is not an adult, she's a 16 year old child.
Much in the same way that I'm not Chinese because saying 'I live in Europe which, which is next to Russia which shares a border with China' would be blatantly stupid.

As for the rest of it, if you can't see that pointing to the behaviour of a child (and women in general) to diminish the actions of a man - when it is entirely, entirely irrelevant, is the wrong then I don't know what to tell you.

*Also, I said victim blaming.
This is a perfect example.

Social media companies like Facebook and Instagram should have automatic age information posted for people under the age of 18. This way no one (like Broner in this case) could say that they didn't know the individual they were corresponding with was underage. It would also protect the companies from any possible litigation.

chuck9788 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:50 Social media companies like Facebook and Instagram should have automatic age information posted for people under the age of 18. This way no one (like Broner in this case) could say that they didn't know the individual they were corresponding with was underage. It would also protect the companies from any possible litigation.

Yeh. When you sign up you have to put in ur DOB. But then after that you’re registered. Then you can chose to just leave ur day and month visible, which doesn’t help. Anyone under 18, there should be an automatic age listed regardless of privacy settings. If you don’t like it, don’t join social media.

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:46

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:17

First of all she is no victim. Calling her a victim over a text message is downplaying the term victim. She 1 year away from being 18, a adult women. Lets not act as if she 13 years old. She is close to being 17, acts like a sl;t and got a simple text message. Nothing more. Adrien made a mistake, he backed off. End of the story. If he wouldve continued when he knew she was 16, thats a different situation. Than i wouldve said he is mentaly abusing her stalking her etc. But since it wasnt the case and ge backed off than there is no problem.

She's 16, FFS.

When you say 'she's nearly 17, which is a year away from being an adult', it make you sound a proper wrong 'un.
She is not an adult, she's a 16 year old child.
Much in the same way that I'm not Chinese because saying 'I live in Europe which, which is next to Russia which shares a border with China' would be blatantly stupid.

As for the rest of it, if you can't see that pointing to the behaviour of a child (and women in general) to diminish the actions of a man - when it is entirely, entirely irrelevant, is the wrong then I don't know what to tell you.

*Also, I said victim blaming.
This is a perfect example.

You just make it way more complicated than it is. Nothing happened.

She is no child, she is a teenager who raps in every song about twerking, bit,h, pu;_y, Did broner do something bad. No. Did he do something stupid. Yes. Did broner back off when she told him his age. Yes. Therefore there is no problem. A problem is had broner continued knowing she was 16.

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 05:47

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Its a joke. The girl acts like a 30 year old trash women, raps 80 % profanity, but than acts like this innocent 16 year old litle girl, texting what broner wrote her, playing the victim and than rap about "fu;_&k this fu;!k that".

She couldve just wrote broner "i am 16, dont text me again", instead of making that fake drama to seek attention.

I'm not seeing the "joke". She's a 16 year old girl, and he tried to message her with the intention of fornicating her. She "acts like a 30 year old"? What on earth does that mean? There's only one "30 year old" in this entire thing, and that's Broner. But you see no problem with it.

Thanks for outing yourself.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 05:23

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Past the moral compass, this about billions dude has to hit the web for women?

English next time.

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 11:15

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 05:23

Past the moral compass, this about billions dude has to hit the web for women?

English next time.

Dumb guy say he richer than any but he need internet for girl.

RonnyJ wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 09:44

Lenny Cravats wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 08:46


She's 16, FFS.

When you say 'she's nearly 17, which is a year away from being an adult', it make you sound a proper wrong 'un.
She is not an adult, she's a 16 year old child.
Much in the same way that I'm not Chinese because saying 'I live in Europe which, which is next to Russia which shares a border with China' would be blatantly stupid.

As for the rest of it, if you can't see that pointing to the behaviour of a child (and women in general) to diminish the actions of a man - when it is entirely, entirely irrelevant, is the wrong then I don't know what to tell you.

*Also, I said victim blaming.
This is a perfect example.

You just make it way more complicated than it is. Nothing happened.

She is no child, she is a teenager who raps in every song about twerking, bit,h, pu;_y, Did broner do something bad. No. Did he do something stupid. Yes. Did broner back off when she told him his age. Yes. Therefore there is no problem. A problem is had broner continued knowing she was 16.

Broner backed off when he was outed publicly for trying to fvck a child.

You don't seem to understand the concept that a child's behaviour does not legitimise sexual advances, so let me put it another way.
I am a teacher. I teach kids in this age range. I have seen hundreds of girls like this. I have never decided that I will try and have sex with them because they act in this way -- because they are children.
If I tried to have sex with one of them, I would be a wrong 'un, that includes the girl that talks about sex and is sexually active as much as it includes the virgin that does her homework the day it's set. The reason is simple. They are children, I am a man.
I wouldn't try and fvck them, full stop, their behaviour is irrelevant.

Broner is mentally under age himself.

boxing_rocks wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 12:34 Broner is mentally under age himself.

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

gilgamesh wrote: ↑04 Jan 2020, 23:47 Oh Good Lord. Broner tried to send a girl a message. He didn't actually touch her or nothing, but he tried to talk to her. Somebody lock him up immediately this is important.

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Is it against the law to try to get a girl's number now? I didn't say I didn't think it was creepy or f*cked up, but why is it news?

It's not a prosecutable offense to my knowledge. Plus...he's not wrong that the girl carries herself as if she's much older than 16. Could've well been an honest mistake.

Most importantly, he apparently didn't get the number and didn't talk to her beyond asking for her number. So who cares?

I hate to break it to you, but that untalented girl who inexplicably has a record contract has almost certainly been f*cked by her share of grown men already. She just didn't like Broner that's all.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 04:28

She's 16 and he was trying to get her number so he could f*ck her. If you don't think that's a problem, I suggest you check your moral compass.

Is it against the law to try to get a girl's number now?

Yes you idiot. She's underage.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37I didn't say I didn't think it was creepy or f*cked up, but why is it news?

BECAUSE IT'S AGAINST THE LAW YOU MORON.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37It's not a prosecutable offense to my knowledge. Plus...he's not wrong that the girl carries herself as if she's much older than 16. Could've well been an honest mistake.

Most importantly, he apparently didn't get the number and didn't talk to her beyond asking for her number. So who cares?

I hate to break it to you, but that untalented girl who inexplicably has a record contract has almost certainly been f*cked by her share of grown men already. She just didn't like Broner that's all.

You're a special one.

lookingaround87 wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 18:04

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37

Is it against the law to try to get a girl's number now?

Yes you idiot. She's underage.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37I didn't say I didn't think it was creepy or f*cked up, but why is it news?

BECAUSE IT'S AGAINST THE LAW YOU MORON.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑05 Jan 2020, 13:37It's not a prosecutable offense to my knowledge. Plus...he's not wrong that the girl carries herself as if she's much older than 16. Could've well been an honest mistake.

Most importantly, he apparently didn't get the number and didn't talk to her beyond asking for her number. So who cares?

I hate to break it to you, but that untalented girl who inexplicably has a record contract has almost certainly been f*cked by her share of grown men already. She just didn't like Broner that's all.

You're a special one.

It's against the law to f*ck the girl. It's not against the law to ask for her number. At least not as far as I know. If that's a law it's news to me.

Now you think you can stop pretending to be offended by the concept of a teenage girl having sex long enough to grasp what I'm actually saying, and address that or you just gonna keep going on ignoring the points I made?

Have to say, if he didn't know she was a minor and then back off after learning, that's really not all that big a deal.

so this is nothing to do with stealing or trying on someone else's shoes?

Famous boxer acts like a peadophile... people on here's first response is to shame the child. Classy