Give it to me straight, /sci/

[Anonymous No.10512623]

Was Alan Turing a goddamn pedo? I really look up to this guy and I want to set the record straight, at least within my own mind. What we *know* is:
>convicted having "acts of gross indecency"
>with a youth of aged just a hair over 18
>he himself being in his late 30s
>pleaded guilty, offered no resistance
>with a long, sterling record serving the Crown
>in an agency known for cover-ups
>in the country that brought you Jimmy Savile
Look, I don't have any proof, and I don't want any proof. What I'm asking for is evidence that I'm *wrong*, so I can go back to fangirling over le smart computer man. Anyone?

[Anonymous No.10512629]

All gays are pedophiles

[Anonymous No.10512632]

>>10512623
>over 18
>pedo
check your definitions

[Anonymous No.10512655]

>>10512632
>not considering the unusual guilty plea
>not considering the friends-in-high-places angle
>not considering the fishy story of how the two met
>not considering the convenient age of [math]18+\varepsilon[/math]
>not considering the general, recognized tendencies of homosexual men
Tell me more about the face value of this.

[Anonymous No.10512674]

>>10512655
You're too late, polcuck. The Queen herself has already placed the royal seal of approval on a 40-year-old Alan Turing stirring up young men's butts, as befits a monarch of her stature.

[Anonymous No.10512682]

>>10512655
The real question is WHY didn't he just go to jail for a few months or even years...

WHY did he choose chemical castration? You're telling me a smart man like him... who cracked German code and kept quiet about it for years... can't handle reading books/doing work from minimum security jail?

Inconceivable.

[Anonymous No.10512771]

The age of consent here is 16 op.

[Anonymous No.10512804]

>>10512623
almost every pedophile cases in the church are committed by homosexuals!!!

[Anonymous No.10512966]

>>10512771
>appealing to age of consent laws
By this reasoning, being a turdburglar was wrong because it was illegal. Not saying I disagree, I just want to make sure you've thought through the logic of the argument.

[Anonymous No.10513017]

>anime poster is being retarded
imagine my shock.

[Anonymous No.10513050]

>>10512771
>if something is illegal, then it is wrong
it is illegal for a white person to practice christianity in north korea. is it wrong?

[Anonymous No.10513065]

>>10513050
yes, people who are willingly christians must be burned at the stake

[Anonymous No.10513942]

>>10513017
>>10513065
Why do these goon raiders and pedo apologists never use capital letters or punctuation properly? It's such a weird affectation.

[Anonymous No.10513995]

>>10512655
>>not considering the unusual guilty plea
Guilty pleas are very common, especially if you are guilty with overwhelming evidence
>>not considering the friends-in-high-places angle
Literally not an argument, zero actual evidence of anything
>>not considering the convenient age of 18+ε
Age of consent in UK is 16, nothing convenient about it
>>not considering the general, recognized tendencies of homosexual men
Nice scientific thinking there

This is literally conspiracy tard tier thinking

>>10512682
He didn't wanna bail on some big project he was dedicated to I believe so he opted to not waste time in prison

[Anonymous No.10514110]

>>10513995
>no evidence
I get it. He's a beloved public figure, right?

[Anonymous No.10514187]

>>10514110
>beloved public figure,
Helped beat the Nazis.

[Anonymous No.10514196]

>>10514187
>it's ok to molest children if you work for military intelligence
Someone was asking what evidence there was of a coverup? It's shit like this. This corrupted mindset that even some anons have, apparently.

[Anonymous No.10514199]

>>10512623
Seventeen is legal basically everywhere and well over the point of pubescence so I dunno what you’re caring about. No one else cares.

[Anonymous No.10514201]

>>10514196
Having sex with seventeen year olds isn’t “molesting a child”. It’s simple consensual sex just about everywhere

[Anonymous No.10514211]

>>10514199
Sodomizing a 17-year-old boy was illegal, etc etc. Jesus Christ this board is low IQ sometimes.
>>10512623
Interesting theory. Unfortunately the UK doesn't have a policy of releasing old documents the way the US does; we may never get the whole story on this lad the way we did about, say Martin Luther King. (Pic related.)

[Anonymous No.10514216]

>>10514211
“Sodomizing a 17-year-old boy was illegal, etc etc. Jesus Christ this board is low IQ sometimes.”

Yes, the British government had rather homophobic laws at the time.

[Anonymous No.10514220]

>>10514216
>A is right because the law says it is
>if the law says B is wrong then the law is wrong
Not sure if doublethink, or just doublespeak.

[Anonymous No.10514223]

>>10512623
Who cares?

[Anonymous No.10514231]

>>10512623
Never get to know your heros.
No one's perfect. Instead celebrate his qualities worth celebrating. I still love Columbus. Sure he was a dick, but godamnit the entrepreneuring balls on the guy to tell everyone he'd sail around the world using tech that was meant for (relatively) short trade trips. I respect the fuck out of that.

If you go around grading everyone on every aspect of their life and give overall fails if they get an F anywhere, you wont be left with many interating people.

[Anonymous No.10514232]

>>10514110
What's your point?

[Anonymous No.10514235]

>>10514220
No no, you got it all wrong. We're always right because we're now and that was then when people were homophobic and racist. Personally I think we should just throw everything out and start from scratch because who knows, the guy who invented fire probably hit a woman at some point in his violent caveman life. We can't trust anything!

[Anonymous No.10514246]

>>10514220
“>A is right because the law says it is”

Never claimed anything was right because it was legal.

“>if the law says B is wrong then the law is wrong”

Never said that either. Try again.

[Anonymous No.10514305]

>>10513995
>He didn't wanna bail on some big project he was dedicated to I believe so he opted to not waste time in prison

What....... you're kidding me man.... he didn't want to "WASTE TIME" so he opted for CHEMICAL CASTRATION and then killed himself?

You think a guy like him doesn't know what chemical castration does to you? You think he wasn't told he'll be depressed, suicidal, no energy, can't sleep, all-in-all live with mental torture

inconceivable!

[Anonymous No.10514363]

>>10514305
Supposedly it was an experimental treatment whose "side" effects were as unknown, but yeah, you would think a supposed super-genius would be able to put two and two together. But on the other hand a real super-genius probably wouldn't get caught red-handed as an "almost" pederast.

[Anonymous No.10514370]

>>10514363
>Attempting to shove non-existent pedophilia into the subject

He was charged with homosexual acts, not “pederasty” or “pedophilia”, neither of which are legally or medically applicable to Alan’s relationship with Arnold.

[Anonymous No.10514383]

>>10514370
>"pederasty" is not legally or medically applicable
Check your dictionary, boylover.

[Anonymous No.10514401]

>>10512623
There's literally nothing wrong with having consensual sex with someone older than 17

[Anonymous No.10514406]

>>10514383
“Check your dictionary, ”

“anal intercourse especially with a boy as the passive partner”

Doesn’t apply, as Arnold was nineteen and legally able to consent three years prior.

“Boylover”

Not an argument. Why are you trying desperately to insert a “Muh pedophiles” narrative? Do you just hate Turing?

[Anonymous No.10514423]

>>10514401
having sex outside marriage is immoral

[Anonymous No.10514432]

>>10514423
Marriage is immoral. Humans should have sex with whoever they want, ideally a different person every day.

[Anonymous No.10514433]

>>10514406
>Arnold was nineteen and legally able to consent three years prior.
Murray was not legally able to consent to acts of gross indecency. But given how confused you're acting about this extremely simple point I'm going to assume you're just some middling-iq turbo-sophist who realizes his arguments are made of Swiss cheese, but feels the need to go through the motions anyway for le reddit computer man.

Watch, he'll probably declare the argument over soon, himself victorious. Sometimes I stand here thunderstruck.

[Anonymous No.10514435]

>>10514433
Are you really Muslim or is the pic just to post something?

[Anonymous No.10514442]

>>10514433
“Murray was not legally able to consent to acts of gross indecency.”

Yes, he was not legally able to consent to homosexual sex, because homosexual sex was illegal at the time. We know. Yet he was above the legal age of consent, and nineteen, so there’s no “muh pedophiles” line to argue.

“But given how confused you're acting about this extremely simple point I'm going to assume you're just some middling-iq turbo-sophist who realizes his arguments are made of Swiss cheese, but feels the need to go through the motions anyway for le reddit computer man.”

Aw, nothing but ad Homs.

“Watch, he'll probably declare the argument over soon, himself victorious. Sometimes I stand here thunderstruck.”

Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.10514469]

>>10514442
>it wasn't legal but something different was legal, and also the laws were wrong
I can only assume you're n-tupling down on this in order to wear out and drive off actual good-faith argumentation. I can sort of understand that, given how completely BTFO you're getting, but could you at least try to address OP's actual theory?

[Anonymous No.10514485]

>>10514433
Moslems may not have Logos and be the Scourge of God, and i am warming up to them more by the day.
Hopefully the Holy Church will excommunicate ther black pope soon, this Mythal of Lies is becoming unbearable.

[Anonymous No.10514486]

>>10514469
>it wasn't legal

Never said homosexual sex was legal in 50’s Britain. Welcome to quote me saying it was.

>but something different was legal

Yep, sexual activity at the age Arnold was at was legal as long as it wasn’t homosexual. He wasn’t a minor.

>and also the laws were wrong

Please quote me saying “the laws were wrong”. I’d love to know where I did that, and you’d get a real kick out of quoting me saying “they were wrong” because that’d make me look stupid, so please do so. I’ll wait in fear.

“I can only assume you're n-tupling down on this in order to wear out and drive off actual good-faith argumentation.”

Please quote me saying that the “laws were wrong” so we can return to good-faith argumentation.

“I can sort of understand that, given how completely BTFO you're getting, ”

No, just looks like you making things up and avoiding directly quoting me. Please quote me saying “the laws were wrong”.

“but could you at least try to address OP's actual theory?”

There’s nothing of substance there. Arnold was nineteen, and it wouldn’t be “pedophilia” even if he were five years younger.

[Anonymous No.10514511]

>>10512623
>Look, I don't have any proof, and I don't want any proof. What I'm asking for is evidence that I'm *wrong*, so I can go back to fangirling over le smart computer man. Anyone?
holy r*ddit, you have to go back.

[Anonymous No.10514542]

>>10514486
>quote me
How he ducks and weaves. How about you condemn Turing and his co-defendant as lawbreakers and sexual deviants?
>Yep, sexual activity at the age Arnold was at was legal as long as it wasn’t homosexual. He wasn’t a minor.
Well, at least you're being creative. Of course this same silly "argument" could also defend Turing if he had molested a girl because at least she wasn't male. Points for creativity, though.
>Arnold was nineteen, and it wouldn’t be “pedophilia” even if he were five years younger.
That's gonna get a big Yikes from me, fellow redditor.

[Anonymous No.10514566]

>>10514542
“How he ducks and weaves

How he ducks and weaves from quoting me. You’ve outed yourself as a troll here, so I’m not going to feed you anymore. Sorry.

“How about you condemn Turing and his co-defendant as lawbreakers and sexual deviants?”

I don’t care if they break those laws, and their sexual desire for eachother is no business of mine.

“Well, at least you're being creative. Of course this same silly "argument" could also defend Turing if he had molested a girl because at least she wasn't male. Points for creativity, though.”

Nope. If this girl is the same age as Arnold was, both she and Turing would be free to engage in sexual activity together.

“That's gonna get a big Yikes from me, fellow redditor.”

Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.10514585]

>>10514566
>rhetorical ass-covering, refusing to take an explicit side
Makes your position look weak. Ouch
>suddenly not caring about laws
But that was the whole foundation of your "age of consent" argument (such as it was). Brutal
>unable to find-and-replace "old enough but male" with "female but too young"
Doesn't inspire confidence. I'm starting to cringe pretty hard now
>Not an argument.
Welp. Maybe you could start presenting some, though honestly you should pose as a poster. After seeing you get destroyed continually for this long, I'm probably the only one left who will give you the time of day.

[Anonymous No.10514589]

>>10514585
New poster

[Anonymous No.10514621]

>>10512623
>>with a youth of aged just a hair over 18

Not pedophilia unless the kid is prepubescent.

[Anonymous No.10515300]

>>10512623
OP, stop projecting already. Grow some balls and find some dick to suck, if you're so obsessed over the idea. Most people really don't care if you like fucking guys.
Unless you're into prepubescent boys of course, please seek psychological assistance immediately in that case.

[Anonymous No.10515691]

>>10515300
>The only reason anyone would dislike pedos is if they themselves were a pedo.

[Anonymous No.10515704]

>>10515691
he was talking about fags you fucking moron
can you read?

[Anonymous No.10515712]

>>10515704
Fags are pedos, and OP is a faggot. So you're doubly correct, if a little redundant.

[Anonymous No.10516978]

>>10512655

[Anonymous No.10517217]

>>10512629

[Anonymous No.10517629]

>>10512623
Most people have their first sexuality experience under the age of 18. The difference is that most gays have their first sexuality experience with an older person.

[Anonymous No.10517641]

>>10514406
Buggery was illegal therefore nobody could consent. It's like saying someone consented to be murdered or injected with heroin. I'm not familiar with the age aspect but being homosexuals they almost certainly groomed some youth. It's just what homos do.

[Anonymous No.10517644]

>>10512623
what does this have to do with science or math

[Anonymous No.10517653]

>>10517641
>It's just what homos do.
>trust me I do it all the time.

[Anonymous No.10517680]

>>10517629
>>10517641
In fact, some say that homosexuality is caused by the trauma of getting molested as a child. If this is indeed the case,,homosexuality could be the origin of legendary infections such as vampirism, which is said to be transmitted by a similar contagious mechanism.

[Anonymous No.10517734]

>>10512623
>asterisk for emphasis
>fangirling
>pedophile for a fucking 17-18 year old
Please go back. Women don't belong on this board.