Anti-contact advocates/contact-offenders

"The evidence does not suggest that those who publicly proclaim to adhere to an anti-choice ideology are invariably going to be adhering to it behind the scenes,"

Sad but true. It became almost a running ( sick ) joke that when a former BCer or GCer did run afoul of the law; that the pro-choice were more likely to be arraigned on non-contact charges, and the most vocal non-contact were gonna be arraigned for contact offenses.

We all know plenty of exceptions, so its hardly formulaic. But it demonstrates that ( if the convictions were deserved ) that some of the most vocal non-contact types were hypocrites.

The anti-contact were usually much more practiced at lying than the pro-choice offender; who more often demonstrated a failure to recognize boundaries, risks to self &tc. It was sometimes no surprise that the person who failed to take security advise seriously, or who asked us if it was OK to misrepresent yourself to gain "access" would later turn out to be equally uninterested in taking our advise on RL interactions.

In a way, though, you know where you stand with the guy who is a security risk to himself ( and that's "as far away as is possible." ) The non-contact advocate/offender does a much better job of concealing their actions. And, unfortunately, those around them when they go down could end up getting caught up in the events or investigation.

Its equally regrettable, insofar as their activities tend to tarnish the image of the non-contact within the community. But at least so long as a fora allows for discussion of both sides, then it can't be accused of appealing to those who wish to disassociate themselves from the pro-choice argument as a cover to conceal their true intentions.

Dante