Clinic escort mom blogs about helping daughter get an abortion
Mom of the Year goes on to describe how her [15-year-old] daughter came to her agonizing decision all by herself, after being counseled by Mom on how hard it was for her (Mom of the Year) to be a teen mom, how as a doula who works with teen moms she sees all the hardships they face, how difficult it is to get benefits, and so on and so on. But her daughter decided ON HER OWN. Let’s be clear about that.
The post then covers the difficulty of affording abortion when living in poverty; how Mom obtained the necessary documents to get permission for her daughter; getting funding and religious counseling; how proud she was that her daughter decided to work as an escort the day of her procedure; and a lot more stuff that is basically the reason why the acronym “smh” was invented….
So congratulations, abortion industry. You’ve taken a woman’s grandchild from her, and not only is she not angry or sad, but she’s posting blogs about what an empowering experience it was.
Oh, and so is her teenage daughter. The end of the post includes a contribution from poor Kayla, in which she says: “Did I feel sad? Yes. Do I regret it? No! Because I know that the spirit I named Mariah will go on to a woman who is ready for her.”
There’s nothing else to say about this. There is only sadness.
~ Kristen Hatten, discussing a post on Jackson Women’s Health Organization’s (pictured) clinic escort blog in which a mom discusses taking her daughter for an abortion, Live Action News, September 16
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“decided ON HER OWN”
Ya, sure! Parental pressure doesn’t end just because abortion is now legal. The legalization of abortion only made it possible for parents to pressure their own children into a very decision and, as the article points out, to kill their own grandchildren.
Jill please correct your statement that the blog is the clinic’s blog it is not the blog is administered and maintained by the clinic escorts NOT Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
And if her the mother had been prolife?
Perhaps the daughter would have come to the decision to let her baby live ON HER OWN!!
Does Laurie’s daughter get civics credit for her hours spent at the Pepto Pink kill mill?
She’s been a permanent fixture when I’ve been there.
What’s wrong Laurie?
Her 15y/o daughter came to this decision all by herself? 15y/o, immature, scared, and overwhelmed. “Counseled” by mom, more accurately she was told horror stories. Mom gets all the necessary documents. A 15y/o pregnant girl works as an “escort”? I thought PL demonstrators were so violent and dangerous! What mother in her right mind would permit this, or allow her daughter to be placed in any kind of risky situation?
Yes, its easy to see how this child came to this decision by herself.
Oh, and the next time you hear of someone being murdered or killed by a drunk driver, take solace in knowing their spirit will move on to the body of man or woman who is ready for it.
“Pepto Pink kill mill”
Anyone else think this would make an awesome name for a band?
Hi JDC,
I thought this was an awesome color for a New Orleans bordello.
Hi Mary,
That sounds about right.
The New Wave Feminism intrigues me. It is refreshing to know that there is a movement out there which combats the old-school man-haters and their idea of women’s “liberation.” Kudos to Kristen Hatten!!!
Wow. This is sad beyond words. That poor girl – I guess you’ll tell yourself anything to numb the pain of being cornered into killing your own precious baby.
And wow. What a shock that a girl who’s been inundated with sex sex sex sex since she was very young (13 and testifying about comprehensive sex ed?? Ugh). Where was the talk about respecting herself? Wish she had had someone in her life telling her she is worth waiting for, that she should, at the very least, wait for a man who will stay with her and treat her right and not give herself away to some fifteen year old kid.
Oh and another thought – where was the father of this baby being killed? This mom seems to have forgotten that she is *not* the parent of the baby, but the grandparent. Oh so sad. This world is so broken.
Oh, this is the daughter of THIS Laurie Bertram Roberts?? http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/2012/aug/01/laurie-bertram-roberts/
Did not know that.
Thanks for looking this up Kel.
“Because I know that the spirit I named Mariah will go on to a woman who is ready for her.”
For Kayla to make this statement is just tragic. Where was her mother when Kayla neeeded guidance regarding sexuality? This paints a picture of a mom who is uninvolved in her daughter’s upbringing in that regard. But as they say – the apple does not fall far from the tree. Hooray for making whoopi should be this mom’s motto….
Mariah is in heaven.
Praying for this mother and daughter.
God help us.
Oh and another thought – where was the father of this baby being killed? This mom seems to have forgotten that she is *not* the parent of the baby, but the grandparent. Oh so sad. This world is so broken.
Good point. What a sad story.
where was the father of this baby being killed?
It pains to say this – but looking for another baby momma no doubt. And if that is the case, there truly is no honor here as the mother is being complicit in the cycle that defines these types of “relationships.” I am not even sure if the daughter will learn anything beyond this abortion.
Since Ms. Bertram Roberts apparently reads this blog, I would like to provide her with one bit of information that perhaps she was not aware of when helping her daughter make the decision to have an abortion. According to a January 2012 Planned Parenthood Fact Sheet, “It is known that having a full-term pregnancy early in a woman’s childbearing years is protective against breast cancer, and some studies have also indicated that breastfeeding, especially in women who are young when they give birth, may reduce a woman’s risk of developing the disease. A woman’s age at menarche and menopause also influence her risk for breast cancer, with earlier onset of regular menstrual cycles and later age at menopause associated with higher risk.” (Kelsey & Gammon, 1991).
Admittedly, PP does go on to deny any connection between induced abortion and breast cancer, but logically, since abortion prevents both a full-term pregnancy and breastfeeding, it seems that Ms. Bertram Roberts’ young daughter now will not receive that protection against breast cancer her pregnancy could have afforded had she made the choice to carry her child to term.
But Jeanne,
I have no doubt that when her daughter made this decision for herself she did so only after she had researched everything thoroughly. You make it sound like her mother might have actually influenced her decision when we have been told “she came to her agonizing decision all by herself”. Mom only “counseled”. (Sarcasm alert)
Mrs. Bertram Roberts assisted her daughter in having an abortion to escape more binding issues: taking responsibility for a baby conceived by a daughter who was not parented to understand the responsibility that comes with sexual activity.
So no, this was not empowering for her daughter. The only lesson learned here is that deadbeat guys can take advantage of Kayla’s willingness to abort. Does the mother realize that her daughter is on a path to the very destructive lifestyle that has defined many in the black-American community? That is disheartening.
The bigger picture to think about: how does her action empower black women to take charge of their lives. Meet a guy, have whoopi, abort a baby, have some more whoopi, become a baby momma at some point, have some more whoopi, have another abortion…. Where does it end? I don’t call this empowerment at all but a demeaning way to live.
“Oh, and so is her teenage daughter. The end of the post includes a contribution from poor Kayla, in which she says: “Did I feel sad? Yes. Do I regret it? No! Because I know that the spirit I named Mariah will go on to a woman who is ready for her.””
Well that’s heartbreaking. It seems like this kid knew at some level that what she was carrying was a human being, and she “chose” to end her life (though it’s pretty obvious a fifteen year old is going to do what mom encourages, especially when she’s getting scare stories about single parenthood shoved down her throat). I hope she finds someone to help her with her sadness, because it seems like mom is just all proud and happy about this.
Mary, as long as we are spewing sarcasm…You pro-lifers only care about the unborn. Where is your support for the already born 15 year old child or her mother who is empowering her daughter through abortion.
The daughter recognizes that the fetus was more than a blob of tissue–she named it. She recognizes that by having the abortion she will never know the child that she conceived. But then she denies the significance of what she has done–ending the life of her unborn child–with the bizarre rationalization that somehow this person will live and find life with another mother. Reincarnation absolves her of the consequences of what she has done. Would she do the same thing if her year old baby died–would she cheer herself up by saying that the spirit of her dead child will find happiness as another child in another family?
Uh, nohype, why are you blaming the kid? She’s really, really clearly parroting what she’s been taught. She’s fifteen, she’s not even old enough to legally have sex in I think all states, she’s not old enough to drive, she can’t vote. She’s not an adult who’s responsible for all her own decisions. If you read the blog post that mother wrote it’s really obvious what kind of “support” this kid got.
As I am drawing nearer to 30, I have more and more female friends becoming aware enough and vocal enough to speak out about abortions they had in their teen years. It’s truthfully heartwrenching. Often, their mothers, raised in the throws of “female empowerment”, believed themselves to be truly assisting when they counselled their 14, 15, 16, 17 year old daughters to kill their grandchildren. They truly believed that this would be an empowering thing, saving their daughters from the inevitable unhappiness (oftentimes, thinking of what ‘they could have done/been’ if not for their own pregnancies).
These mothers didn’t really give their daughters the chance to think about the subject, to contemplate or pray or consider. They counseled, and then almost immediately (sometimes day later, sometimes moments later), asked if their daughters wanted them to schedule the abortion. In other cases, they simply assumed that their daughters wanted an abortion and planned the day.
Now, as women, these friends of mine are realizing that their opinions, their choices, their future, was all ignored for the benefit of what validated their mothers.
Laurie, I’m sure that you think that you were honestly trying to help your daughter. I as a mother often find myself thinking that I know better than my sons what they want, and they are quite young still. No doubt you believed that you were simply guiding a decision which Kayla made on her own, ultimately. The truth will come out one day, and I am sorry that you had to be so involved in a day which will haunt her. I pray that you seek healing for whatever drives your need. If you are post-abortive, I pray for your healing from your abortion. If you have some other hurt in your past which brings you to this, I pray for your healing from that. If it is merely a detachment from reality, I pray that you find the Truth.
Please, though, please, teach your daughter that sexuality does not define her. Teach her the value of chastity, and of chaste love. Teach her that she is desireable as a friend, companion, and equal to any boy or girl, that sex is not what makes her desireable. Teach her to respect herself.
ts,
Could you please clarify the point you’re trying to make? Thank you.
Mary, The pro-aborts like to claim that pro-lifers only care about the unborn. But in reality the pro-lifers out-give the pro-aborts in charitable giving by better than 3-1.
And in this instance the pro-aborts see pro-lifers counseling mothers against abortion as non-supportive. This is the “progressive’s” thought process and they show it openly.
But in reality the pro-lifers out-give the pro-aborts in charitable giving by better than 3-1. – you’ve got verifiable data for this of course?
I went and read the post. Originally I thought this was immediate abortion…but no apparently she went back and had “silent reflection” (their words).
There was a comment from a birth mother who was talking about how much the article saddened her and how she hoped God would be there. Kayla got on there and said, “I’m fine, no regrets.” At 15 maybe not…but later…how does she know?
People always say “I don’t regret.” Some say it after 3. But I wonder. Stuff I thought “No big deal” at the time, I ended up regretting deeply later.
Abortion is so final. There’s no chance for the mother or child to prove what could be–and how do we know that what that child could be isn’t something wonderful? We can’t know the outcome.
Kayla is so young to be making such adult decisions. (And, yes, I consider sexual activity an adult decision–I know what hormones are like, I was a teen once, but what you’re thinking in a hormonal fog verses clear-headed thought are two different things).
The “support” began long before the abortion.
Safe sex right? Where was mom before her daughter began giving herself away to young boys interested in girls that give themselves away?? Did she make sure her daughter was “ready” to have sex by getting her on birth control? And I am sure it was understood that IF/WHEN her daughter got pregnant that problem would be solved by abortion. The influence of this mother towards abortion is obvious!!!
My own mother paid for my sister’s abortion. I was a young teenage girl. THAT stayed with me.
It’s truly a sad state of affairs when the only answer to teenage girl’s sexual maturity would be to consider putting her on birth control. Unfortunately though, due to the total irresponsibility of some parents – that seems to be the only way out of this predicament in some households. The mother dropped the ball before Kayla started “giving herself” away.
Shortcuts and cop-outs everywhere.
Thank you ts but I still don’t quite understand the point of your post.
I was being facetious. Why ask the about the mother’s knowledge of a breast cancer risk when the daughter supposedly arrived at this decision herself? Certainly she did her research, right?
In Kel’s link Laurie Bertram Roberts gives us the usual sob story of the eeeeevil Catholic hospital that lets pregnant women hemorrhage even though they are “miscarrying” and won’t do “emergency” abortions, whatever those are.
Ms. Roberts has the advantage as she can give her side of the story. I would be interested in the medical staff’s side of the story.
Bleeding in early pregnancy is not unheard of, some women will bleed through the pregnancy. Yes she may be at increased risk for miscarriage, it may be thought one is going on, but so long as there is a viable pregnancy the benefit of the doubt will be given, unless there is a life threatening situation for the woman. Its pretty much a wait and see situation.
I bled for 5 months straight in my third pregnancy, sometimes profusely. I had only one ultrasound verifying I hadn’t lost the baby at 10 weeks when the bleeding began, they were not routinely done at that time, and that I had a low lying placenta.
So long as I had a viable pregnancy, verified by a heartbeat heard by the stethoscope, it would just have to be touch and go. The miscarriage risk was there and I was to come to the ER if the bleeding became profuse and continuous. It sounds like this was the situation with Ms. Roberts. Thus her surgery came after she nearly “bled to death”. I can empathize with Ms.Roberts that this is terrifying. If I was frightened by this, I can only imagine an 18y/o girl’s trauma.
Thankfully the bleeding subsided in the 5th month and other than going into labor 3 weeks early, my daughter was fine. Sadly, this was not the situation for Ms.Roberts or any number of other women.
* I think Kristen Hatten’s original article post has closed the comments, and I clicked a link there, and now I’ve arrived here.
* I’m responding to commenters on the other thread on the liveactionnews blog — although after reading the comments here, the gist of what I’m saying applies to commenters here on Jill Stanek’s blog too –
To: Kristen Hatten (the author of this article), Mary Lee, Marauder, Joe Wetterling, Calvin Freiburger, Beverly Harlton, and the other people who have commented on this blog post, using a sarcastic tone, or made snide jokes related to the issue of a young girl choosing to have an abortion —
Whether you are a secular pro-life believer (as I think you said you are, Mary Lee) or are a religious person (Christian, other religion or spiritual), as I think some of the other commenter likely are, I think that we all need to remember our own decency here.
Don’t we all believe in decency?
I don’t know if the author of this article, Kristen Hatten is Christian or not, but when I see that Kristen is using a Nazi reference as part of an article about a young girl/child who had an abortion (subtley comparing either the mother, Kayla, or both to Nazis) — and when I see Kristen is opening mocking Kayla’s mother, Laurie, by insulting her and derisively and sarcastically calling Laurie “Mom of the Year” — and saying things that drip with mean-spirited sarcasm like “Where’s my shocked face?” —
I think that we all need to remember that we are talking about a young girl — a child – who recently had an abortion and just went through a difficult and likely emotionally painful experience — and yet some people think it’s justified and ok to make jokes?
— No matter what side of the fence one is on idealogically, I think it’s fair to say that Kayla’s experience was NOT an easy situation for her, and was more likely a very difficult situation for her, and I think may have been quite emotionally painful experience for Kayla — yet I’m hearing people making jokes about “cookies” and “French fries” falling from the sky and “yawning” like this whole situation is one big joke or boring them…
I’d like to ask — how would Jesus would want us to behave towards Kayla and her mother — how Jesus would want us to treat Kayla and her mother, Laurie?
I think Jesus would want us to treat both of them would with compassion, love, and understanding — not compare them to Nazis, make jokes about Kayla’s difficult experience, laugh, and make sarcastic and cruel remarks towards either of them, or say they disgust us, etc.
I don’t think it’s very Christian to hurl insults at the mother, Laurie, or speak sarcastically to her, or indirectly call her a “murderer” by saying that she “helped her daughter murder a baby,” etc.
For the Christians, I ask you — what do you think Jesus would have said to the mother, Laurie right now? Do you think Jesus would laugh and make jokes and be sarcastic and cruel — insult her, and call her a murderer?
I understand that Christians absolutely believe that abortion is murder, and perhaps those who are making jokes and attacking and insulting the mother/Laurie feel they are justified in some way to mistreat her because they believe she is a murderer according to their belief system — and it’s OK to be cruel to her because she’s a sinner or they believe she’s an evil murderer, etc.
But — in the Bible, when it came to people murdering Jesus — at the crucifixion when they were literally hammering nails into his feet and nails in his hands on the cross and murdering him in a cruel and torturous way — did Jesus call those people murderers and did Jesus try to hurt them with cruel words in response to their actions?
No, as all Christians know, Jesus was kind to the people who were murdering him — Jesus forgave them — Christ taught that we must forgive those who have wronged us and have compassion and love those that do things we think are wrong.
Jesus taught compassion and kindness for one’s enemies and wrongdoers — and to many Christians, women or girls who have abortions are wrongdoers, murderers, etc.
Where is the compassion, the kindness, the love that Jesus taught, in the posts by Christians pro-life believers on this thread?
– I think that the commenter named Kylee most closely embodies Jesus’ teachings of compassion, love and kindness — and I commend you, Kylee, for refraining from making cruel remarks, making jokes, etc. that I have seen others do here.
For those who are not Christian (such as me), then at least for decency’s sake — I think it’s important to point out that making light-hearted jokes about another person’s difficult and painful experience (* especially a child/young girl’s experience) is not the right thing to do.
I wonder if people are being so aggressive on this thread because they’re angry or hurt about something in their own lives, and are taking secret pleasure at having a “justified” reason to unleash hurtful, cruelty on Laurie and/or her daughter Kayla, so they can have an excuse to vent their own anger/hurt feelings, under the guise of “righteousness?”
As we all know, it’s possible that like most 15 year olds, Kayla surfs the internet, and what if she’s reading this comment thread — do we think it’s OK to compare a young girl to a Nazi because she had an abortion?
Do Christians here believe that calling those they believe are wrongdoers names, insulting them, hurting them, making jokes about their painful experiences, laughing and treating them with cruelty will help them find Jesus and do what we think is the right thing?
I ask the non-Christians — do you think your doing the above named thing (laughing, being cruel, making jokes about another person’s painful experience) is the right thing to do?
How would you feel if you were treated that way?
Do you think trying to hurt other people (such as the cruel and hurtful comments directed at the mother, Laurie) will change her way of thinking, beliefs, or anyone’s hearts and minds?
I would like to encourage all commenters here to remember their decency — and though some might say, “Why should I be decent or kind or compassionate toward someone I think is a murderer?
To the Christians, I’d say — because that’s what Jesus would do.
To the non-Christians, I’d say — it’s the right thing to do.
Oh my.
Sarah. We are all adults here and have our own opinions. Many of those who comment here are NOT believers.
I will not tell an author what to say or not to say…….good grief. Write to Kristen and reprimand HER.
We CAN be angry about the action!!! This mother led her daughter to the mill to kill her own grandchild! That is a fact.
A painful, difficult heartbreaking situation for Kayla? I wonder how Kayla’s baby felt?
And absolutely I AM praying for this mother and this daughter. As I stated above.
Mary,I was being sarcastic too. Sorry, I swear again that I’ll never post sarcasm again.
Gee, Sarah, thanks for teaching us how to be whitewashed tombs.
Remember, the same Christ who commanded us to love our neighbor also overturned the vendors in the temple. Sometimes, love means not allowing our neighbor to live in delusion.
And FYI, many of the posters here are post-abortive and know how important to the healing process it is that one should accept the facts. Abortion is the direct killing of an innocent.
You think the Nazis were bad? We are creating humans just to destroy them with processes like embryonic stem cell research and IVF. Our death camps are not hidden miles from civilization, but placed next to our churches. We are not the unaware Germans of WWII, but we are informed and the knowledge is readily at hand and yet we STILL purport to believe in the justice of abortion. We are worse, Sarah. We are worse.
Actually, Sarah Wellan, Jesus had all kinds of TRUTHful things to say to the people RESPONSIBLE for killing him. Read Matthew 23 … “Hypocrites” “Snakes” “Fools.” Loving means forgiving but it also means WARNING and teaching. We could so often be more loving and forgiving – I completely agree! But that does not mean simply being sympathetic and agreeable.
– Mary Rose, Carla, Truthseeker, and Life Joy – Well, first of all I’d like to thank all of you who responded with your thoughts.
– I do my best to try to see things from other people’s perspectives (though of course I don’t always agree with them), and after reading your comment, I can appreciate the points of view that each of you is presenting.
– btw, I think I’ll only have time at the moment to respond to Mary Rose’s comment, but when I can (maybe tomorrow), I’ll try to respond to Carla, Truthseeker, and Life Joy.
– This is going to be a super-long post, but well, I had some stuff on my mind to share.
* Mary Rose – I hear what you’re saying, and I think I can see where you’re coming from — I can see that you feel passionately about this, and I can respect that. You are defending what you believe is right, you feel you are literally trying to save unborn babies lives — and the spirit of what you are doing, the principle behind it, is quite noble, I think.
- I think the problem arises in terms of how you are going about trying to achieve that goal. I just don’t think being sarcastic and attacking people is a very effective way to change hearts and minds.
– I was disappointed to see the sarcasm in your post.
– It’s not that I think I’m all perfect all the time (I can be sarcastic myself at times too) — but well, I don’t know, in my experience, when I am sarcastic, I find that there is a certain level of mean-spiritedness that’s going on with me at that moment (usually when I’m having a rough time or I’m angry in my life for other reasons) – and although I’m not religious – (I’m an atheist, though I used to be Catholic – I went to 12 years of Catholic school) — on my better days when I’m closer to being the person I’d like to be, I feel that coming from a place of mean-spiritedness isn’t helpful for me to try to understand what’s going on with other people — as we are all I think attempting to make sense of the mother in this article, Laurie’s decision to take her 15 year old daughter to have an abortion.
– Mary Rose, I’d like to understand your point of view, and where you’re coming from, but sarcasm can get in the way, in my opinion. If you don’t mind my asking you — what’s the purpose/point of being sarcastic when we’re trying to express our feelings about an issue as sensitive as teen abortion?
– You started your post with sarcasm – you said, “Gee, Sarah, thanks for teaching us how to be whitewashed tombs” — what was the point of the sarcasm?
– Were you trying to tell me you’re angry or mad at me for what I said in my comment?
– If yes, why not just come right out and say something like, “Sarah, what you said really made me mad/pissed me off” or “Sarah, I don’t like what you said, it made me angry, and here’s why…”
– If you’re mad at me for what I said, I think you have a right to your feelings, period — I’d rather you just tell me what’s on your mind, instead of having to try to figure out why you’re being sarcastic. I guess I would just prefer if you (and others) would just tell me directly what you’re feeling, instead of doing the sarcasm thing.
– Does that sound fair?
– So, back to what you were saying in your comment. I’m not sure what you mean by “whitewashed tombs?” Can you clarify that? Do you mean you think I was being dishonest in some way in my comment? If yes, how?
– Regarding what you said about Jesus overturning vendors in the temple — I do remember that from the bible (Jesus definitely didn’t really like moneylenders) – but I think that there’s a difference between feeling angry at someone (like perhaps some of you here are mad at the mother/Laurie for committing what you believe is a sin by helping her daughter get an abortion) — and what we DO with those feelings of anger.
– Basically I think it’s healthy to * feel * angry — what matters, though is how we communicate or *express* that anger.
– I think it’s most helpful (at least in my life) when I am able to express my anger in a constructive, non-abusive way. When I am able to approach a situation or talk to a person who has made me angry * without * being verbally abusive, I find the whole thing goes much better than if I just attack the person with insults, sarcasm, and anger, and verbal abuse.
– I mean, for example, I am much more receptive to hearing what someone else has to say if they try to constructively express their anger to me – rather than yell at me, be sarcastic, hurtful, or abusive towards me. Don’t you find that to be true as well?
– So when I saw people here (and on the other live blog where the original article appeared) being sarcastic towards Laurie, and saying some mean-spirited, or cruel things to the mother in this situation, I felt it was only right to remind people of the inherent decency that I know they have in them, mostly because it was the right thing to do. Also, I don’t like to see someone get attacked or ganged up on — and if I see it, I will speak up to remind people of the goodness that have in them, and encourage them to re-connect with that positive force within them to try to speak more constructively towards the person they’re angry at. Haha, I sound like Mother Theresa, I guess, but oh well, it’s what I believe.
– As far as what you said about “Sometimes, love means not allowing our neighbor to live in delusion” — I think I see what you mean, but in my own personal value system (again, I’m an atheist — former Catholic though), I just believe in basic fairness, and although I can see that you believe the mother/Laurie was living in delusion and she helped her daughter murder her baby — even if that were true, I just don’t think that being cruel to the mother, ridiculing her, insulting her, and treating her abusively is a helpful way to approach someone to try to get them to see your worldview.
– Again, I’m not perfect (nor do I expect perfection myself – I’m imperfect, and that’s OK) — I yell at people and I can be mean sometimes too — but while at the time, it may make me feel better to act abusively towards people who make me mad, ultimately, it’s just not helpful to solve the situation.
– And wow, I didn’t know that many of the posters here had had no abortion themselves. I imagine that must have been a difficult experience for them.
– Re: what you said that it’s important to the healing process for one to accept the fact that abortion is the killing of an innocent – well, reading Laurie’s comments, I think it’s clear that she doesn’t agree with you.
– I can see that you feel that embryonic stem cell research and IVF are also murder, and are much worse than the Nazi death camps — and it seems that you see abortion clinics are like death camps, and if we stand silent in the face of what you believe is the murder of innocent unborn babies, then we are simply much worse than the Nazis.
– I can understand your point, you’re making sense to me — however:
– Even if it was a fact that abortion is killing an innocent (and honestly, I think there is some merit to pro-lifers’ arguments on that), in my opinion, I think people are just doing the best they can. I don’t think Kayla was setting out to be evil and commit murder — she wasn’t doing cartwheels and super-happy about having this abortion — and from the original post by Laurie on the clinic blog, Laurie also mentioned that due to a medical issue, that having the baby might have endangered Kayla’s life.
– I don’t expect a young girl/a child to sacrifice her life for a baby’s life.
– Does it make Kayla evil if she was not willing to die to save the life of this baby? I don’t think it does. I personally didn’t sign up to be a superhero martyr in this life — like everyone, mostly I just do the best I can, and I think that’s what Kayla did. Trying to make Kayla feel bad about her choice or attacking Kayla’s mother is not helpful, in my opinion, to change hearts and minds.
– However, I do find that trying to come from a place of understanding, compassion, and kindness in most situation is much more helpful than being abusive towards someone.
– Even if I was talking to an actual murderer – say, someone in prison for murder or something like that – if I ever wanted to reach that person’s soul and try to heal the deep pain that most likely caused that person to murder someone else — again, I think the best way to approach that person is with compassion, understanding, kindness, and love, if I could.
– The saying in the helping professiona is HURT people hurt people — people who have been hurt and abused are the ones who hurt other people. I guarantee you behind every bully, every violent person, and murderer in this world, is a person who was abused as a child – 100%. I think the first step to healing the pain in an abused person is kindness and compassion — not yelling at them or ridiculing them or abusing them, or telling them they are a terrible horrible person.
– However, Mary Rose, I do commend you for standing up for what you believe in, and for trying to save babies lives. While the technical aspects of “what constitutes life” can be debated on and on — my main central point here is that the *way* you and other pro-lifers approach a woman or young girl on the abortion issue — if you use blame, cruelty, abuse, and approach them in anger, I just don’t think it’s a helpful or effective way to change hearts and minds.
– I think compassion, kindness, and love is what heals, not anger and hate.
I HATE that abortion kills an innocent human being!
I HATE that it is legal!
I HATE that 3500+ people will die today!
I HATE that I chose abortion 23 years ago.
I HATE satan the father of lies and the lover of abortion!
I have RIGHTEOUS ANGER about the killing and will never stop calling it what it is!
Murder.
And when women are at the end of themselves and don’t know where to turn and are broken over what they have done?
There is hope and healing for them
http://rachelsvineyard.org
“I think compassion, kindness, and love is what heals, not anger and hate.”
Ms. Wellan - I get it but it is truly sad that all this was lost on the mother Laurie Bertram Roberts long before her daughter put herself in this predicament.
Ms. Bertram Roberts lacked compassion, kindness and love to heal her own failures in the parenting of her daughter but responded with anger and hate when her daughter became pregnant.
It’s easier for you to go after pro-lifers than to address this mother’s inadequacies as a parent. BTW, no one on this thread expressed hate of the person but rather hate toward the cowardly act of allowing this 15 yr-old to abort.
You do also realize that it is okay to be angry as it is a normal (primary) human emotion?
“My main central point here is that the *way* you and other pro-lifers approach a woman or young girl on the abortion issue — if you use blame, cruelty, abuse, and approach them in anger, I just don’t think it’s a helpful or effective way to change hearts and minds.”
We change hearts and minds every single day through truth and love, Sarah. We hate abortion. We’re entitled to expose its ugliness.
I am certain this mother has heard it all from we pro-lifers. It is child abuse what this woman did to her daughter and grandchild, so unless you suggest we keep silent on that issue as well, your argument about simply giving this mom a big hug is not acceptable.
Again, I do agree that there are individuals whose passions for life cause them to become unloving, including myself at times. Pointing out the evils of the abortion culture is not unloving. Complacency and calling dismembering human beings personal freedom is unloving.
And, Sarah – Check out Kristen Hatten’s article about her hate mail from yesterday (the writer whose sassy writing you have found to be so distasteful):
http://liveactionnews.org/five-disturbing-pro-choice-insults-extensive-hate-mail-collection/
Seems highly appropriate on many levels as food for thought … and it’s funny.
The thing that struck me about this sad story is that Laurie probably put her daughter on birth control. After all, she is in the camp that wants birth control dispensed from vending machines at high schools. She worked for an abortion doctor. I’m sure there was no hardship in acquiring synthetic hormones to wreak havoc on her daughter’s reproductive system.
The fact that this 15 year old STILL got pregnant even though her mother wasn’t one of us frigid, prudish pro-lifers, just points out the flaw in that “more birth control is the solution to less abortions” argument. All the Sandra Flukes (or whatever her name is) can sit down and shut up because Kayla and I are both proof that birth control is never 100% effective. Only difference is that I allowed my child to live and have a rambunctious soon to be 7 year old son running around and Kayla has the memory of a spirit named Mariah that was once safely nestled in her womb until she walked into that clinic of death.
I also wonder who will be there with Kayla when she is older and pregnant with a “wanted” baby? Who will be there to shield Kayla when the reality of what she did as a 15 year old starts to sink in? My friend had an abortion, also coerced by her mother. Years later when pregnant again and contemplating another abortion she had an ultrasound and was amazed and yet horrified to see the baby was fully formed, waving her arms and had a strong beating heart.
I also find it amazing that Laurie herself had 2 babies as a teenager and yet counseled her teen daughter to abort. Is Laurie saying by her actions that she wishes she had offed her 2 oldest daughters before birth? That she wishes she had done as Kayla and aborted Kayla’s older sisters? I’m sure that makes all of Laurie’s children feel sooooo secure in their mother’s love. I really can’t imagine what that is like to have a mother who thinks my life didn’t matter before birth or that her feelings towards me determine my humanity.
What a truly heartbreaking story all around. The fact that Kayla had already named her baby girl Mariah tells me she understands at least in concept that there is a natural sanctity to life. I pray she will have the help and support she needs when she comes to confront the reality of her decision. I’m not sure what’s worse about the actions of her mother – urging her into an abortion in the first place or then making it so public. What else could Kayla do at that point but try to justify what she had done and say she didn’t regret it – even if it was already starting to bother her. SMH indeed.
“I really can’t imagine what that is like to have a mother who thinks my life didn’t matter before birth or that her feelings towards me determine my humanity.”
Sydney M – “reality” can help you understand this question from the perspective of a pro-abort father.
Sarah Wellan,
In the first place Ms. Roberts is the one to tell the world of this situation. No one is victimizing her in any way. She made this choice, no one is exposing her. This is what happens when you put your business out there for the world to read. So please no sniveling as to how Ms. Roberts is being so abused.
She insults the intelligence of readers. Her daughter came to this decision “all by herself”. Please, its obvious to anyone who can read that mom’s “counseling” was very influential.
Having a baby might have endangered her daughter’s life? Yet she’s leaving the decision up to her daughter? She writes about a supposed life threatening situation this lightly? Was her daughter under the care of a specialist? Did she have the abortion in a hospital setting since there is a medical condition? Sorry Sarah, not buying it.
Her 15y/o pregnant daughter, who’s life may be threatened by her pregnancy, works as an “escort” with her mother’s blessing. Excuse me, but as a grown woman, unless I’m blind, lost, or helpless, I can get into a building without a 15y/o girl “escorting” me. Also, is this a safe activity for her pregnant teen, who’s life might be endangered? After all, PL people are so violent and dangerous, right? Certainly Ms. Roberts should not even consider allowing her daughter to take part in such activity.
When you tell the world your business don’t expect everyone to give you a standing ovation or swallow your story hook, line, and sinker.
“reality” can help you understand this question from the perspective of a pro-abort father. – oh really Thomas R.? And on what exactly do you base this statement? Demonstrate.
“And on what exactly do you base this statement?”
I think he’s talking about how your son knows you’re pro-choice, which means you would have supported his mother ending his life when she was pregnant with him. I think that’s what he’s referring to.
Yes Jack, and just like the mother and daughter in this story, my son and I are both pro-choice. If this case isn’t being understood how would mine.
If Kayla is 15 I am wondering when statutory rape charges will be filed.
Age of consent and all that jazz.
If the boy is also under the age of consent there wasn’t a statutory rape, or at least they were both simultaneously the victims and perpetrators. You can’t charge a sixteen year old boy with having sex with his girlfriend, that’s just awful.
Sarah,
My sarcasm was not directed at Laurie, the mother, but at you, and was intended specifically to highlight the ridiculousness of your comment, your castigation of the prior comments without comprehension of who here has what experience actually working with post-abortive mothers and their family members.
If you read my initial comment on this thread, I actually have personal understanding of how parenting a teen into abortion can affect their lives and damage their futures. I am righteously angry at Laurie for her pressure on her daughter to engage in and support unhealthy behaviors, from young sexual behaviors to abortion.
Regarding whitewashed tombs, I suggest you brush up on scripture if you intend on criticizing us on our religious conviction. Whitewashed tombs-pretty housing for an ugly thing (the message of Death). In other words, making something horrible (like abortion) sound like it’s okay. It isn’t. It is an evil act borne of fear and selfishness, and resulting in the tortuous death of our most vulnerable. When we make it out to be any less harmful than MURDER, then we beautify it.
I would never abuse a young girl in any way-verbally or otherwise-for having an abortion. It is always coerced with a child, simply because someone under the age of majority doesn’t have the cognitive ability to make a sound decision on the matter of life and death. I would not, however, lie to her if she asked my opinion. I would be honest and tell her that there is hope and beauty and life after abortion, with healing outreaches waiting for her. I would also tell her that abortion ends a human life and that her baby would be praying for her in Heaven.
Her mother, however, has the RESPONSIBILITY to guide her daughter aright. In this case, Laurie created a very unpleasant situation for her daughter and then guided her toward death. And I am sorry for her, that she was so engaged. And I pray for her healing from her own miscarriage and the ordeal which she endured. I pray for her soul, for her wellbeing, and that she ceases to compound the pain.
God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Christ called people liars and hypocrites. He told his beloved to “Get behind me, Satan!” The Lord is not tolerant of evil actions, and neither should we be.
We’ve had this discussion “reality” and we remember what the end result was. No need for me to rehash it other than to remind you that the ego integrity vs. despair dilemma will hit you like a ton of bricks soon enough. Are you up to facing the music? (this is a rhetorical question so no need to respond).
Jack: excellent memory!
If it’s what makes you feel better Thomas R., you keep telling yourself that.
No.
Moriah’s not coming back to Earth.
She went directly to the next life and personally I believe her
mom will someday be face to face with her.
That alone, without a word spoken, should be confrontation enough.
“You can’t charge a sixteen year old boy with having sex with his girlfriend, that’s just awful.”
No Jack, that is not awful. Carla is spot on. If it were my daughter you and the rapist should both be happy that I would be willing to charge him instead of finding other ways to get him to stop raping.
Yes I’m totally pro-rape, that’s definitely what I was saying.
If two underage kids have consensual sex I don’t agree with throwing one in jail. That’s absolutely ridiculous. If force or coercion is involved there should be charges, or if an older person has sex with an underage person there should be charges. I know you would all like to think that your daughters have no sex drives and would never ever have consensual sex with a peer, but reality isn’t exactly like that.
Oh and you can screw right off for your insinuations.
Not to mention that’s poor parenting. “Don’t worry, daughter, if you choose to have sex with your boyfriend I will make sure that he’s the only one blamed, there’s no need to take responsibility for your actions!” I mean come on. Great thing you’re teaching your kids truth.
I went into Laurie Bertram Robert’s blog where she says she would support any of her daughters having another abortion. She states,“They are my children-I do not own them. I guide them, I help them, I love them. That is my job. I am their mother NOT their owner.”
Did she own her children when she was pregnant with them? Did she only start loving them the minute they exited her body? What precise minute did her daughters become her children? If it was not her job to protect her daughters when she was pregnant with them, would it be alright if the state had forced her to abort her children based on others’ belief that she was too young and too poor to parent?
Laurie also says, “The truth is my daughter was using condoms. Guess what sometimes they fail. Especially, when children who aren’t educated in their use like my child is are the ones placing them on their penis.”
Abstinence is accurate 100% of the time it is used. It never fails. This woman needs to educate her daughters on self-control. When a child brings a condom along on a “date” it shows their intent to have sex. The condom carrying child is not interested in getting to know and date the other person but intends to have sex. Was it Laurie’s daughter that had the condoms or the male or both?
Since Laurie put her and her daughter’s story out there, people are interested in who the father of the aborted child is. If he has broken any statutory rape laws, he should be held accountable. If Laurie knew her daughter was having sex with an adult and did nothing to stop it, she should be held accountable too.
Jack,
What is ridiculous is if a fifteen year old and a sixteen year old are having sex and the parents/guardians of these minors do not take measures to stop it.
How’s that data coming along truthseeker?
Jack, you need to remember that truth’s attitude towards women appears to be that they’re incapable of making their own rational choices.
Well no kidding truth, but that’s not what we were talking about.
If you found out your teenage daughter was having sex with another underage person, what would you do? I would ensure to the best of my knowledge that the sex was consensual (as in, you know, actually talking to my kid and try to make sure that she hadn’t been pressured, coerced, or anything like that), and then take steps to prevent the kids from engaging in sexual activity if it was a consenting relationship. What I wouldn’t do is throw a fit and try to get some kid up on charges or beat him up, unless he was over the age of consent or had coerced or forced her. Why do you think you shouldn’t have to do your job as a parent, truth? Do you only teach your sons to be responsible sexually or do you teach your daughter too?
“When a child brings a condom along on a “date” it shows their intent to have sex. The condom carrying child is not interested in getting to know and date the other person but intends to have sex. Was it Laurie’s daughter that had the condoms or the male or both?”
I tend to agree but I think it’s deeper than that. As far as I can tell this mom is one of those parents who seems to think teen sex is inevitable, so this girl was probably taught that sex is a normal part of teen relationships and is a part of “getting to know” someone. Which is really sad.
“Jack, you need to remember that truth’s attitude towards women appears to be that they’re incapable of making their own rational choices.”
Eh. Half the guys I know who freak out over the suggestion that their daughters might want to have sex at some point in their lives are the ones who high five their sons for “getting laid”. It’s a weird dichotomy.
If you found out your teenage daughter was having sex with another underage person, what would you do? – I think he’s already given a big clue as to what he would do Jack – If it were my daughter you and the rapist should both be happy that I would be willing to charge him instead of finding other ways to get him to stop raping.
When a child brings a condom along on a “date” it shows their intent to have sex. – I think the word ‘hope’ is usually more accurate than ‘intent’.
Maybe the issue is that there is a physiological way to determine whether a female has had sex or not whereas with men there is no such test. So men can go out and dip their wick with no apparent ‘marker’ while if a woman has had sex she’s used goods. It probably has its roots in the ‘women as property’ paradigm too.
“I think he’s already given a big clue as to what he would do Jack – If it were my daughter you and the rapist should both be happy that I would be willing to charge him instead of finding other ways to get him to stop raping.”
Well yeah, I was hoping that he’d be a little less reactionary and a little more reasonable. That underage boy is someone else’s kid, after all, and if there wasn’t any coercion or force involved both kids need to be taught and dealt with. But of course, some dads pull the redneck thing. If someone thought he could hurt my son if he had consensual sex with a peer, they’d have to contend with me.
I don’t exactly think violence is a proper response to teenagers making normal mistakes, in general.
Tis strange indeed Jack. It’s almost as if some folk think women don’t/can’t/shouldn’t have any sexual desire or activity until they are wed and ready to be pregnant. Anything other than that scenario must be indicative of a male having somehow perpetrated a criminal act of some sort.
Some people seem to think that female sexuality doesn’t exist, I guess, and that women always drag themselves kicking and screaming to bed in order to make babies or please their husbands when they’re married. My female friends and ex tell me they find this way of thinking incredibly sexist, as if women aren’t people with the full range of human experiences and desires including the less admirable.
“take steps to prevent the kids from engaging in sexual activity if it was a consenting relationship.”
What is funny here Jack is that you say you would take steps to prevent them from engaging in sexual activity but you freak out about taking those steps legally.
As far as I can tell this mom is one of those parents who seems to think teen sex is inevitable, so this girl was probably taught that sex is a normal part of teen relationships and is a part of “getting to know” someone. Which is really sad.
Agree. As I said,if there was an adult having sex with the teen girl and the girl’s mom was aware of it, both the enabling parent and the adult having sex with the teen should be held accountable. Once the unborn child is killed, so is the evidence of who the biological father is. If this mother is going to scream her daughter’s story all over the internet using her real name, she should make sure to tell the whole story. Does she have the guts to let the world know who the father is? Is he proud his child was aborted?
I would feel no different if an adult woman was having sex with a fifteen year boy. Parents who know, encourage and enable their children to have sex with adults should be held accountable as well.
Maybe the woman should spend less time escorting the unborn to their deaths and more time keeping an eye on her fifteen year old.
” What is funny here Jack is that you say you would take steps to prevent them from engaging in sexual activity but you freak out about taking those steps legally.”
What’s funny here is you think that two teenagers under the age of consent having non-coerced sex is a problem for the legal system (actually in most states, it’s not even a criminal case, in my state if there’s less than a difference of three years I think and there’s no force, it’s not a criminal matter). You obviously take rape and coercion extremely lightly if you think that two kids having consensual sex is that. I don’t expect the legal system to do my parenting, I don’t know about you. I would have the opposite of a problem locking away some kid or adult who hurt my girl, but I wouldn’t try to get some kid she had a consensual encounter with thrown in jail (and it wouldn’t even be possible because there’s no crime).
“As I said,if there was an adult having sex with the teen girl and the girl’s mom was aware of it, both the enabling parent and the adult having sex with the teen should be held accountable. Once the unborn child is killed, so is the evidence of who the biological father is. If this mother is going to scream her daughter’s story all over the internet using her real name, she should make sure to tell the whole story. Does she have the guts to let the world know who the father is? Is he proud his child was aborted? ”
Well of course, I don’t have any disagreement with that. I got the impression the father was her daughter’s peer from the way she told the story, but it wasn’t outright stated so there’s room to speculate I guess.
And I do agree that parents who refuse to report statutory or forcible rape should be held accountable for sure.
What is funny here Jack is that you say you would take steps to prevent them from engaging in sexual activity but you freak out about taking those steps legally. – actually what’s funny is that the picture you have painted seems to be that if a girl has consensual sex (and in some cases may even be the instigator) the boy should be charged with rape. If there is to be any legal action, it should be against both.
Got that data yet truthseeker?
Once the fetus is killed, so is the evidence of who the biological father is. – a DNA sample could be taken.
I got the impression the father was her daughter’s peer from the way she told the story, but it wasn’t outright stated so there’s room to speculate I guess.
And in cases of abortion where so many lies abound, I wouldn’t be surprised if the father of the aborted child is 18 or older.
Maybe Laurie can get the father to step forward. Maybe he’ll be willing to let her smear his name all over cyber-space like she did with her own daughter. Maybe Laurie could use her daughter and make a demonstration video for the aborted child’s dad, showing him how to put a condom on a banana so her little girl can have a more fulfilling sexual experience with dead-baby daddy and/or other males in the future!
Jack, so let me get this straight. Even if you couldn’t find any other way to stop it; as long as the sex was was consentual; you wouldn’t take any legal steps to keep a sixteen year old boy.t from having sex with your fifteen year old daughter. We will just have to agree to disagree cause I would.
Uh, truth, what part of “it’s not illegal” do you not understand? It’s not illegal, there are no “legal steps” in any state with Romeo and Juliet laws, at least. I don’t see why something not being a crime is such a difficult to understand.
And anyway, like I said, I don’t expect the legal system to parent for me.
Truthseeker, I have to say I don’t think consensual sex between minors should be illegal. Is it stupid? Yes. Is it immoral? Yeah. But it should not be illegal. That is a parenting thing.
My dear Lord LibertyBelle! Visit the state police website of your state and look at the sex offender registry very closely. There is no such thing as consensual sex between minors. That is why majority of states have “age of consent laws.” Our society needs these laws precisely because of parents such as Bertram Roberts. At minimum these laws protect:
– minor girls from “unwanted pregnancies,” corced sex, abortions and single motherhood;
– minor boys from being charged with statutory rape (those hormones will make them do it without the girl’s “consent” you know)
At maximum, they hold parents accountable by having to anwer for their lack of parenting. After the fact but nonetheless.
Thomas, people use “consensual” sex between minors as shorthand for “not forcible rape”.
“- minor boys from being charged with statutory rape (those hormones will make them do it without the girl’s “consent” you know)”
Hormones don’t make people do anything. If some boy (or girl) forces a girl (or boy) to have sex, it’s not the “hormones” fault.
Anyway, regardless of that. NO in most cases, age of consent laws don’t target underage people about the same age for having sex with each other. They are in place to prevent older people from taking advantage of teenagers. Most states have caveats to prevent young people from being charged for engaging in consensual sex, they are often called Romeo and Juliet laws.
Seriously, what is so difficult about this? Age of consent laws target adults or a person significantly older than the underage person in question. You aren’t going to find underage boys or girls charged with statutory rape (thought they can be charged with forcible rape, of course).
And plus, I don’t think you get that minors CAN legally consent to sex, but only with each other. There are ages that a child who is younger than that cannot consent ever even with another minor, but there is a legally defined gray area in many states where the minor can engage in consensual sexual activity with another minor within a certain age range, and it’s legal. That’s why truthseeker would be laughed out of the police station if he tried to turn some kid in for having consensual sex with his daughter.
Here this might help: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/sr/statelaws/summary.shtml
Only 12 states have what you all are talking about, which is a single age of consent, under which any sexual contact is illegal. And even then another child will most likely not be prosecuted (and who’s going to be prosecuted? Boy? Girl? The law doesn’t specify gender). Pretty much all other states have some type of legalization of sexual activity between minors and legal protection for children.
I have no idea why it bugs me so much that people don’t understand this, except that I really don’t like inaccuracy. These laws are made to keep adults from getting with immature kids, not to punish kids for having sex with each other. It’s not a “in lieu of parenting” tool that truth thinks it is.
A human being at his/her core is just like a bio-chemical reactor Jack. So yes, those hormones will make a young boy do it. But you may call them “urges,” which is the same thing anyway.
Studies after studies indicate that the frontal lobe of an adolescent is not yet fully developed and thus reasoning is very often over-taken by impulsivity dictated by physiological changes.
And yes, if the age is 6-months or so apart and there are no indicators of any force, prosecutors may not pursue it. Also keep in mind that many “batteries” may have originally been offenses of a sexual nature (many police depts will charge an underage boy with a battery to “save” his hide).
“A human being at his/her core is just like a bio-chemical reactor Jack. So yes, those hormones will make a young boy do it. But you may call them “urges,” which is the same thing anyway.”
Uh, I know what hormones are. My point was it’s just a stupid excuse. Humans have rationality, we are not enslaved to hormones. Though I do think that an adolescent that commits a crime has much more chance of being rehabilitated than an adult.
“And yes, if the age is 6-months or so apart and there are no indicators of any force, prosecutors may not pursue it. Also keep in mind that many “batteries” may have originally been offenses of a sexual nature (many police depts will charge an underage boy with a battery to “save” his hide).”
Why don’t you actually read the laws? I am tired of this conversation. I will say it one more time. IN MOST STATES, sex between minors of a certain age, as long as both of them consent, is LEGAL. Not prosecutors failing to prosecute, not police officers charging with lesser offense. Legal, not prosecutable at all. This is extremely frustrating, because you guys are just making up crap. Stop making up stuff, read the laws for your state or all states even, I even linked you an article that explains the laws and very few of them have anything like that.
And stop pretending that consensual sex is something males “do” to females. If two minors consent to sex in a state where that’s not legal, both should be charged (and has happened, though it’s usually the boy because people are sexist). It’s absolutely disgusting to think some kid should be punished for the rest of his life because him and his girlfriend made a mistake, and there’s no reason that she shouldn’t legally be treated the same as him if we’re insisting on charging kids for mistakes.
This is honestly extremely frustrating. Why can no one read?
My dear Lord, Truthseeker!! Do you honestly believe that humans are slaves to our hormones!? No, we are not. They are strong, yes, but we have been endowed with this awesome thing called reason and intellect. It allows us to override hormones. And though adolescents’ brains aren’t quite fully developed, we don’t give them enough credit. I made it through my teen years (ie I was a minor) and managed, despite raging hormones to rival my male peers, to not have sex with anyone. And also, I managed to get through pregnancy without being a total Queen Bee Beyotch to everybody, even though that is a stereotype due to the insane hormones.
I’m just saying that two seventeen year olds don’t need the law to tell them not to have sex. And anyway, if they are bent on having sex, I doubt they’ll stop and say, “Oh wait crap. This is sooooo illegal.”
We’ve got one person arguing that a teenage boy is the ONLY one responsible for sexual contact, and another arguing that a teenage boy is NEVER responsible for sexual contact? Seriously?!?
Newflash, from someone who WAS a teenage girl. We are perfectly capable of saying “no” but we choose not to because of a combination of peer pressure and sex ed that encourages us to “experiment” long before we are actually ready for sex, and which fails to adequately stress our strength and ability to control ourselves. We also lack sufficient education on the moral and ethical seriousness of sexual behavior.
That said, I don’t care HOW old the boy is who forces himself on an unwilling partner-forced sex is rape, every time.
Oh drat. I meant Thomas. I’m so sorrry, Truthseeker. :P
But another point, Thomas, why on earth do you think it’s the state’s job to parent!?
LibertyBelle, don’t lie. You are female and thus have no wish for sexual activity, ever.
I was hoping you would not realize that LibertyBelle, LOL…
I get it now – all this logic leads me to be persuaded to do away with consent laws because you know: if minors can have sex there is truly no reason to check age AT ALL…
Not parent LibertyBelle. But, we are not an anarchy. A state has an obligation to protect should there be a cause such as a rape against a minor. Are you telling me that the state should defer to the parent if a minor reports “an incident” by another minor? Or better yet – should the state prosecute the parent instead?
This is honestly extremely frustrating. Why can no one read?
Jack, you know by now that English is my second language, right? LOL…
No one is talking about doing away with age of consent laws. Adults who have sex with teenagers, especially younger teenagers, should be charged with a crime even if the kid thinks they’re consenting (which they do believe they are consenting, when I was a teen I had sex with some adults and believed I was fully consenting. They usually bought me beer or drugs too, which is another crime that no one is talking about doing away with). The problem is people are arguing with the fact that if two peers have consenting sex not involving force and coercion, that’s an issue that needs to be taken care of by parents and possibly schools if it happens there, not by the law (unless crimes like public indecency or something of that nature are involved). Most state laws reflect this line of thinking.
And no one is talking about not charging minors if they commit a forcible or coercive sex act. If someone threatens her boyfriend into sexual activity, that’s a chargeable crime no matter their ages (though I think very young people would best be served in juvenile court being helped rather than in jail, but that’s a different subject), or if a boyfriend continues sexual activity when he is told to stop he should be charged. Anything involving force, coercion, or any other form of non-consent should always be charged, always. no matter if the parents want a charge to result or not. That’s a legal issue and always should be. Rape is a matter for the courts. Two minors engaging in mutual sexual activity is a matter for parents and possibly schools (with parents involved of course).
“Jack, you know by now that English is my second language, LOL…”
I’m sorry, I did forget. It was more directed at truthseeker than you.
Perhaps I need to rephrase my message: the legality of allowing minors to have sex with minors to me should only be limited to 6 months age difference not like, say in Texas where a 17 year-old can have sex with a 14 year-old and call it a day (no fun intended). So a 17 year old is still a minor but the age differential is most definitely a power-differential as well. That is why I think that laws that allow minors to have sex with minors ultimately fail miserably in protecting undergage boys and girls. Hope I made myself clear…
Jack I was just having some fun with that statement. I read very well that is the reason I question a lot also.
I would agree that laws needs work. I’d prefer a two year age difference law for people under eighteen and older than thirteen. If a fifteen year old and a seventeen year old get together, I don’t think it’s appropriate to charge anyone. They are both in high school at that point and are peers, assuming that there is no consent issue they should be dealt with by parents and schools. I think a two year difference is fair to kids who make mistakes but still protects teens from exploitation by someone who is older and will do them deliberate harm. And I think there can be some leeway for people still in high school but have turned eighteen, maybe a one year age difference for people eighteen to nineteen. Anyone twenty and older and out of high school shouldn’t be having sex with teenagers, ever.
I have to also remind some readers here who were against sex education in schools. Remember that thread? Some decried the new CPS mandate (as did I) but now, knowing how some think laws allowing sex between minors are such a hoot, I no longer question CPS enacting sex education in Kindergarten.
BTW how can one be for legality of sex between minors and against sex ed in school?
Because thinking that something shouldn’t be a legal matter does not equal approving of the activity in question. I don’t think most of the people who comment here would say that teens should be having sex, they simply aren’t ready and of course some people have their religious reasons against it. Not everyone thinks that the criminal “justice” system is an appropriate place to deal with matters of minors close in age having sex with each other with no force or coercion.
What type of legal consequences would you want for these minors, btw? Would you charge both, just the older one, just the boy, what? Do you think they should be put on the sex offender registry, go to jail, get treatment, what?
I am going to stick with 6 months. A 17 year-old is not a peer to 15 year-old. Have you ever seen 15 year-olds hang out with 17 year-olds in high school Jack? I doubt it. 17 year-ol boys wer seeking 15 year-old girls for “opportunities” but that was the extent of peer relationships beyond academia.
Fifteen is a freshman or sophomore and seventeen is a junior or senior. Yes, I’ve seen kids of those ages date, be friends, hang out together, etc. I didn’t go to high school but I see kids in those age ranges hang out in my neighborhood all the time. 6 months is ridiculous in my opinion.
If it is above the six months I prefer, a sex education course and community service in a healthcare setting would suffice.
I referenced the sex offender registry to point out that the notion of consensual sex is an oxymoron Jack. That was it. Having worked with sex offenders for number of years I have this covered to a “t.” There is never equality in consent and this especially applies to minors.
Yes, but you were wrong about your notion that consensual sex is an oxymoron. Legally, in most states, it certainly exists even for minors.
I certainly don’t agree there is “never equality in consent”. Apparently some people are having some terrible sex.
Because thinking that something shouldn’t be a legal matter does not equal approving of the activity in question.
Jack with all due respect, please read this aloud to yourself. Approving of sexual activity btw minors and not approving of sex ed that has a purpose to prepare and educate minors regarding consequences of having sex? I don’t get it…
Apparently some people are having some terrible sex.
I know now why I got out of working with sex offenders (minors and adults). You win! Minors can have sex with minors and age means nothing. I am moving on to another thread.
“Jack with all due respect, please read this aloud to yourself. Approving of sexual activity btw minors and not approving of sex ed that has a purpose to prepare and educate minors regarding consequences of having sex? I don’t get it…”
I personally do approve of some sex ed in schools, it puts me at odds with people here a lot of the time. But parents should be the main people that teach their kids about sex, as they should be the main people involved in taking care of their minor children who get involved in consensual sexual activity with other minors (within the confines of the law). Some people believe that schools and legality should have no say when it comes to minors and sexual activity (of course, excluding rape or other forms of non-consenting activity). It’s not an inconsistent viewpoint.
And like I said, very plainly, that I’m not “approving” of sex between minors, at all. I will raise my kids to the best of my ability to not involve themselves in sexual relationships until they are adults. I just don’t think it’s something the legal system should handle, and the legal system in our country is something I think fails in a lot of areas. It shouldn’t handle this issue with the restrictions I’ve already stated I believe in.
“I know now why I got out of working with sex offenders (minors and adults). You win! Minors can have sex with minors and age means nothing. I am moving on to another thread. ”
You didn’t catch that I was making a joke about their being “no equality in consent”? I was directing the joke at adults, not minors. I’m pretty sure the majority of married couples have equal consent, for goodness sake.
It is much easier for minors to be manipulated which is why I DO believe in reasonable age of consent laws and don’t think minors should be involved in sexual activity at all. I just don’t think the legal system should handle peers having sex.
Got you Jack! I am very passionate when it comes to protecting children. I have worked for so many years with sex offenders across all age groups (very young to very old) thus my very serious stance on age of and equality in consent. But I will disagree with you that the legal system is not to get involved. Certainly in many cases it does. I have seen so many of these 17 yr-olds having sex with 15 yr-olds “circumstances” that I am convinced of this one hundred percent. The parents are a separate discussion altogether.
BTW, the sex ed in K at CPS stands. The children will only learn the terms penis and vagina (at least at my sons’ school) and it will be a co-ed session.
I am passionate about protecting children too, especially from sexual assault. But that also includes protecting children from disproportionate punishments for mistakes (which is what consenting teen sex is, it’s a mistake. Notice how I’m not saying that actual abuse is a “mistake” at all). And I don’t think it helps anyone, least of all the kids, to focus legal system time on teens in relationships when we should be focusing on real cases of coercion (like older people having sex with minors). I don’t think the legal system is the best place for these things.
I was in the legal system a lot as a teenager and I think it’s inefficient, it doesn’t actually help, kids simultaneously get away with a lot of terrible stuff and get punished disproportionately for minor things. I think a focus on families and getting parents involved (I could even go with a legal requirement for family counseling in these cases, I suppose) and finding out what the problem is at home, especially if there is abuse occurring or a lack of supervision, would do a lot more than making this a legal matter and charge some 16 year old for rape when he had consensual sex with another sixteen year old.
Jack,
I’m still in the process of reading today’s comments (because I’m just that slow), but I’ve got to say that you don’t just have “street smarts”. You’ve got real smarts.
Common sense isn ‘t too common these days.
Our legal system is focusing on real cases Jack and it is also catching the unequal consent in cases involving minors as well. The Sex Offender Management Board (SOMB) in my state is doing a wonderful job. Too bad Texas is dancing to its own tune on this…
Anyone twenty and older and out of high school shouldn’t be having sex with teenagers, ever.
I agree. But what if he/she is now 20 but has been having consensual sex with a younger teen partner(s) since he/she was a teen them self?
I agree that consensual teen sex is an oxymoron. Can you really legally consent to something that is already illegal for you? If a kid gets charged with underage drinking, maybe they should just say, Hey! it was consensual drinking!
Anyway, I know these situations are difficult and we adults should do everything we can to discourage teens from having sex.
My teenager has a cute little girlfriend and the first time he picked her up, her dad came out and talked to him. Her dad asked my son, “Have you ever ever had your nose broke?” When my son told me this, I freaked out and said maybe I better go something similar to the young lady — because yes, I know how assertive they also can be.
My son calmed me down and made sure I knew that this father made it clear to him that his daughter was to be treated with the utmost respect. I realize teen girls are equally responsible for decisions in this area and have the sex drive and all that, but I believe many of us realize there is a difference between the genders. The main difference being that she is the one that ends up carrying the baby.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7PQYSZaGSP0
I think we must just define unequal consent differently, I suppose. I don’t think it’s automatically dependent on whether you’re seven months older than someone else (though I realize there has to be a line, so I don’t really have an issue with a “hardline” consent age set at eighteen, no adults should be having sex with kids younger than eighteen). I do agree that it’s far more likely for a younger teen to be able to be manipulated by an older teen, which is why I think two years is a more reasonable cutoff than, say, Utah’s ten years or Hawaii’s five. I think it’s far more dependent on the situation if you’re talking about kids close in age. I do agree it should be evaluated, but if the evidence suggests that both minors consented, I don’t agree either should be charged because of the age difference within a couple years. Like I said, I think a family approach would do much more good then slapping some cuffs on a sixteen year old because his girlfriend’s daddy is truthseeker.
And you keep bashing on Texas when they actually have pretty harsh penalties for coerced sex, especially involving children. They even had a law that would give the death penalty for raping a child under fourteen, but it was ruled unconstitutional. Their age of consent is a year lower than I would like (I’d rather see 14 as the lower limit for minor partners and 18 as the limit for adult partners) and a bit too big of an age gap (I’d rather see 2 years than 3).
Oh, right. Jack, I’m sorry – I actually mistook any sexual feelings for what is really the desire to use my powers as a temptress to dominate and control men. ;) How silly of me.
I’d just like to say that I would also love to see children protected from those preying upon them. I’m not against age of consent laws per se. Sexual crimes are particularly damaging because they also damage a person’s soul on not just their body.
But the fact is, I still maintain that two peers engaging in sex, while I don’t agree that it should be going on, also should not be punished by law – at least in my opinion. Mistakes like that, though serious, should be handled by the parents.
As to the sex ed vs teens having sex, I’m not against sex ed per se. However, we really have to look at what is meant by “sex ed.” Far too often it just involves showing you how to use a condom and talking about diseases, et. Basically only the physical aspect. But if sex ed talked more about how serious an activity it is and went in depth about what your rights are and how to assert them (ie, no one – not family, not peers, not other adults – ever, ever, ever has a right to touch you inappropriately, how to say no, who to contact if you’re threatened, etc.) I’d be more comfortable with it. Sex ed often treats sex a bit flippantly with the attitude that “y’all are doing it anyway so here’s how to stay safe.”
I have 4 teenagers, all slightly less than 2 years apart. Two years is an eternity at that age. I’m with Thomas on this one.
“But what if he/she is now 20 but has been having consensual sex with a younger teen partner(s) since he/she was a teen them self?”
I think it really sucks if they get treated legally too harshly, but there has to be some type of line somewhere. If you’re an adult you have to understand that actions have adult consequences, including having sex with a younger boy or girl friend that isn’t legally able to consent to it. I think teens need legal leeway and it should be treated as a parenting issue (I’m okay with family counseling being ordered and stuff like that, I just don’t want kids getting their lives utterly ruined over teenage mistakes), but when you’re a legal adult you have to start taking full responsibility. I think what penalties a person should have in this situation are a different story.
And I totally agree with you that regardless of who initiates sex or wants it more, female teens are affected more by sexuality, it’s just biology. Higher possibilities of STDs and they are the ones impregnated. And I think females release more bonding hormones with casual sex than males. But do I feel like some people (not you) tend to treat this as an excuse to put the onus on girls to say “no” instead of treating each child regardless of gender as a person responsible for any consensual activity they get up to, whether it’s initiated by someone else or not. I think people tend to use the old “he’ll try to get you to do this, say no!” with girls and ignore the fact that they might be the ones initiating, or tell boys they have to control themselves and ignore the fact that they might be the ones being pressured. I think it does them all a disservice. I’m planning on telling my kids the same thing, basically. You’ll want to, and people will want you to, but this *insert the gazillion reasons not to have sex as a teen* is why you should wait, and this is how you get yourself out of a situation that’s getting too hot no matter who wants it to go further, etc.
“I have 4 teenagers, all slightly less than 2 years apart. Two years is an eternity at that age. I’m with Thomas on this one. ”
See I don’t get this at all, I remember being fifteen and being involved with seventeen or eighteen year olds, I don’t think either of us were more responsible than the others and I certainly don’t think anyone should have been imprisoned for it. All of us needed some intervention but I don’t think criminal charges would have been justice for them.
Boys will be boys and girls will be the ones carrying the burden of sex. Praxedes won the lotto here. In 99 percent of minor sexual encounters the assertiveness comes from the boy. LibertyBelle while attempting to make a point, discounts that fact.
And yes, thanks Lrning! – anyone who went to high school knows that Sophomores don’t hang out with Seniors and if that is the case more is going on than you want to know.
No boys will not be “boys”. That attitude is 100% bad. Boys need to be taught that they SHOULDN’T be this type of person. Acting like it’s some intrinsic part of being male is part of the problem. People need to treat each other with respect, this shouldn’t be accepted but then suddenly slap some cuffs on some kid because he was doing what has been claimed is normal male behavior his entire life (initiating sex, NOT coercing, if he’s coercive he should be charged and dealt with). Not to mention that boys who DON’T want to initiate sex for whatever reasons will feel pressured hearing this kind of stuff, as if they are doing something inherently unmasculine by not wanting sex and not initiating it. And honestly I take this assumption that all boys are like this with a whopping grain of salt, I have rarely in my life ever initiated sex nor particularly wanted it, but I’ve had plenty of it. I do think male sex drives must be somewhat different because it is more common that males commit sexual assault and such, but I would be willing to bet a lot of it could be negated or improved if we fix the attitudes that encourage this kind of stuff.
And I think it might be generational too, My generation is the one after casual sex has become incredibly common and I promise that girls and adult women are initiating sex, a lot. The reasons might not always be that they just want to get some, but it is really disgustingly common to get propositioned if you go out for a drink.
And saying things like “girls carry the burden of sex” may be true biologically, but it doesn’t have to be culturally. Seeing pregnancy and such as the girl’s problem is another issue that encourages these mindsets. I don’t think boys should be punished for consensual encounters, but it definitely should be impressed on them that they are just responsible for that baby they made, even if we don’t carry them.
Read Boys will be Boys by Miedzian.
In 99 percent of minor sexual encounters the assertiveness comes from the boy. – what is the source of your verifiable data for this?
it is more common that males commit sexual assault and such – from what I’ve read over the years this is more about power and control than sex per se.
And saying things like “girls carry the burden of sex” may be true biologically, but it doesn’t have to be culturally. Seeing pregnancy and such as the girl’s problem is another issue that encourages these mindsets. – well said Jack.
Goodness me Jack, you have super-human patience and tolerance.
We have some who can’t accept that womens sexuality is anything more than being submissive and open to coercion. Therefore any sex between minors is tantamount to rape.
We have some who acknowledge that this is not accurate. Women are capable of being participatory and sometimes may even be the instigator.
Some think that if minors have sex then…you know….someones gotta be locked up.
And of course those who believe that sex-ed means orgies in classrooms.
I’m just bored, I always argue online and play video games when I’m bored and the kids are sleeping or gone lol.
“it is more common that males commit sexual assault and such – from what I’ve read over the years this is more about power and control than sex per se.”
Yes, but a certain percentage of women desire power and control just as a certain percentage of men do, but they don’t tend to use forced or coerced sex to get it nearly as much as men do. There’s some type of difference, maybe it’s biological or something that’s ingrained in culture. From what I’ve read the amount of domestic violence perpetrated by either gender is far more equal than people think, but while abusive women tend to emotionally and physically abuse their partners, they are a lot less likely to sexually assault them (though if you emotionally abuse someone to have sex, you’re committing sexual assault, and I think people tend to not consider it assault as much when a female does it). So even when women are abusive, power-hungry people, they don’t use sex as a way to gain power nearly as much as men do. So there’s some type of difference. I just don’t think it’s an inalienable part of being male that can’t be improved.
“And saying things like “girls carry the burden of sex” may be true biologically, but it doesn’t have to be culturally.”
That and it makes the speaker sound waaay too much like Denise.
The burden of sex meaning PREGNANCY. Okay, how many minor boys take on the father’s role once they impregnate a minor girl? What other burden is there for the minor boy? The minor girl is left there and unfortunately may consider an abortion. So whose burden is it when it comes to the nitty gritty of pregnancy resulting from minors having sex? Yes, females in general always get the short end of the stick. And the boys move on. And no JDC, I am not Denise. Please examine the dynamics between minor sexual relationships a little closer…
Whoa whoah whoa how did I discount that fact!!? I only said I managed to have self control. Unfortunately for us, once I started dating my husband though, 99% of any physical contact was and is initiated by me. Also, I know a ton of teen girls who initiate phyiscal contact. I’m with reality on this one – where’s the data???
And as to the age difference thing, you guys must have gone to some heavily segregated schools because I know plenty of students who hang out with kids outside their age range. But that’s beside the point entirely, I guess.
I guess we just disagree on the nature of teens and laws. I mean, yes, underage drinking is illegal but it’s still a choice that teen made.
And I totally am with Jack’s ideas to have about two years difference be the cutoff. But here’s the thing, guys. If there was coercion involved, by all means go to the authorities. However, if it’s illegal in the first place for two teens having sex, and one of them coerced the other than they wouldn’t necessarily go to the anyone because both would get charged and how is that fair?
These situations should be carefully examined and made sure that no coercion is going on. Maybe it’s just that lately, I’ve had very, very little faith in our justice system. Let’s put it this way, if my 17 year old son were to have sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, I’d be super upset and we’d have to re-evaluate our dating policy, etc. BUT I would not want him thrown in prison!! NOr would I want her thrown in prison. People make mistakes – especially teens. Throwing them in jail will only exacerbate the problem, not fix it. If your kid has sex before they should, that’s a time for a heart to heart and also some in-house punishment. But prison? Or court fees? Unless your kid raped/coerced/hurt someone, the government doesn’t need to be involved.
The danger here is the idea that somehow it’s the government’s job to protect us from our mistakes. I don’t believe that at all.
BUT to the point of this article, yes the mother should care more about who the father is adn what the situation was. If she doesn’t know, that’s usually a big red flag.
I guess the overall point is, parents, be involved with your teens’ lives.
In 99 percent of minor sexual encounters the assertiveness comes from the boy. – what is the source of your verifiable data for this?
Are you kidding me asking for data on this. Anyone who was an adolescent, has adolescents, works with them, and lives on this planet – knows this. Just check out this new sexting sensation. I will give two guesses which gender sends “sexts.”
I guess the overall point is, parents, be involved with your teens’ lives.
I agree LibertyBelle a hundred percent. It is precisely because of some slackers out there, we even have this polemic.
Thomas R you would be surprised…..
Girls are getting way, way more aggressive. Did you know that every year, the female population is consuming more and more porn? I’m not sure how old you are, but it seems a lot of people who are my parents’ age have a hard time believing girls can be aggressors. Maybe it’s generational, I don’t know. But even back when I was in high school, girls were pretty aggressive and it’s gotten worse. Not that all girls are, but not all guys are aggressive either. Maybe not all girls have extremely high sex drives (but more do than you give them credit for), but they also use sex to control the relationship and also sometimes to rebel or because they are bored and it will make them feel wanted and connected. You’re underestimating the effects of our parents’ sky-high divorce rate have on my generation of females. I really think that has a huge impact on the amount of sex teens are having. Sex makes you feel wanted and loved and if you didn’t come from a home where you were loved unconditionally, well you’re going to look for it elsewhere – male or female.
Females are consuming more porn because males make them watch it with them. And than act it out. Could that be the reason. I am not sure about minor girls in that regard. Peer pressure maybe?
Unfortunately for us, once I started dating my husband though, 99% of any physical contact was and is initiated by me.
Right. Then later the guy can say, I only went as far as she was willing to (have heard it time and time again). How many males will actually say no to sex after the female initiates? That is the real test. My husband told me about two out of 100, and those two are probably gay. I think he is close to the mark and respect his honesty.
We need to teach both genders to respect themselves and to say no to the pressure to have sex before marriage.
You had me in stitches Praxedes. HAHAHA. Exactly – No guy I know would ever say no. That’s the reason I am so hard on my gender. They are sexz maniacs ever since the first wet dream.
“The burden of sex meaning PREGNANCY. Okay, how many minor boys take on the father’s role once they impregnate a minor girl? What other burden is there for the minor boy? The minor girl is left there and unfortunately may consider an abortion. So whose burden is it when it comes to the nitty gritty of pregnancy resulting from minors having sex? Yes, females in general always get the short end of the stick. And the boys move on. And no JDC, I am not Denise. Please examine the dynamics between minor sexual relationships a little closer…”
Um, the whole point was that this “boys will be boys” and “pregnancy is the girl’s problem” is a bad way to look at the world. The only reason boys and men can walk away after they knock someone up is because we let them. This is a bad thing to encourage and state and act like she’s the only one responsible for that baby. Boys need to be raised with a sense of responsibility for their offspring.
The more people talk like a sex is a risk free situation for boys the more you are encouraging experimentation. And there are emotional consequences to sleeping around no matter who you are, maybe males are less vulnerable to the emotional consequences but they do exist.
“Are you kidding me asking for data on this. Anyone who was an adolescent, has adolescents, works with them, and lives on this planet – knows this. Just check out this new sexting sensation. I will give two guesses which gender sends “sexts.” ”
Girls send the sexts a lot. Boys send them too. And no I don’t know that somehow males always initiate, like I’ve said, I’ve not initiated sex barely at all in my life. Not all guys are like that and I think you guys have some weird fifties mindset because sex is being initiated by females a lot. Denying this because you really, really want women to not ever be the instigators doesn’t fix anything.
“Females are consuming more porn because males make them watch it with them. And than act it out. Could that be the reason. I am not sure about minor girls in that regard. Peer pressure maybe?”
Yes, it’s always, always the dudes fault. Always, no matter what. This mindset isn’t helping.
“How many males will actually say no to sex after the female initiates? That is the real test. My husband told me about two out of 100, and those two are probably gay. I think he is close to the mark and respect his honesty.”
Well yeah if you’re going to get called gay for turning someone down, no one is going to want to say no. That’s a rude thing of your husband to insinuate about someone who doesn’t want sex for whatever reasons. And yes guys do turn women down, your husband isn’t everyone. I’m tired of this mindset. Men are not animals and are capable of not having sex even if someone initiates it. The more people (I particularly get annoyed with other men who claim this) say that men AREN’T going to turn down sex, the more it hammers into the head of young people that it’s okay to be a ball or hormones and not use discernment. Oh, and any guy who claims that men never turn down sex is talking about himself and his slutty friends, not all men are like that.
And good lord don’t accuse guys of being gay if they don’t want sex with someone. Some people just don’t like sex all that much, or have whatever issues from childhood, health problems, maybe he just doesn’t like her all that much, maybe he *gasp* thinks casual sex is immoral and doesn’t want to do it.
Of course both genders should be taught. What they should not be taught is this weird idea that women never initiate sex, are never responsible for having sex even when they initiate it, and that men are some weird bundle of hormones that apparently are incapable of self-control.
What I’ve learned from this conversation is that women hate sex and men only turn it down if they’re gay. Lovely.
Lol I’m so mad right now. The mindset seems to me like this: “Don’t have premarital or casual sex, it’s wrong. But, you’re a filthy male and thus if someone initiates it with you, you’re not going to say no. Which is bad, how dare you take advantage of her like that. But if you do turn her down, you’re probably gay. Which is also bad, don’t be gay. Actually, don’t be a guy at all because you can’t win either way. Become a monk.”
I mean, come on. No one is denying that males in general enjoy sex (though not ALL guys enjoy or want sex, and don’t deserve to be shamed for not being horny all the time or otherwise not wanting to be in sexual relationships), but it’s not this incredibly one-sided thing where women are passive, submissive participants in all cases. Women have responsibilities just like men do (have you ever turned a woman down for sex? Some get incredibly upset about it even if you’re as nice as possible) when it comes to relationships. And no her responsibilities are not limited to valiantly resisting the nasty male when he inevitably begs for sex. All people are different, and forcing people into boxes because of your own personal experiences is wrong.
And plus, from what I can tell from my work with teenagers is that boys ache for loving relationships like women do, maybe in a different way or for different reasons but I’ve only met a few who really enjoy simple casual sex, most males I know agree that sex in relationships is miles better. We’re just not socially encouraged to express this, and are expected to subvert this need into sexual conquests instead of building solid relationships. If you encourage this trope of horny dudes who only want one thing, ESPECIALLY if the shaming men who don’t want to have sex is added in, you’re going to get more young people who think that conquests are what is expected of them as boys. Add that to their natural sex drives and hormones and you’re gonna have a bad time.
Jack:
Underage girls are not and never will be the problem some want them to be. We have to face that…
I do not consider underage girls a “problem”. Neither do I consider underage boys a “problem”. They are kids, getting awful, awful social messages and under a lot of pressure.
If there is one thing that needs to go it’s this idea that there’s something wrong with boys who aren’t willing to hop in bed with the nearest available girl. That’s a problem. The idea that girls have no sex drives and will never want to have sex also needs to go. How will girls learn to control themselves if all they hear is that the boy is the one who is the aggressor? How will boys learn tenderness and love if they hear that they are only expected to want sex?
And seriously, I can’t possibly be the only guy who’s ever turned a woman down and been shamed for it. You guys are on some planet I’ve never heard of.
“And no JDC, I am not Denise.”
You know that line was intended in jest, right?
No worries JDC. – I am very confident in my skin.
I have yet to read any comment here that shames a guy for turning sexual advances from a female. Our polemic, thus far, has focused exclusively on the differences between sexual activity between adults and minors. What am I missing?
“No worries JDC. – I am very confident in my skin.”
Glad to hear it.
You don’t think that assuming men or boys who refuse sex from women or girls are probably gay is shaming? With how much I hear about how awful it is to be gay, how same sex urges are likened to addiction or pedophilia, I don’t understand how in the world anyone thinks this isn’t a not even subtle way to shame men or boys who don’t act like males are “supposed” to act (like indiscriminate horndogs, apparently).
Glad you feel better JDC, LOL…
That’s the reason I am so hard on my gender.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart, Thomas R.
What I’ve learned from this conversation is that women hate sex and men only turn it down if they’re gay.
You and your “likers” must have a case of selective learning.
Jack, people have a right to how they view human nature. If I just can ask you to consider not taking things personally and internalize too much. That comment simply conveyed a fact that homosexual men are not attracted to females. Do you think that this may be the correct interpretation?
Oh, and in the story above, who is bearing the very public brunt of sexual choices?
Where is the father of the teen girl?
Where is the father of the aborted child?
Where are the father(s) of the teen girl’s sisters?
They only went as far as they were allowed – and then they left.
Thanks Praxedes.
“You and your “likers” must have a case of selective learning.”
No, I don’t. If your husband and men like him think something like “all men will accept advances from females, if they don’t they are probably gay” and says things like this, that’s definitely a shaming tactic and contributes to young males thinking that they have to prove their masculinity and heterosexuality by being promiscuous and possibly even aggressive with young females. It’s not even debatable if you realize how terrified a lot of young males, especially those who grew up without a strong, stable father figure, are of not appearing masculine enough or heterosexual enough. Young males tend to shame each other a lot for not being manly or straight enough, and this attitude seems to be contributed to by the older generations of males as well (as well as older females and younger females, but to a much lesser extent).
“Oh, and in the story above, who is bearing the very public brunt of sexual choices?”
That is the entire point. She shouldn’t be bearing the consequences of her and his sexual choices alone publicly. It should either be a private matter that the parents of both kids take care of together, with both children taking responsibility and not killing their child, or he should be publicly named as well. The fact that he isn’t has roots in this attitude that pregnancy is a female problem, boys are expected to be after sex and no responsibility, as well as other nasty social messages that these kids are getting.
“Jack, people have a right to how they view human nature. If I just can ask you to consider not taking things personally and internalize too much. That comment simply conveyed a fact that homosexual men are not attracted to females. Do you think that this may be the correct interpretation?”
No, that’s not a correct interpretation and that’s not what was said. What was said is that men who turn down advances from women are probably gay. This is blatantly implying men who don’t have sex when it’s offered with women are homosexual, and that men are not capable of turning down offered sex for reasons that have nothing to do with homosexuality. It’s a nasty message and I don’t let things like this be said without a rejoinder.
My son will know he is capable of turning down sex without being gay, and that there’s nothing shameful or different about him for doing so. It’s how all men should act with women, respect.
Oh, and it is personal and internalized. I’ve been called a fag like, tons of times for either not objectifying women (seriously, confront guys who catcall ladies and see how many times they call you a “p**sy” or a “fag”) or not wanting indiscriminate sex. I’m much better at ignoring it and not feeling pressured into sexual activity now as an adult, but when I was younger this attitude was definitely one of the reasons I was promiscuous. This type of thing has to stop. It’s not good for young males and it’s definitely not good for young females.
I really wish bmmg were on this thread, at least another guy would back me up on this.
No I’m not kidding Thomas R. So you don’t have any data on this. All you have is anecdotal stuff from yourself and maybe a few friends. And you must be kidding about the ‘sexting’.
Females are consuming more porn because males make them watch it with them. – what about this, do you have any data for this?
Jack is right about the attitudes being displayed by some here which perpetrate the whole outdated submissive/aggressive attitudes towards female and male sexuality.
And my anecdotal experience and observation for some years has been that many tennage boys try to support and commit to being fathers but in many cases the girls end up sending them on their way for various reasons.
Reality you are not the guy I wanted to back me up lol. ;)
Thomas, you are WAY off the mark, and out of line in the way you address young men and their ability to control themselves. I question what kind of a teenage boy you were from your attitude.
When I was a teenager, my then-boyfriend now-husband actually DID stop us on multiple occasions from going further than he was comfortable with. I was most assuredly the one to make the moves in our dating relationship. He DID say no, repeatedly. And FTR, he has never in the time I’ve known him had a low sex drive. He just wanted to make sure that we were both ready before we did have sex.
Also, I have a friend whose husband would be mortified if he found out that she looks at porn. She seeks it out, and she is almost always the instigator in sex, to the point where it actually is probably their biggest, most obvious relationship issue.
These are examples I use to make the point that 99% is a ridiculous overstatement of the number of sexual advances made by men/boys. I know it is way easier to think that your teenage daughters will never seek out sex, but having gone to an all-girls’ high school, I can confidently assert that this is not a safe assumption. This is only a part of the reason why girls and boys deserve strong, clear messages about the moral and ethical implications of sex before marriage, the health risks, and the reality that pregnancy and childbirth is the result of sexual relations.
It is true that teenage boys and young men have a higher sex drive than young women as a general rule. That does NOT mean that you get to put every male who doesn’t jump at the chance to have sex into the category of ‘broken’ or ‘gay’. How you debase yourself! Do you believe in your ability to withstand temptation to sin, or not?
I’m with Jack. This thread is degrading to men & women alike and incredibly frustrating and offensive!
Seriously, I’m a little dumbfounded at the idea that anyone would feel like a young man or teenage boy presented with sex has only 2 options: have sex or be gay. What if the girl has an obvious STD? Does he still have no self-control, simply because sex is involved? What if she tells him she wants to get pregnant?
And how often do we hear the sl**-shaming, “If you don’t want to get pregnant, don’t spread your legs!” but this doesn’t hold true on the other end? He isn’t responsible-shouldn’t be responsible-if he has the chance to have sex? If he gets her pregnant, it’s just ‘her burden’ and he has no culpability because why? Because how could she possibly expect him to be capable of saying no? Is that it?
Thank you MaryRose, I was starting to feel like I’m crazy or something. And I’m really, really insulted that it’s implied I, and your husband, or any dude who’s turned down sex for whatever reasons are abnormal or gay or whatever. How can people not see how offensive that is, and how it contributes to young men thinking that they have to have sex? If young ladies are affected (and they are) by women being objectified and sexualized by our culture, then young men are definitely affected by being treated like animals or budding rapists who are defective somehow if they don’t jump on the next girl who winks at them. And it’s got nothing to do with how much of a sex drive you have, as far as I can tell I have a perfectly normal male sex drive. Doesn’t mean I want to have sex or that there’s something up with me if I turn down offers, especially not when I’m single and shouldn’t be screwing around anyway.
And I agree, it’s like the blame is simultaneously being put solely on the boy AND the girl. It’s the oddest thing. I think I’m going to take the rational response and say that consenting sexual activity is the responsibility of both parties, and both genders should be taught that all consequences are their responsibility no matter who’s body it’s happening to.
Jack,
I remember my husband telling a good friend of ours how her boyfriend would initiate sexual contact if he was a good person – that is, that he would want to have an honest talk about it when they weren’t ‘hot & heavy’ before they actually pushed past that boundary. It seems to me that this should be an expected minimum of both men and women. Ideally, of course, they agree to wait until marriage. But at a bare minimum, shouldn’t they talk about it when all parties are able to think clearly-before actually ‘doing the deed’? I remember when I heard about what he had said to our friend & how disappointed I was that he didn’t push for abstinence. Now, seeing the kind of junk that some people apparently feel is normal, I find myself incredibly proud of his rationale and respect for women, especially considering that he does not have strong religious convictions about sex and marriage as I do.
You go girlfriend!!!
It was a looong time ago, but having witnessed what a couple of friends’ older sisters were put through I was determined not to cause a pregnancy when I was a teen.
Yes, MaryRose, I am proud of him too for at least encouraging communication and honesty, I mean even if you don’t consider abstinence the goal (like maybe the friend and her boyfriend didn’t), there’s no need for people to act like rutting animals. I don’t remember ever really being asked if I was ready for or wanted sex with any particular person. It’s assumed, as a younger guy, that I’m always up for it. That’s along with heavy shaming if I wasn’t. That’s not cool. It’s also not cool that my ex went through a lot of pain because she was usually the person who wanted sex in our marriage, but she was taught from the time she was a young girl that your husband would always be the one who wanted sex more. It caused more damage to our already rocky marriage, and that’s with me very rarely turning her down. I just hate that people will try to put people in boxes that don’t fit and make very damaging assumptions about people based on gender. It’s awful.
Reality, I’m glad you didn’t cause any teen pregnancies. More boys should think about that.
Well Jack, as we’ve seen here, there are a lot of mixed messages and hypocrisy in some quarters. That just makes things confusing and doesn’t keep the focus on the actual issues which need to be addressed.
“Uh, truth, what part of “it’s not illegal” do you not understand? It’s not illegal”
Jack, does it make you feel good to talk down to me? A closed mind is a terrible thing; you should keep yours more open. I would not only bring them to court but as my daughters legal legal guardian I would get a restraining order against him.
http://www.juvenilelawcenter.com/sex-between-minors/
Well you live in Cali. Like I said MULTIPLE TIMES, a few states have a single age of consent (I guess Cali is one of them) where what you are saying is true (though many prosecutors don’t pursue charges). MOST states (including mine), do not criminalize sexual contact between minors of a certain age, it depends on the state. It’s not a difficult concept. Even if I had a mind to, I could not bring charges against a 16-year-old boy for having consensual sex with my 16-year-old daughter unless I moved to California or a state like that. And I probably wouldn’t. Like I said, I don’t expect the state to parent my kids for me.
And I think the California law is insane, so there’s that.
And l-o-l you talk down to me, call me stupid, imply I approve of rape all the time. So knock it off, you’re not fooling anyone. I’m seriously done putting up with stuff from people.
That comment simply conveyed a fact that homosexual men are not attracted to females.
This is ALL this comment stated. If you think this is gay shaming, you are reading way more into it than was intended. My husband meant that if a male is gay, he wouldn’t be interested in sex with a female — otherwise he would be straight. I wouldn’t expect a straight person to have sex with someone of the same gender, would anyone else here?
The fact is, there are differences between the genders when it comes to this topic and anyone can take the time to research it for themselves.
From my husband and my conversations with teens and people of all ages as well as our experiences dating/marriage, we believe , that most male teens/young male adults will go as far as the female is willing to (if this is a woman they are attracted to and dating).
Seriously, I’m a little dumbfounded at the idea that anyone would feel like a young man or teenage boy presented with sex has only 2 options: have sex or be gay.
Seriously, I’m a little dumbfounded at where you got the idea that anyone here said that there are only two options. There are more options, but it seems apparent that in the last 50 or so years, we have failed in teaching our young people in how to utilize the other options.
but this doesn’t hold true on the other end?
Who is saying this doesn’t hold true on the other end? It should hold true on both ends but, unfortunately, we have set up a culture of non-committed sex.
Also, I have a friend whose husband would be mortified if he found out that she looks at porn. She seeks it out, and she is almost always the instigator in sex, to the point where it actually is probably their biggest, most obvious relationship issue.
I bet her husband would be even more mortified if he found out that you know about her porn use and he doesn’t. How debasing and degrading to her marriage.
And girls cannot just send committed teenage fathers on their way. Fathers can go to court and get half custody. There are groups willing to help them. So baloney on that point.
Prax,
Honestly, I think that porn is degrading and debasing in all cases. I’ve told her she needs to quit the habit, that it’s bad for her relationship and it’s not good for her head. I was simply pointing out that there are women out there seeking out porn just like there are guys doing it, and that they aren’t being forced into it by their boyfriends.
My point was, arguing that boys won’t contain themselves is setting up a self-perpetuating cycle and not helping the situation. We need to teach our youth self-control in things of all natures, especially sex. We also need to hold them to those standards instead of holding to the “boys will be boys” attitude. And I’m seriously offended by the idea that my husband and others are somehow abnormal-one of two in a hundred?-because they choose to say no for ANY reason. And to associate young men who say no with gay men is going to just pressure more young men into sex before they’re ready out of a fear of being gay.
“This is ALL this comment stated. If you think this is gay shaming, you are reading way more into it than was intended. My husband meant that if a male is gay, he wouldn’t be interested in sex with a female — otherwise he would be straight. I wouldn’t expect a straight person to have sex with someone of the same gender, would anyone else here? ”
No, but I would also not say that if a man didn’t take an offer of sex he was gay. Which is what that statement says. If you say “My husband told me about two out of 100, and those two are probably gay. I think he is close to the mark and respect his honesty.” You aren’t gay shaming, because obviously men exclusively attracted to other men aren’t going to take an offer of sex from a female. It IS shaming men who turn down sex for reasons other than homosexuality, as if they must not be attracted to women to not want sex. It honestly really offended me, I’m sure it will offend any guy who isn’t exclusively gay who has turned down sex. It’s not a nice or true statement and I really do think it should be apologized for.
Like I said, I don’t expect the state to parent my kids for me.
Except of course when you want the state to. As in setting up custody arrangements.
“Except of course when you want the state to. As in setting up custody arrangements.”
How in the world is this analogous to not wanting kids imprisoned for consensual sex?
Jack, does it make you feel good to talk down to me? – are you saying this with a straight face?
A closed mind is a terrible thing; you should keep yours more open. – now you’re just being a comedian.
I would not only bring them to court but as my daughters legal legal guardian I would get a restraining order against him – perhaps his parents might seek a restraining order against your daughter, have you considered that?
Any luck with that data yet truthseeker?
From my husband and my conversations with teens and people of all ages as well as our experiences dating/marriage, we believe , that most male teens/young male adults will go as far as the female is willing to – well that’s one small segment of society.
And girls cannot just send committed teenage fathers on their way. – what are you trying to force on women now?
Fathers can go to court and get half custody. There are groups willing to help them. – indeed, but that doesn’t create a relationship between the mother and father.
So baloney on that point. – I think you missed the point, and I don’t mean that in a snarky way.
Jack,
In most, if not all states, as the legal guardian of your unemancipated minor you have a legal right to bring anybody to court and keep them away from your child in order to protect them. And if somebody is having sex with a minor would be reason enough, in most peoples eyes’ for keeping that person away from said minor.
That’s not the same thing as rape or sexual misconduct charges and you know it truth. I’m pretty sure you’re just trolling me at this point.
I could also have my minor daughter declared delinquent if she refused to listen to me and continued to have consensual sex with some boy. Which, seeing as she’s my kid and he’s not, is probably the route I would take if there were zero other parenting options. It’s not something I would do unless I had no other choices though.
My point was, arguing that boys won’t contain themselves is setting up a self-perpetuating cycle and not helping the situation.
I’m not arguing. I’m stating that they DON’T contain themselves.
We need to teach our youth self-control in things of all natures, especially sex. We also need to hold them to those standards instead of holding to the “boys will be boys” attitude.
Yup. And my husband and I teach our own and area teens this. Is there anything else you recommend we do? Where do you get the idea that I support “boys will be boys” attitude?
And I’m seriously offended by the idea that my husband and others are somehow abnormal-one of two in a hundred?-because they choose to say no for ANY reason.
Who is saying your husband is abnormal? I was referring to the early dating relationship and on the whole. The remark was off the cuff and not meant to be an exact. It was meant to state that there is a problem and the sexual revolution, and contraception and abortion DID NOT solve it. Of course, there are exceptions and hopefully more than two of 100 young men can say no. But check out the stats for young men into porn.
And to associate young men who say no with gay men is going to just pressure more young men into sex before they’re ready out of a fear of being gay.
My husband was associating young gay men with saying no to women (because he believes that gay men refuse female advances) and to read anything more into it than that is disingenuous. Being fearful of bringing gay men into the conversation because it might offend straight men, sounds more like gay-shaming to me.
My 4 teens are all boys. Sorry, Thomas, I can’t agree with you on the belief that boys are the assertive ones in 99% of sexual encounters. I am constantly shocked at how girls behave these days. They are very assertive, suggestive, and even downright coercive at times. I wish I were kidding. I’m trying to raise my boys to be the ones to say No. I also am teaching them to avoid putting themselves in situations that can get out of hand sexually, but kids these days don’t even require privacy for their sexual encounters. Seriously, it’s a tough time to be a teen.
When I said 2 years was an eternity I didn’t mean that teens don’t socialize with other ages. I meant that I notice huge differences in maturity and decision making between the ages. And my kids notice it too.
How in the world is this analogous to not wanting kids imprisoned for consensual sex?
Imprisoned? Who said that now? A restraining order more than likely would do the trick.
You said that you didn’t expect the state to parent your kids. But the state has already helped you parent yours, Jack. Maybe you only want the state’s help when it’s something you agree with.
“But the state has already helped you parent yours, Jack.”
No, the state helped me protect my family’s well-being from an abusive ex-spouse by ensuring my children’s safety with me. And actually they didn’t do much, my ex didn’t contest custody after a few arguments because we agreed to no child support (except she pays for my son’s meds, that’s the financial help she gives). I’m not sure what you think I did wrong in that situation. And I’m still not sure what you are getting at here. Everyone has different levels of involvement that you think the state should be involved in parenting and people’s private lives. Apparently some people think the state should be way more involved than it is.
And you must be joking, the whole argument started over truth thinking young boys in consenting relationships with girls around their own age should be in legal hot water and get rape charges.
And honestly knowing my state there’s more than a good chance I wouldn’t have gotten custody even with the proof of abusive behavior on her part. So, I don’t see how that’s the “state helping me parent”, they actually probably would have caused me and the kids a lot of problems if things had actually gone forward.
“That’s not the same thing as rape or sexual misconduct charges and you know it truth.”
Jack, why don’t you think that sexual misconduct could be one of the charges I would bring forth when seeking a restraining order?
This is why I feel crazy, didn’t truth direct his last comment at me, saying I could get a restraining order against some kid? And now he asking why I think he wouldn’t get sexual misconduct charges against the kid? Am I misreading or is he being confusing? Someone help me out here.
Why shouldn’t your daughter get charges as well for consenting sex, truth? Assuming mutual consent and around the same age.
How does I’m not arguing. I’m stating that they DON’T contain themselves. fit with “We also need to hold them to those standards instead of holding to the “boys will be boys” attitude.” Yup. And my husband and I teach our own and area teens this.
Where do you get the idea that I support “boys will be boys” attitude? – um, from I’m stating that they DON’T contain themselves. perhaps?
truth seems to be stuck Jack. He simply doesn’t seem to comprehend that any action, any legal action, any consequences, could be applied anywhere other than against the male involved. He can only attribute ‘sexual misconduct’ in one direction.
I am constantly shocked at how girls behave these days. They are very assertive, suggestive, and even downright coercive at times. I wish I were kidding.
I totally agree and see it, too, Lrning.
But the fact of the matter remains, is that a girl is unable to have sex with a “less than enthusiastic” boy. If you get my drift. This is nature’s work, not mine. Take it up with Nature.
If ya can’t handle the fire, get outta the kitchen. High schools don’t normally have troubles with young women sniffing around for teen boys. On the other hand. . . . .
Oh, and Jack. You were promiscuous because you chose to be.
Erections are involuntary, actually. Females can rape males though it’s quite uncommon. An erection doesn’t equal consent, I’m really surprised to see you of all people imply something like that Prax.
Yes, I chose to be promiscuous. Just as a lot of minor girls and boys choose to be promiscuous. That doesn’t mean that kids aren’t affected by and pressured by certain messages that were given, among other things. And most of my partners were older than me because the crowd I was around, so I don’t think I can entirely be blamed for that though I’ll take it if you admit these are bad messages to be sending kids.
“Why shouldn’t your daughter get charges as well for consenting sex, truth? Assuming mutual consent and around the same age.”
Jack, I would have the utmost respect for a parent who did. And I am not being confusing at all; you just have trouble comprehending things that someone else says if you disagree with what they are saying.
Jack, I would have the utmost respect for a parent who did (but that would never apply to me of course)
you just have trouble comprehending things that someone else says if you disagree with what they are saying. – I disagree strongly, your message is confused.
I t is very clear Reality. The message is that I would expect a responsible parent to bring a restraining order against any person who was having sex with an unemancipated minor if necessary in order to stop it. Why do you suppose that confuses you?
“An erection doesn’t equal consent, I’m really surprised to see you of all people imply something like that Prax.”
And I am so offended that you imply that I think an erection equals consent. You really should consider trying to stop putting words in people’s mouths, so to say.
An erection kept in your pants will never get someone pregnant. And the vast majority of boys are able to stop girls from ripping their clothes off. Get real.
Oh come off it truth. If I’m not understanding, it seems I’m not the only one. Why don’t you be clearer?
Seriously, get real, Jack.
“And I am so offended that you imply that I think an erection equals consent. You really should consider trying to stop putting words in people’s mouths, so to say.”
You said: “But the fact of the matter remains, is that a girl is unable to have sex with a “less than enthusiastic” boy. If you get my drift. This is nature’s work, not mine. Take it up with Nature.” I took that to mean if he’s not aroused, she can’t have sex with him. If I misunderstood that I apologize.
And yes most boys can physically prevent most girls from taking their clothes off. Most sex initiated by females is consensual. I’ve never denied that, female on male rape is pretty uncommon though it does happen on occasion (usually the male is incapacitated in some way, usually alcohol). I’m still not going to say that consensual sex is mostly the dude’s fault, or that girls and women don’t initiate sex often (though not as much as men and boys do) because it’s not true. I firmly believe consensual sex is the responsibility of both parties and both need to be held responsible for anything that results from that.
See my post at 12:00am for clarification
I t is very clear Reality. The message is that I would expect a responsible parent to bring a restraining order against any person who was having sex with an unemancipated minor if necessary in order to stop it. – see there, you’re off to a bad start already, you’ve identified distinct roles in the matter when the roles may well be identical. The only thing that is clear from your message is that you regard the male as the perpetrator, the one who should be restrained, the one who should be punished, in virtually all cases. When it is pointed out to you that this is a rather erroneous assumption and approach, your response is ‘oh well, yes, ok’ but with ‘well that sure wouldn’t apply in my circumstances’ coming from the side of your mouth.
Why do you suppose that confuses you? – uh huh.
I’ll put that claim of yours regarding charitable donations into the ‘truthseeker’s wild pitches’ file then shall I?
And yes Prax, I’m the one who’s completely wrong, even if other people, including women, agree with what I’ve said in other comments or how I read your comments (maybe not that last one, no one else has chimed in on it). Can you consider that maybe you might be in the wrong instead of me?
Really Reality??? Where in my 12:00am post do you see anything about male being the perpetrator? How do you read something like that says absolutely nothing about male or female being the perp and respond with your garbage? It would appear you just like to post inane responses in order to draw somebody into responding to your crap.
But the fact of the matter remains, is that a girl is unable to have sex with a “less than enthusiastic” boy. If you get my drift. This is nature’s work, not mine. Take it up with Nature. – this quite clearly indicates that if a boy isn’t willingly up for it he won’t be….up for it. Nothing about clothes tearing ability. The references to ‘nature’ make it quite clear. And nature says that if a boy has been having any degree of sexual contact then he will probably have an erection, whether he is ‘enthusiastic’ about having sexual intercourse or not.
She might have been saying that males are generally stronger, when referring to the nature thing. It came across to me as “if he doesn’t want sex he won’t be aroused” though, I could have read it wrong though.
Your 12:00am post truthseeker, is but a hint of your well demonstrated message delivered over the course of this discussion. And I explained its meaning to you in my 12:15am post.
It would appear you just like to post inane responses in order to draw somebody into responding to your crap. – no, I leave that to the specialists :-)
I can only speak for myself and though I have erections at times when I was unable to have intercourse; But I don’t recall ever having had an erection when I didn’t feel like I wanted to have intercourse. I always thought the two were supposed to go together. Is it different for you?
Males get erections often while being sexually abused or raped as children or adults, it definitely isn’t something that’s chosen or voluntary all the time.
I found it quite clear Jack. If you get my drift Take it up with Nature It’s rather obvious.
So truthseeker, are you saying you’ve never had an erection whilst kissing and cuddling? Maybe enjoying a bit of light petting? Heavy petting?
Kissing, cuddling or petting doesn’t necessarily mean intercourse is going to take place. Or is it different for you?
Jack, other than sexual abuse though; would you agree then?
Morning wood…?
Oh I am so done with this nonsense
If you want to make excuses for your sons to have underage sex, that’s your mistake. I’m going to continue to expect my own sons to respect and honor girls. I’m going to refuse to expect them to have sex. I understand, of course, as I stated, that teenage boys certainly spend more time focused on sex than teenage girls, as a rule. But my children will not take any opportunity they get. My sons will understand that just because the girl is willing does not make the engagement licit.
You may not be arguing whether or not they can, but I am clarifying that mine won’t. I will not allow them to be blinded by rhetoric that degrades them.
Why knot? But I was thinking of times when I was making a conscious decision when I brought it up. I wasn’t thinking of abuse or morning wood etc
You can’t really disregard sexual abuse and rape though, truthseeker. Obviously, if arousal happens involuntarily during force or coerced sex, it’s certainly possible for it to happen if you just don’t particularly want sex but have been stimulated in some way. But this conversation is rather gross, I don’t want to get into the particulars of erections. My only point is you don’t have to WANT sex to be aroused. And being aroused is not an excuse for having sex. Either or.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/horror-5-jealous-women-rape-husband-to-death/comment-page-2/
I’m sure that it was completely consensual. After all, Mother Nature and all that jazz.
I find it interesting, Praxades, that Jack’s point earlier was precisely your point above. That young men are perfectly capable of keeping it in their pants.
Even if it’s being offered.
…Just saying.
MaryRose I’m really horrified by that article. That’s insane and a great argument against polygamy.
Looking at it in terms of nature and biology there is a difference between men and women. Women do not HAVE to be aroused in order to have intercourse. In the case of a male; they MUST be aroused to in order to have intercourse.
That doesn’t mean arousal means someone consents to sex truthseeker. Or an excuse (I was horny! Couldn’t help it! It’s total crap).
The polygamist probably would have had a better chance of surviving the rape if he had started with the oldest first and worked his way down instead of the other way around.
What in the world do you mean by that comment? I really, really hope it’s not what I think it is.
I agree Jack. I don’t think anybody is saying that arousal = consent. I was just stating a biological fact and pointing out a difference between men and women and their ability to have intercourse.
Jack, I almost didn’t type it cause it seemed so brash. But the point was that stamina comes with experience. Is that what you thought it meant?
That’s just sick (and exactly what I thought you were saying). Would you say that if that was a women being gang raped by men or a man being gang raped by men?
I’m gonna go puke now.
If she was a polygamist with ten husbands I might have.
And the man on man thing, I think you know how I feel about that; 1) there is no such thing as marriage between anything other than a man and a woman AND if they were all men then they are all committing suicide (mortal and spiritual).
“If she was a polygamist with ten husbands I might have.”
That would make it okay how, exactly?
Ugh, so now if people make bad decisions in cultures you know nothing about you’ll make sick comments about their fatal gang rapes. That’s really disgusting truthseeker.
I don’t care what culture you are from; If you choose to have ten spouses then you should expect to be run ragged (even to exhaustion and death) trying to keep up with their physical and emotional needs.
Seriously, truthseeker, I really hope this is all just sleep deprivation or something talking. It is late after all.
Apparently truthseeker doesn’t see the difference between sex and rape. That’s certainly worrisome to say the least. No wonder you think all teenage boys who have sex with teenage girls should be charged.
I’m so, so done with this thread. Good night all.
This is long past the time in a thread when I get a little punchy. I expect to be seeing pink elephants and six-foot white rabbits any minute now.
Oh, it seems the same thought has occurred to others.
Hans, was that elephant wearing tights like the one I saw?
Good night Jack
“Good night all.”
Good night, Jack.
Nite Jack.
there is no such thing as marriage between anything other than a man and a woman AND if they were all men then they are all committing suicide (mortal and spiritual) – such a flagrantly false statement. Mortal suicide?
‘night JohnBoy.
Okay, I really did try to go to bed but I can’t let this one slide, keeps running around in my mind.
“And the man on man thing, I think you know how I feel about that; 1) there is no such thing as marriage between anything other than a man and a woman AND if they were all men then they are all committing suicide (mortal and spiritual).”
Truthseeker, we’re talking about gang rape. So unless you’re implying that
A) Males who were raped by other males are sinning, or women raped by other women are sinning.
B) That gay or bisexual men or lesbians or bisexual women can not be raped by their partners or others.
C) That people in polygamous relationships cannot be raped by their partners, regardless of gender.
D) That any sex between people in relationships is automatically consented to regardless of the genders involved.
E) Worse, that any of these people, regardless of their sexual orientation or relationship status deserve to be raped or assaulted by their partners.
You really need to think about what you are typing before you press “add comment”. If you are implying any of those things, I have a finger held up for you.
My goodness,
How this thread exploded as I blissfully slept. Well my friends, I have to get ready to catch a plane to go home. Will connect with you on another thread soon. This one, however interesting, is way over my head at this point.
Thumbs up?
WOw this thread blew up while I was away – unfortunately, babies need to be taken care of RIGHT NOW. ;)
Anyway, I just have to say, Jack and MaryRose, thank you and a standing ovation to your common sense. Sorry I had to bail.
This argument that men unequivocally want sex more all the time has caused a lot of issues both for me personally as well as for a lot of women I know. For me, it caused some problems early in my marriage when I realized that I was initiating more and when my husband would be the one to say “I’m too tired, not tonight.” Because according to every flipping thing I’d ever heard, the only reason a man would say that is if he was cheating or gay. I mean. It took a lot of tears and explanation for him to finally get across that just like *I* don’t fall into a stereotype, neither does he. ANd do you know what? I’ve talked to quite a few people from my age group who say the same thing. OMG people don’t fit in boxes!!! Crazy.
“Thumbs up?”
Thumbs Ups must be earned.
How in this world did the original theme of sex between minors get so twisted? My head is spinning and what’s worst I think that Hans’ prediction came through for me too.
You know, quit honestly I am so glad of having two and half decades behind me after high school. What a relief!!! My boys are not too far from becoming teenagers so I will have to readjust a bit and be on the look-out for all those “aggressive” girls Lrning, MaryRose, LibertyBelle and Jack so hotly advise about. I am so hoping they will not seduce my sons. Boys will not be boys any longer. Progressivism stinks.
I will have to readjust a bit and be on the look-out for all those “aggressive” girls Lrning, MaryRose and Jack so hotly advise about. I am so hoping they will not seduce my sons.
It does stink, Thomas. Our boys don’t only have to overcome their own urges, they have to navigate through the urges and pressures from increasingly aggressive girls as well. But forewarned is forearmed. Teach them the tactics they’ll need to be successful and instill in them the moral teaching that will provide the desire to utilize those tactics. And always pray for them.
“there is no such thing as marriage between anything other than a man and a woman AND if they were all men then they are all committing suicide (mortal and spiritual)”– such a flagrantly false statement. Mortal suicide?
I will translate this for you “reality” since it seems this statement is over your head in terms of reasoning abilities: one can infer that mortal suicide refers to lack of procreation that ensures that our species carry on. Procreation between a homosexual couple is not possible.
Always look beyond your nose “reality.” Hope this helps.
This is my favorite part of this thread so far! Yeah!
OMG people don’t fit in boxes!!! Crazy.
Right. But there still are differences, on the whole, between the genders.
Just saying what I was saying all along. . . . .
I don’t think someone getting raped is committing mortal suicide Thomas, I could be wrong I guess. I don’t know how truthseeker turned that into talking about consensual relationships when it really specifically was about non-consensual sex.
Wait just a minute, I was commenting on the specific way TS structured this sentence, and if I can read at all, he did not reference rape at all in that comment. I read it literally. Can you please point me to where TS was referencing rape in his discussion of mortal suicide?
Thomas If you start making comments about how someone who died in an alleged gang rape needed more “stamina”, you pretty obviously have an issue with understanding the difference between a consenting (however immoral) relationship and being raped by a partner(s). And my comment was about a man being gang raped by men, which he apparently took as consensual sex? I have no idea what he’s going on about but it seems quite disturbing.
“This argument that men unequivocally want sex more all the time has caused a lot of issues both for me personally as well as for a lot of women I know. For me, it caused some problems early in my marriage when I realized that I was initiating more and when my husband would be the one to say “I’m too tired, not tonight.” Because according to every flipping thing I’d ever heard, the only reason a man would say that is if he was cheating or gay. ”
Were we once married? Lol.
I just don’t understand why people have no issue understanding that young women are affected by negative social messages (like being objectified and sexualized daily in the media), but think that young men aren’t… If you hear every day how men are just horndogs and there’s something different and odd about them if they aren’t trying to get laid at every opportunity then I can’t see how that wouldn’t affect young men and of course the young women in relationships with them. Especially since there’s a severe lack of decent fathers around to counteract these messages. But whatever, I’ll just teach my son differently and hope the parents of any girls he dates teach them correctly.
I missed that stamina “reference.” But I still don’t get how you would attribute it to the statement TS made and I was commenting on? I think that at some point TS switched gears. As far as I can tell, TS has a tendency to be all over the place.
I probably took it that way because my comment was (in essence): “Would you make the same comment about a man being raped by men?” (I made that comment because people usually take rape committed by males more seriously than sex crimes committed by females). Then he went on to say ” And the man on man thing, I think you know how I feel about that; 1) there is no such thing as marriage between anything other than a man and a woman AND if they were all men then they are all committing suicide (mortal and spiritual).”
So, he for some reason decided “man raped by men” was me talking about consensual homosexuality. Maybe. Who knows what he’s on about. Regardless, he obviously doesn’t see the issue with blaming/disregarding rape because it’s committed against people in immoral relationships. They are still people, and it’s not like it makes it okay.
Thomas R., dude, is it your knowledge, your thinking or your world that ends at the tip of your nose?
Homosexuals are a small percentage of the population. Always have been. Population maintenance and in fact, growth, has been easily delivered.
Some homosexuals are biological parents. Both male and female.
Homosexuality isn’t inherited. It’s mostly heterosexual parents who have homosexual offspring.
So now tell me, how is homosexuality ‘mortal suicide’?
Prax I do want to apologize, I shouldn’t have accused you of saying that arousal is consent to sex. I should have asked for clarification and not gone on my assumptions. I’m sorry for getting carried away and accusing you of something you weren’t trying to say. I haven’t been trying to hurt your feelings or offend you, and I know I did and I’m sorry. I was hurt and offended myself so I was being a jerk.
I do think that people assuming all men are up for sex all the time is damaging though, to at least the percentage of dudes who have low sex drives, or PTSD from childhood abuse, or other reasons for being less sexual than their wives or girlfriends. Like LibertyBelle pointed out, it causes relationship friction. For me, there was the relationship friction in my marriage and a lot of stress for me, with my pretty severe PTSD that’s pretty badly triggered by being pressured into sex, there was a lot of unhappy and unpleasant sexual situations between me and my wife (or with random people when I was a teenager). Not like sexual assault or anything, but definitely not anything I wanted really. Before you say it yes I know it’s my fault I am not trying to say it wasn’t, but it wasn’t ONLY my responsibility, I wasn’t the only person to blame especially for people older than me. If someone tried to tell you they really aren’t up for it you shouldn’t keep pressing until they say yes even if it’s a guy. I don’t think most people do it on purpose, I think they’re just going off what everyone that assumes, that men are always fine with indiscriminate sex.
And I do think that women initiating or being the aggressors is a lot more common with my generation and younger. That doesn’t mean that guys don’t have a responsibility to say no, but it does mean that young ladies need to be taught that they need to not be asking for sex either.
I’m left with the impression Jack, that truthseeker considers anything other than a heterosexual relationship within the confines of marriage must be a sex crime of some sort. Soemone needs to be charged with something! Someone must be guilty of some heinous act!
“Thumbs up?” Thumbs Ups must be earned.
So does a punch in the nose. What is your point JDC?
Jack,
Cry me a river you baby. YOU are the one who first referenced man on man sex. You asked me a question about how I would feel about it. I told you that they are committing mortal suicide (AIDS etc.) and spiritual suicide (sinning). I think you bring that stuff up in discussions just so you can get your panties in a bunch.
Jack, what did you find so offensive about my stamina reference? Do you find it offensive when somebody says that cougars have more stamina than kittens?
Whoa there, tough guy. I, very clearly, asked you if you would make the same nasty comments about a woman or a man being gang raped by men as you did about a man being gang raped by women. If you don’t understand the difference between a consenting sexual encounter and a gang rape, that’s on you.
I did not reference “man on man sex”, I very clearly and undeniably referenced rape. I didn’t even specify the orientations of those involved, for that matter. You have your own issues if you take a reference to male on male rape as a reference to consensual homosexuality.
LOL Jack, I don’t think so… :) It’s just more common than most people will admit, you know? And thankfully we have a great marriage now but it’s tough to get over a life-long assumption. Stereotypes are harmful and I’m starting to speak up more because I *know* there are men and women out there who are sick of laboring under these stereotypes. It’s harmful.
If a man cheats because he was propositioned by a female, “I’m a man – I can’t say to no to sex” ain’t gonna fly. People can control their urges.
forewarned is forearmed. Teach them the tactics they’ll need to be successful and instill in them the moral teaching that will provide the desire to utilize those tactics. And always pray for them.
This all way. I agree 10,000% that we just need to teach our kids that what society sells as “sexy” and sex isn’t necessarily reflective of the truth. We need to teach them to be confident in themselves, how to say no, and that breaking the stereotype is okay. They can be themselves and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Thought this was relevant. It’s about male sexual assault victims. For those of you wo say men aren’t ever pressured into sex, check it out.
http://imgur.com/gallery/8zb2B
Reality,
mortal suicide = death of the body
spiritual suicide = death of the soul
Truthseeker. Do I really need to spell it out for you? You’re a grown man, I really hope you understand the difference between rape and sex.
Your comment is offensive because, according to the story you were referencing, this man didn’t consent to a sexual encounter with the women. They allegedly threatened him with weapons and had sex with him without his consent. Snarky comments about stamina are nasty.
Just because someone is in an immoral relationship doesn’t mean that they deserve that type of abuse. And relationships don’t have automatic consent, just because you’re married to someone doesn’t mean that they get to have sex with you whenever they please. It really disturbs me that you’re married and don’t seem to get this.
“They allegedly threatened him with weapons and had sex with him without his consent”
Allegedly? Well there you have it. Scream and cry about something you really know nothing about. How many times did he force them to watch while he had sex with the others? How many times did he force them to have sex with him period? Were any of these forced marriages or marriages where the wives were given to him as property? You don’t know. I don’t know. But imo the chance are better than 50/50 that he had a history of abuse (physical and psychological) with these women since he had 10 wives. Maybe you need to go puke again?
Well, first, I’m not going to make wild speculations about that. Polygamous relationships do tend to have more of a chance of domestic violence and sexual violence, usually towards the women involved. But, I don’t see any allegations of that in the article and I’m not going to speculate about that. I say “alleged” to his rape and murder because it hasn’t been proven in court. The only thing about his behavior that was said in the article is that he had a preference for one wife, and the other ones were jealous. We don’t know anything else about the relationship.
His rape is still wrong, and you still shouldn’t be making comments like that or blaming the victim, unless there is some proof he was the abusive one (and even then I would understand if they killed him if he was abusive and they couldn’t get away, but I’m never ever going to say that rape is an appropriate thing to do to anyone, even abusers. Rape isn’t something that should be used to punish people). And plus, making comments like that about one victim damages all victims. Some people who are victimized by sexual violence are not nice people, but that doesn’t make sexual violence okay.
It’s like those people who think prison rape is just fine and dandy. It’s not, at all.
And now you find you can bend your mind far enough to claim that rape is not sex? And that reference to man on man rape is not a reference to man on man sex? Notice I never threw the word consensual in there; YOU did so that you could cry another river.
Uh, yeah, rape is “sex” I suppose, but it’s a violent act so far removed from what sex is supposed to be I don’t really think it should be referred to as sex. Seems kinda shaming.
But anyway, none of that explains why you think it’s appropriate to go from “what would you say about a man raped by men” to saying all involved are sinners going to hell or whatever. Do you think male rape victims are committing the sin of homosexuality or something? I don’t really understand what you’re trying to get at but it doesn’t seem pleasant.
I told you that they are committing mortal suicide (AIDS etc.) – what, so now you think heterosexuals don’t get AIDS etc.? Being homosexual doesn’t deliver AIDS, sexual practices do. Therefore if you wish to claim that homosexuals are committing mortal suicide then you also need to claim that heterosexuals are as well.
mortal suicide = death of the body – yes, that one’s not difficult to figure out. But it doesn’t explain how being homosexual is of itself mortal suicide. Put some effort into it!
spiritual suicide = death of the soul – only if you believe in such things.
“I told you that they are committing mortal suicide (AIDS etc.) – what, so now you think heterosexuals don’t get AIDS etc.? Being homosexual doesn’t deliver AIDS, sexual practices do. Therefore if you wish to claim that homosexuals are committing mortal suicide then you also need to claim that heterosexuals are as well.”
Are you a holocaust denier too?
The equivalence of being a holocaust denier would be claiming that only homosexuals get AIDS, and that’s not me.
And those who might think that being homosexual is of itself a cause of AIDS are almost beyond help.
He’s saying that it’s not homosexuality that spreads HIV, it’s generally anal sex (for gay males, at least) to be blunt. Gay or bisexual men who don’t engage in that practice (which is a lot of them, some find it completely disgusting and have no wish to do it) have much less chance of contracting HIV as well as other STDs that are spread through semen and blood. Heterosexuals who engage in anal sex have a higher rate of HIV as well (though less than gay males do, because the gay community is much smaller than the straight community, meaning that diseases are easier to pass around). And IV drug users get it quite frequently regardless of their sexual practices.
Good heavens,
I’ve already flown home, settled in and unpacked, did all my grocery shopping, and look at all the activity I missed! Now I’m getting ready for bed. Will check in on you again in the morning my friends.
Good night Mary. I am glad your travels went well.
truthseeker,
You don’t seek truth very well. A man died. He had 6 wives, not 10 (maybe read the article again before you comment?). You made a tasteless joke about stamina. It’s unacceptable and horrific. A man, we don’t know the state of his soul, or what could have happened with his life, died. While being raped by 5 women. If all that conjures for you is a tasteless joke, you should seriously consider seeing a psychologist.
Truth just can’t seem to fathom the thought that men are sometimes vulnerable to and victims of sexual violence, even sometimes from women (though they are much more likely to be attacked by another man). You see the same kind of attitudes when stuff like a teacher assaults her male student, people seem to think it’s a joke or that the boy isn’t actually a victim. Victim blaming and minimizing rape is wrong, no matter the gender of the people involved.
ts,
Thank you, my trip home to see my family went well. I love my discussions with my brother, a former police officer who now teaches criminal justice. A fascinating career and he really makes me think from a police officer’s perspective. Also very good safety tips!
Hi Jack,
Sadly the Neanderthal mentality toward rape victims is alive and doing well.
“What is your point JDC?”
My point is that you should not merely ask for them (which is what I assume you were doing, although I may have misunderstood) but instead say something that people deem worthy of giving a thumbs up to.
“reality:” From that statement that TS made that is the inference that I arrived at. Other than that, other stuff you referenced regarding homosexuality I did not make such claims at all here.
As far as the mortal suicide issue, all I can tell you is that if it were not for a heterosexual couple you would not be and homosexual couples would not be able to adopt. Food for thought tmeister. Heterosexuality sustains society, homosexuality sustains the person. And the winner is???
And the winner is??? - a fair and equitable society.
Are you saying that heterosexuals who don’t or can’t reproduce don’t have an equal place in society with those who can or do?
Is reproduction the only thing which sustains society?
What of the role of folks such as catholic clergy then?
“You don’t seek truth very well. A man died. He had 6 wives, not 10 (maybe read the article again before you comment?). You made a tasteless joke about stamina. It’s unacceptable and horrific. A man, we don’t know the state of his soul, or what could have happened with his life, died. While being raped by 5 women. If all that conjures for you is a tasteless joke, you should seriously consider seeing a psychologist.”
MaryRose, Pardon my mistake about the number of wives. Ten would be ever more egregious. I knew the joke about stamina and cougars was edgy when I wrote it but thought it was funny (and honest) so I shared it; you have a right not to like it. IMO the fact that he had six wives (as opposed to having been gang raped by a roaming pack of five wild women he had no history with), makes my first instinct be that this man had a history of abuse with his harem. Neither of us knows this but I believe I am more likely right in my analysis then you or Jack. And you can tell that to your shrink ;)
And I am not just trying to be insulting….I really like your posts.
Wait, so now if the rapist is someone the victim knows, or a spouse, or anything like that, you’re allowed to make tasteless jokes and blame them for getting raped?
It doesn’t matter if he was abusive, rape is not something to be used as punishment. I’d totally support his wives killing him if they had to protect themselves, you do what you got to do. But sexual assault is not a way to protect yourself, and you don’t get to use it as vengeance. Sexual violence is not okay, full stop, ever. Even if you’re a junkie prostitute, or an awful drug-dealing teenager, or a wife-beater, or a murderer. We’re a civilized people, we don’t punish people with sexual assault.
And plus you don’t get to accuse people of being abusive with no proof, that’s awful. You don’t know what he has or hasn’t done, so you don’t get to make tasteless comments about a sexual assault he suffered. Especially not on a thread with several rape survivors, that’s just disrespectful to people you are talking to.
Truthseeker, be honest, you’re the kind of guy who makes jokes about prison rape, and didn’t see anything wrong with what happened to the people being held at Abu Ghraib, and sees rape as less serious if it’s committed against people who work in the sex industry? You think if people do something wrong, it’s okay to brutalize them. You’re basically just a barbarian.
Way off Jack. I would just as much stop the rape of a prostitute or a homosexual for that matter as I would anybody else. But I am not so -politically correct that I will refrain from looking at the situation honestly and if I think their own decisions and actions put them in a position where rape was more likely to occur.
Let me ask you a couple questions. Do you think the fact this man had six wives made it more likely that he would be attacked and killed by a jealous woman, or in this case, jealous women?
Yeah, a lot of cops have your attitude. That’s why they don’t take the rapes of prostitutes and strippers and the exploitation of street kids seriously. “If you hadn’t run off from home, no one would have hurt you.” – that’s something street kids hear a lot, regardless of the fact that our homes weren’t any safer. “Well, if you hadn’t been selling yourself, he wouldn’t have thought you were an easy target.” – something prostitutes hear a lot. People like you take any opportunity to blame people for being targeted by sexual violence instead of blaming the people who actually committed the crime.
It doesn’t matter what the victim did. I don’t care if some girl or guy got black out wasted and walked naked through a frat party, it doesn’t make the rape any more their responsibility. Their choices may be bad, but they aren’t responsible for someone else’s sickness.
If I have offended anyone who is a victim of rape I offer my sincerest apologies cause that was never my intention. But Jack couldn’t be farther off in his diatribe/analogy of me and my motives as a person. I am one of the ones who has put a stop to sexual abuse when it was brought to my attention and I would never stand by and allow anybody to be raped. Perhaps the things some see in me as objectionable and insensitive are the same things that allow me to confront abusers and/or rapists. You are safe when I am around.
Polygamy is common in some countries truth, people are products of their environments. That doesn’t make polygamy a good thing, but it doesn’t make sexual violence against that person okay or justifiable.
And how in the world does being gay make rape your fault at all?
In Nigeria the Muslim culture that allows for his polygamy would hold him responsible for his rape because a man is only supposed to take on the number of wives he can keep happy and provide for their needs. That ‘environment’ is probably a large part of why his wives felt justified in attacking him.
I have to go join in prayer with my wife and put our children to bed now. Talk at you later. ts
Maybe you should pray on how to stop blaming people for being sexually assaulted?
I really wish you could understand what it does to someone to hear how if they would have done this, or hadn’t done this, or hadn’t been there, or should have been here, that they wouldn’t have been violated. It doesn’t help. It doesn’t make you edgy or politically incorrect, it just means you’re removing responsibility from the perpetrator of the abuse to the victim of the abuse.
Oh, and there’s no excuse to assault someone even if it’s okay in your culture, if that had been a woman raped and “honor” killed because she broke some cultural taboo I know you wouldn’t be saying the same thing. My point with culture was that polygamy is a common thing over there, and we don’t hear about multiple wives raping their husband every day even in polygamous countries. It was the people who committed the sexual assault, their fault, not the victim’s.
Jack, The truth of peoples past does not change when somebody gets raped; even if it the rape kills them. It may seem insensitive to say anything bad about their past; especially since they are now dead; but speaking openly about what I believe to be the likely history prior to the rape does not equal blaming the victim for the rape.
Uh, first off, you’re not speaking truth about this man. You’re making up stuff because of assumptions. That’s not speaking truth.
And like I said, it doesn’t matter what the past was because it doesn’t cause the rape. You really don’t get what kind of damage that does. I internalized a lot of blame for the rapes against me, because I was a “bad” kid and made a lot of mistakes. And people blamed me. My ex thought less of me for not getting out of my home sooner, for not being able to defend myself. My mother blamed me since I was a toddler. And I don’t want to accept that blame anymore. I didn’t do anything that caused anyone to violate me. I made mistakes and they don’t go away because I’ve had it rough, but neither do they mean that any of the abuse I went through was something I could have prevented or makes it my fault. I didn’t contribute to it. The people who decided to hurt me are responsible for that. People can make assumptions about what I did or what I should have done, but none of that changes the fact it wasn’t my fault.
So understand this. Making mistakes or doing something wrong doesn’t make it okay to rape someone, it doesn’t make the rape their fault, it doesn’t make it okay to joke about their rape, and it doesn’t make the rape less of a horrible thing. Okay? It doesn’t matter if he possibly did something bad before that happened, it doesn’t change those facts.
And honestly, if your first impulse on hearing about a rather horrific gang rape is to find things that make it the victims fault, there’s really something wrong with you.
but speaking openly about what I believe to be the likely history prior to the rape does not equal blaming the victim for the rape. – then why do it?
This is strongly reminiscent of the defence “hey, she’s a slut anyway” attempted in some sexual assault cases.
truthseeker, you sound like someone from one of those cultures where a mans word carries three times that of a woman and in which a raped woman is stoned to death for dishonoring her family.
“Uh, first off, you’re not speaking truth about this man. You’re making up stuff because of assumptions. That’s not speaking truth.”
Jack, You like to parse words and cry a river. I never claimed it was anything other than the truth as I see it.
“truthseeker, you sound like someone from one of those cultures where a mans word carries three times that of a woman and in which a raped woman is stoned to death for dishonoring her family.”
Reality, everything you post is the opposite of what a person says so I must be speaking in righteous ways about what an honor it is to stand up in defense of raped women and standing up for their dignity.
What does the Bible say about bearing false witness, truth? If you don’t know the truth about this man’s life you shouldn’t be making up stuff.
You still haven’t admitted that rape is wrong even if someone did something immoral or wrong.
And yeah, stand up for raped women and their dignity, but not men who are raped. Make sure you blame them and try to find ways to excuse what was done to them.
We both know that I think homosexuality is immoral and wrong right? And we both know I posted that “I would just as much stop the rape of a prostitute or a homosexual for that matter as I would anybody else”. So I am bewildered that you have this idea that I would not think that rape is wrong even if someone did something that is immoral or wrong. I tell you what; I will ‘admit’ what you want me to if you will admit that it is really screwed up to ask a person who is disgusted by rape whether or not I will admit that it is wrong.
I must be speaking in righteous ways about what an honor it is to stand up in defense of raped women and standing up for their dignity. – no you haven’t. All you have done is impugn victims of rape.
I think that you justify rape because you’ve repeatedly justified the rape of the man in the article that MaryRose linked. You won’t even say that it’s wrong, you’ve gone as far as to invent an entire backstory for him to justify your blaming him. You’ve made jokes about it too. Obviously, you aren’t particularly disgusted by rape.
“All you have done is impugn victims of rape.” by saying things like “I am one of the ones who has put a stop to sexual abuse when it was brought to my attention and I would never stand by and allow anybody to be raped.”
And the opinions I stressed about the topic of this thread; ” that I would expect a responsible parent to bring a restraining order against any person who was having sex with an unemancipated minor if necessary in order to stop it.” How do you, Jack and Reality, suppose your mind can twist that into my impugning the victims of rape?
The truth of peoples past does not change when somebody gets raped; even if it the rape kills them. It may seem insensitive to say anything bad about their past; especially since they are now dead; but speaking openly about what I believe to be the likely history prior to the rape does not equal blaming the victim for the rape. – your own words. And when asked what relevance someone’s past has when they are a rape victim, you fail to respond.
Like I said, you’ve blamed this man to the point of inventing an entire backstory for him. You don’t have a problem impugning rape victims, if you disagree with his lifestyle.
What other lifestyle choices do you think are sufficient reasons to make jokes about and blame someone if they are raped?
And the opinions I stressed about the topic of this thread; ” that I would expect a responsible parent to bring a restraining order against any person who was having sex with an unemancipated minor if necessary in order to stop it.” How do you, Jack and Reality, suppose your mind can twist that into my impugning the victims of rape? – disingenuous ducking now? You’ve jumped from consensual sex between minors to rape? It’s many of the other things you have said, no twisting required.
“And when asked what relevance someone’s past has when they are a rape victim, you fail to respond.”
What relevance it has is that people can put themselves in positions where rape is more likely to happen. Speaking of these positions is a positive because it can help others to avoid those dangerous positions. And speaking openly of those positions does not impugn the dignity of rape victims it honors them by helping others to avoid the same types of dangerous situations. Helping others avoid situations that are more prone to rape is relevant to people who want to help people avoid rape.
What if I said that this man should have had a gun under his pillow to protect himself. Would you think I was blaming him for the rape because he should have had a gun to protect himself? Or would you think that I believe he could have had a better chance of not being raped if he had kept a gun under his pillow to protect himself?
Yeah, go ahead truthseeker, put some icing on it. Pity about the cake you’ve already baked.
What is it Reality? Are you wiling to answer the question about the rape victim and the gun? It’s gotta have a liberal in a tizzy when their talking points conflict and they have to think on their own. Come on. Throw two sheets to wind and answer the question.
What if I said that this man should have had a gun under his pillow to protect himself. Would you think I was blaming him for the rape because he should have had a gun to protect himself? Or would you think that I believe he could have had a better chance of not being raped if he had kept a gun under his pillow to protect himself?
There’s no way to completely insure that you won’t get raped. I put myself out on the street to get away from my father and still ended up getting hurt again by someone else. I did my best, but wasn’t enough. It’s not fair to put the blame on the victim for not doing enough to protect him/herself, because there’s not any real way to predict stuff like that.
Most rapes are committed by family members and acquaintances of the victims, so unless you think everyone should be a hermit, then it’s probably best to focus on the rapist and how to stop him/her from perpetrating.
truthseeker, attempting to distract with any number of disparate scenarios is not going to alter the picture you have already painted.
Right Jack. Focus on how to stop him/her from perpetrating. Threatening to hurt them and preventing them from coming into contact with the one they are molesting is effective. And I am sorry you were sexually abused. You have me all wrong. If I were there and I found out about it I would not have tried to sweep it away or blamed you; and I would have confronted the abuser and put a stop to it.
Great non-answer Reality…….
It says all that is necessary.
Lol you wouldn’t blame me, you’d probably just tell me all the things I could have done to prevent it and make sure I knew that if I had made other decisions it would have stopped or not happened. ;)
I don’t think you’re a bad guy truthseeker, I have no doubt if you knew about a sexual assault or abuse happening you’d try to stop it. I’m just rather dumbfounded you can’t see how speculating about what a rape victim should have done differently is blaming them, and I don’t know how you can’t see how it’s wrong to invent a backstory about someone for the express purpose of blaming them for a fatal rape committed against them. It’s giving me a headache.
Jack,My wife was sexually assaulted in a parking garage at U of I Circle campus one night. I am dumbfounded because you think that telling her she should have avoided being alone in parking garages at night is blaming her for having been raped. And the ‘backstory’ about Mr. Oganga was just a conduit that allowed me to express what I see as rational reasons to avoid polygamy. It wasn’t to blame the man for being raped that night. If you are truly interested in finding out why you are dumbfounded the answer this question and maybe I can use your answer to show you how you are ‘projecting’ false assumptions about what I say.”What if I said that this man should have had a gun under his pillow to protect himself. Would you think I was blaming him for the rape because he should have had a gun to protect himself? Or would you think that I believe he could have had a better chance of not being raped if he had kept a gun under his pillow to protect himself?
Oh my goodness.
Making up things about that guy was not okay. You can express your feelings about polygamy without making up things about some dead rape victim. I don’t know why you think that’s acceptable. It’s not. How would you like it if something like that happened to your son and people made up horrible speculations about him and made jokes about his rape?
It’s not helpful to tell rape victims what they should and shouldn’t have done. You’re just as likely to get assaulted at home in your own bed as you are in a parking garage. The stranger on the street is actually a lot less likely to hurt you than family members or acquaintances. The only way to insure that you won’t be raped is to never interact with people ever again, basically. So really you’re just creating a culture of blame and fear for women mostly (because women are the ones who are usually told don’t do this and do do that), but for anyone who’s been assaulted. Like I said, I’ve been blamed a lot and I just refuse to take any more. No one gets to tell me what I should have done, because they weren’t there and I probably couldn’t have prevented anything anyway. I hope your wife understands that it wasn’t her being in the parking garage that caused the rape, it was the rapist.
And with your gun thing… there were always guns in my home growing up. Didn’t help me because I wasn’t willing to kill my dad. Many people aren’t willing to kill people they love even if the people they love repeatedly hurt them. So considering that most rapes are committed by people who are close to those they rape, I doubt guns are the “get out of rape free” card you seem to think they are. But anyway, you don’t get to tell people that they should have had a gun, or shouldn’t have walked home, or whatever. It doesn’t help, there’s no way to predict every thing that could possibly lead to you getting assaulted, and the only reason it happened was because the rapist decided it was going to happen.
Truthseeker I really wish I could get you to see what damage it does to hear over and over again that you should have done something differently, that you didn’t do the right thing, and that if you had just done this one thing you wouldn’t have been hurt. It really messes up your brain. I have dealt with a lot of self-hatred and blame, and it’s only just recently I’ve decided to just refuse to blame myself for it or accept any blame from anyone else. I can’t stand that people think it’s acceptable to continually second guess and “inform” victims of sexual violence of what they should have done or shouldn’t have done. I really wish you could see how much it hurts people.
Jack, sensitivity is not one my strengths and ‘blaming’ the victim is not something I would do though you and others might interpret things that way. But you never answered my question. I didn’t ask you if you thought that guns were the solution. I asked you to choose one of two ways that you could interpret a hypothetical something I said to a rape victim. Rather than try and get you to answer again I will just explain the reason I asked the question. When I say “this man should have had a gun under his pillow to protect himself” I do not say it to put any blame on the man, I say it because he could have had a better chance of not being raped if he had kept a gun under his pillow to protect himself. When I said this you alluded to the point also wasn’t that guns are the solution. That just tells me your are not getting my point at all. My point is that I would not say that to put blame on the man; not to argue about whether guns are the solution. I gotta go now. Peace.
Is it just me or has this thread gone completely insane?
Truth,
This man should not have to sleep with a gun in order to be safe from assault.
Your wife, and I am so sorry to hear that she was the victim of sexual assault should not have to avoid parking lots at night in order to be safe from assault.
When you tell someone what he or she should have done, you are telling them that their assault is partially their own fault. It is never ever ever my fault if I am attacked. No matter if I’m in a dark alleyway at 3am. That dark alleyway should be safe.
There are prudential things that one can do to avoid rape, but assuming that all 6 wives consented to the marriage, they are adults in an adult situation and rape is not the logical result of polygamy. Furthermore, even if one does not take the actions which are prudent, it remains the perpetrator’s fault if a crime occurs. It never becomes the fault of the victim. Ever. He shouldn’t have married 6 women, according to my belief structure, but not because the conclusion is rape! Because the conclusion is damage to the immortal soul.
Regarding my statement of 09/26/13 on another thread in which I attempted to justify Truthseeker. I hereby proclaim, afer reading further comments from TS on this thread – that he no longer has my support. I have given him the benefit of doubt but it expired 5 minutes ago.
Truthseeker please seek professional help.
No JDC,
Its definintely not just you!
TS 3:26am
I am appalled that you would tell your wife that. Yeah, maybe she shouldn’t have been alone in a parking garage at nite, maybe she had no other choice. Maybe she shouldn’t be alone in your home either since women have been sexually assaulted in the “safety” of their own homes. The problem is the predators, who can strike anywhere at any time. You remind me of the Clinton apologist I worked with who said that if Paula Jones was “any kind of a lady” she wouldn’t have looked at “it” when Clinton flashed her. Its beside the point that if he wasn’t a sick pervert he wouldn’t be flashing her.
“No JDC, Its definintely not just you!”
Excellent. I was worried for a moment that there was a slight chance I was the crazy one here.
Just imagine JDC the low I ”feel” for supporting TS in number of my posts. I need a long island iced tea to recover…
“Jack, sensitivity is not one my strengths and ‘blaming’ the victim is not something I would do though you and others might interpret things that way.”
Well I don’t think sensitivity is one of my strengths either, but there’s no excuse not to try! I don’t believe you’re intentionally blaming the victim but the fact remains you are.
“But you never answered my question. I didn’t ask you if you thought that guns were the solution. I asked you to choose one of two ways that you could interpret a hypothetical something I said to a rape victim. Rather than try and get you to answer again I will just explain the reason I asked the question. When I say “this man should have had a gun under his pillow to protect himself” I do not say it to put any blame on the man, I say it because he could have had a better chance of not being raped if he had kept a gun under his pillow to protect himself. When I said this you alluded to the point also wasn’t that guns are the solution. That just tells me your are not getting my point at all. My point is that I would not say that to put blame on the man; not to argue about whether guns are the solution. I gotta go now. Peace. ”
I know what you think you’re saying when you make statements like that. The fact remains that you’re removing responsibility from the perpetrator whether you mean to or not. I actually get where you’re coming from because it’s easy to fall into that trap of thinking and I do it a lot. “Well, if I hadn’t have done this maybe I would have been safe” no, it’s the perpetrator who made the decision regardless of my or any other crime victim’s actions.
I don’t know why you can’t see that saying “well, he probably would have been safe if he did [insert action]” is putting the responsibility to prevent the rape on the victim.
Hey “reality” – I had never thought I’d be giving you “likes.” I don’t particularly enjoy it but you’ve earned them here.
Jack, sensitivity is not one of my strengths….
NO!! Really? I’d have an easier time believing that sunflowers grow at the North Pole.
Lol Mary, you crack me up.
ts’s problem is that he’s totally locked into “20/20 hindsight” mode. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. That’s not productive, as Jack illustrates in his own case.
It’s better to concentrate on prevention. Sure, warn about dangerous places and situations, but keep our eyes peeled for the perpetrators, and how to reduce their threat.
Exactly Hans. There’s nothing wrong with being aware of your surroundings and thinking about defending yourself, but when it comes to this hindsight stuff it doesn’t help anyone, at all.
JDC welcome to the internet. It breeds crazy in even the sanest of people.
And I don’t want to accept that blame anymore. I didn’t do anything that caused anyone to violate me. I made mistakes and they don’t go away because I’ve had it rough, but neither do they mean that any of the abuse I went through was something I could have prevented or makes it my fault. I didn’t contribute to it. The people who decided to hurt me are responsible for that. People can make assumptions about what I did or what I should have done, but none of that changes the fact it wasn’t my fault.
YAY!!!! Cartwheeling across the room, Jack!
Lol thanks Prax. I will give you and Carla and Hans and a few other people credit for helping me see that, I needed to hear that it wasn’t my fault a lot before I decided I was just going to believe it. :)
Hi Hans,
Exactly. Trust your instincts (Big Joe’s No. 1 rule) and avoid situations that can make you an easy mark for a predator or that have the potential to be very dangerous, i.e. confrontations with people you don’t know. However noble your intentions, you never know how someone will react or what type of situation you can find yourself in. Predators are out there waiting, it is US that have to be careful, observant, and sensible.
I had a bizarre situation when driving to a weekend free lance job at a hospital several years ago. I was going north on Hwy X, which turned into a 30mph two lane thru a small town. I cut in front of a cattle truck then noticed he was right on my tail. I thought nothing of it because of the slower speed limit. I realized I overshot the intersection onto HwyY where I needed to turn left so I decided to pull into a parking lot and turn around back onto HwyX going south. As I turned I realized the trucker was blocking my exit! There was no mistaking what he was doing. Something I had done, however innocent, had set him off. Remembering Big Joe’s very important advice about NEVER getting into confrontations, there was no way I way going to approach this guy, which I’m sure is what he was waiting for me to do. For all I know he had a loaded gun and this was certainly not rational behavior. Thankfully I noticed another exit onto a side street and bolted, got back onto Hwy X then headed for Hwy Y. Hwy Y was dark, desolate, and few vehicles and I never took my eyes off the rearview mirror, even though I was sure he could never get that rig turned around in time to catch me.
All the way to the hospital I was thinking of that movie “Duel” starring Dennis Weaver, you can see it on Youtube and expected to see that cattletruck bearing down on me at any minute.
It was a terrifying experience but it shows how easily you can wind up in a very threatening situation and that very bizarre and dangerous people walk this earth. I honestly don’t know what I would have done if there hadn’t been that side exit. I probably would have been forced to make a run for it to the nearest gas station.
Omg truckers. Have you ever seen the movie “Joy Ride” Mary? It’s freaky. You’ll never look at truckers the same lol.
Hi jack,
No I haven’t but will check it out, thank you. I hope you will check out “Duel”. The full movie is on youtube. Thankfully I didn’t continue on Hwy X north as that again turned into open highway and who knows what could have happened, since I had no idea this guy was after me. He could easily have forced me off the road or trapped me.
When my situation happened cell phones were not common. Now I woud dial 911 ASAP!
Yeah I might check it out, I like horror and thriller movies (though gore is just boring, some good psychological horror is where it’s at).
I find nothing creepier than people stalking others in cars, I can’t imagine what a helpless feeling that would be, especially in the era before cell phones. My ex-wife was followed by a car this one time when she was walking about 3 miles home from work. She used to work evening shifts so she’d get off work around ten pm, and I couldn’t walk her home because I was home with the sleeping kids. She couldn’t see who was in the car because they stayed about a block behind her at all times, and there wasn’t any traffic to force them to speed up. Luckily she had a cell phone so she called me, I tried to convince her to call 911 but she didn’t want to because they hadn’t done anything wrong. When she was like three blocks from home I came outside and started walking (half-running, I was worried, we didn’t live in a nice neighborhood), and they just sped off when they saw me. I had one of my guns on me just in case but thankfully I didn’t have to use it. I think they were just pervy guys checking her out, she is really hot, but you never know and that’s totally inappropriate behavior even though they never did anything bad to her. My ex was so freaked out that for the next couple months I just put the kids in the stroller while they were sleeping and walked her home from work every night. And yet I still couldn’t convince her to carry a gun or pepper spray at least!
Though I am sure there are some people who would blame my wife for walking home from work without a weapon, if something had happened, if the follower hadn’t driven off when they saw me. It wouldn’t have been anyone’s faults but the perpetrator if she had gotten raped or mugged or anything like that. She didn’t do anything wrong by walking home from work. And I’m sure some people would have tried to blame you Mary, if that man had gotten hold of you somehow.
I’m just tired of that attitude. It seems like people will do anything to make the victims feel responsible. A lot of people think that sex crimes against those in the sex industry are less serious than those against “good” people, because (this is an actual quote that I’ve heard) “how can you force someone who is selling it?”. I know people think that drug addicts and dealers deserve harm, even to the point of shrugging off sexual assaults committed against them if they get put in jail. “Maybe they’ll learn to stop selling drugs if they have that happen”. People blame women who are intoxicated, or men who weren’t able to fight (I’ve heard that a lot, from my ex and my mom and the people at my parent’s church, sometimes even been accused of “liking it” because I wasn’t able to physically fight off an attack). I just don’t understand why people do this. I’ve never met anyone who was assaulted who didn’t feel guilty and awful already, no one needs more blame. I don’t see what people think they are doing. It’s not helping to blame people after the fact or tell them all the things they should have done. It causes a lot of problems.
Hi jack,
You’ll like “Duel” because it is all suspense, no gore.
Exactly, I don’t care if your ex-wife was walking down the street stark naked, NOTHING excused her being sexually assaulted. She certainly should have called 911 though, but thankfully she got home safe and sound and that’s all that matters. The police could have just sent a patrol car and if the guy didn’t bolt when they showed up they could have gotten his license plate and questioned him.
BTW my brother told me about a woman walking home who realized she was being followed. Thinking fast, she raised her hand and yelled “Hey Joe, I’m over here”. The stalker bolted. He didn’t know if “Joe” was her elderly neighbor, an off duty cop, or a 6’4″ 300 lb foul tempered warehouseman. He was a figment of her imagination.
Oh and my brother says to keep a can of bug spray by your bedside. It works better than mace.
Yeah I wish she had called 911 too, she just didn’t want to be embarrassed if it turned out to be nothing. I should have called myself, but shamefully I hated doing something when she told me not to so I didn’t. I’m just glad she got home okay. And your friend is smart, to make up a male friend that might discourage a would-be attacker.
“Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!”
Duel is one of the best tv movies ever made. I think Spielberg was around 22, just a few years before another movie with a predator: Jaws.
LOL it was after an encounter with some pervy guys in cars that my husband took me to buy a gun. We were engaged at the time.
BTW what is it with pervy guys and cars?!
I will never join in your PC BS. I never blamed anybody for being raped. I merely pointed out that MOST of these polygamist relationships have a degree of abuse from the male towards the female. You can deny it or refuse to admit it because THIS man got raped but my saying it does not = blaming this man for being raped. That will not change me or how I behave. I will continue to escort my wife and daughters when they are out at night and counsel them it is unwise to be out alone (not cause I would blame them if they got hurt…DUHHH). I am the only voice of reason left on this thread.
And I am also probably the only one left on this thread who would actually confront the rapist and stop them from offending again. Most PC minds are also unable to confront people…instead they just like whining about things.
Let me rephrase that last post , and pull out the crap. PC minds are uneasy with confrontation so I am also probably the only one left on this thread who would actually confront a rapist and stop them from offending again.
Seriously. I never ‘blamed’ the victim and you people all piled on as if I did. Like a pack of pit bulls. Once one snips at something they all go into a rage. lol
“I am the only voice of reason left on this thread.”
Well, that’s one interpretation of what’s going on here.
I have taken note of the sensitivity rape victims have about being blamed for having acted in ways that make them in any way ‘responsible’ for having been raped. I will never make a good rape victim counselor. What I do make is a very good friend of rape victims if they need somebody to put a stop to it. All they have to do is say the word. The Lord creates us each with our own strengths and weaknesses.
“Just imagine JDC the low I ”feel” for supporting TS in number of my posts. I need a long island iced tea to recover…”
What you need Thomas is conviction in your own beliefs. Then you wouldn’t “feel” that you spending your life supporting things one day and feeling low for supporting them the next.
“I don’t know why you can’t see that saying “well, he probably would have been safe if he did [insert action]” is putting the responsibility to prevent the rape on the victim.”
Jack,
Thanks for taking the time to hash this out. Now at least I’ll know why some victims feel offended. Your sharing of your past sense of responsibility for having been raped is helping me see why you interpret what I am saying as somehow putting the blame on you. Kind of ironic but I believe it is because I don’t blame them at all that I have such a hard time understanding why they feel offended.
I do want to tell Jack that I do accept his apology above and, after having read through the thread a few more times, I see where my words were twisted quite a bit and want to make my point loud and clear.
Jack pointed out to me that I should consider that I might be wrong because he had more likes than me and some of these likes even (gasp!) come from women. Jack, you should know by now that having more people agree with you doesn’t constitute “rightness” and throwing that at me will never make me agree with you. Might does not make right (as in the case of the wives who raped their husband or as in the case of your abusive childhood). It is a very warped pack mentality and one that helps keep abortion legal in our country and causes situations like gang rape and gang beatings and murder. With that said, I am personally going to stop clicking the like square from now on in an attempt to stay out of this pack/popularity contest. Anyone who survived middle school knows that the most popular kids are not always the nicest, smartest or even the students with the most common sense. From my adult observations, often it is just the opposite and these kids can be sneaky bullies.
It has been insinuated numerous times on this thread that I don’t hold both genders accountable for consensual sex situations and this just is not true. My comments came from a point of the differences between the genders on this topic and THAT IS ALL. And there is no denying there are, on the whole, differences. My statements were not meant to get into areas of young people who have been coerced, manipulated or raped although I believe these discussions are very important as well. They just are not the point that I was coming from at the time. I was talking about your typical teenage dating relationship between opposite genders as in the story that started this thread out. Anyone who knows me, knows I am big into accountability of young people of both genders in all situations. If anyone is interested in further learning where my, and my husbands, mindsets comes from on this topic (in addition to life experiences with self and young people and prayer), please look into Theology of the Body. It comes from a place of understanding and respecting and cherishing male and female similarities and differences.
The fact remains that women are sexually harassed and raped more often by males. It is also a fact that when men are sexually harmed, it is also most often perpetrated by males. Pointing this out in no way discounts the role women play in our culture that adds and/or does nothing to improve and change these sad statistics. Nor does it mean that I don’t realize that there are women predators as well.
Most PC minds are also unable to confront people…instead they just like whining about things.
Your statement, ts, reminded me of a quote by Peter Maulin who was co-founder of the Catholic Worker. He said, “It would be a better world if those who act would also think and those who think would also act.”‘
Mary Rose said this, “We need to teach our youth self-control in things of all natures, especially sex.”
Absolutely, I have been doing this in my home, in my work at a middle school and as a volunteer teaching on this topic for almost ten years. Don’t just think about it, do it.
Thanks for accepting my apology.
I didn’t mean “more people agree with me, and so should you”, I agree that can be a bullying tactic. I just meant that other people didn’t think I was totally wrong, so maybe you could consider that I had a point. Am I the only person who reevaluates my positions if I notice that everyone’s disagreeing with me? I don’t necessarily change my mind, but I usually check and make sure I’m not being confused or saying something crazy or being inadvertently offensive. I thought everyone did that.
I don’t even really disagree with the rest of your statement. I realize there are differences. I just think that people tend to generalize too much and that causes problems, like LibertyBelle and I mentioned. From what I can tell from talking to teenage boys (though these are kids who were in horrible situations as kids, so they might be different) and from what I remember from being a teenage boy is there’s an intense amount of pressure to be “normal’ and initiate sex with girls and take it when they offer it. Nobody wants other people to think they’re gay or a loser or all the other things that kids like to call each other. And plus it can bleed over into marriages like LibertyBelle stated with hers, where it causes confusion and pain for people who don’t fit in.
Am I the only person who reevaluates my positions if I notice that everyone’s disagreeing with me?
I do this as well. In this case, however, my position was reevaluated for me several times by several people.
“PC minds are uneasy with confrontation so I am also probably the only one left on this thread who would actually confront a rapist and stop them from offending again.”
Don’t be ridiculous, I definitely would confront a rapist. Actually I worry that I would lose control and end up seriously hurting someone if I knew a rape had occurred. I’ve confronted men for sexually harassing women on the street or at the bar, I’ve pulled some chick off my buddy when he was basically passed out and she either didn’t notice or didn’t care that he wasn’t awake. If anyone was molesting a kid or raping someone they’d stop one way or another if I found out about it. Don’t confuse wishing for sensitivity for rape victims with not wanting to confront rapists or stop them from hurting anyone. And don’t take the fact I couldn’t defend myself from stuff that happened to me with being unable or unwilling to defend other people (I don’t know if you were thinking that but just in case, don’t think that).
“Thanks for taking the time to hash this out. Now at least I’ll know why some victims feel offended. Your sharing of your past sense of responsibility for having been raped is helping me see why you interpret what I am saying as somehow putting the blame on you. Kind of ironic but I believe it is because I don’t blame them at all that I have such a hard time understanding why they feel offended.”
I honestly don’t think that you are trying to blame most rape victims. I just think you need to understand that telling people “hey, that wasn’t a good move, it probably raise your risk of being raped” after they have already been assaulted does the opposite of good. All they hear is “it’s my fault, if I had just not done this one thing he/she couldn’t have raped”. All it does is create this constant self-blame and paranoia.
– See more at: https://www.jillstanek.com/2013/09/clinic-escort-mom-blogs-about-helping-daughter-get-an-abortion/#comment-466102
Hi ts,
I have always liked you, however much we may have disagreed. I just found your statement to your wife appalling. Believe me, you’re not telling her anything she hasn’t tormented herself with time and again, in addition to her physical and emotional trauma. This horror could have occured on your living room floor as well as in an empty parking garage.
As I said the predators are out there waiting. WE are he ones that must be vigilant. However none of us is immune, however careful we may be.
I
“I do this as well. In this case, however, my position was reevaluated for me several times by several people.”
I’m sorry you felt ganged up on. I didn’t intend that at all.
Thanks, Jack.
I think I may have told a story here at one point about getting into a heated discussion with one of the old regulars at a bar I used to work at.
We got on the topic of date rape and I talked about the “friend” who raped me after I went out drinking with him and went back to his apartment. The old regular basically told me what a fool I had been and what did I think the young man was looking for by buying me drinks and taking me to his home? In my defense, I told old regular that my 19 year old drunk self thought that the rapist really liked me and wanted to further get to know me — but not in a sexual way. The rapist also knew that I wanted to wait until marriage and I knew this young man for years.
The old regular is also an alcoholic. There were several times where he knew his wife was picking him up so he would drink to the point of barely being able to function to say nothing of drive. I pointed this out to the regular and said I could have easily taken his wallet and car keys when he was in his drunken stupor instead of protecting them and giving them to his wife and that he should think of that the next time he drank to excess.
After all, what did he think I was really looking for?
I like how you turned that around. Some people don’t realize that they trust people (even people they don’t know very well) all the time with various things, and normally nothing bad comes out of it. It’s when the other person makes the decision to be an abuser that the abuse or rape happens, not because the victim decided to trust them. It’s a very important point that people don’t seem to get.
I like the cab or bus driver analogy. You get into a taxi cab or bus, a perfect stranger is driving, and you trust that they’ll simply take you to your destination, not assault or rob you. People do this every day with no ill effects. But say one day the person driving the cab is a rapist or thief or something of that nature, and instead of taking you to your destination decides to assault or rob you. That doesn’t mean you did anything wrong by taking a cab or riding the bus, it means that someone else decided to commit a crime. It really could happen to anyone, and it doesn’t mean the victims did anything wrong by living their lives. This isn’t to say that people who for whatever reasons stay in abusive homes did anything bad either, I could have left knowing that abuse would continue if I didn’t, but I was a kid without really anywhere else to go. I should have been safe with my own parents, parents aren’t supposed to be like that. People have to understand that even if people aren’t making particularly prudent decisions that doesn’t mean they are putting themselves at risk, the rapist is the one who makes the situation bad.
I should have been safe with my own parents, parents aren’t supposed to be like that.
Absolutely. When I left my abusive marriage a common theme from others was, why did you stay so long? Spouses aren’t suppose to be like that either. I stayed until I realized that staying was actually enabling him, not helping him.
Seeing and hoping for the best in folks in not necessarily a bad thing. But it sure can cause a lot of pain. But I still think it’s better than trusting no one and looking over your shoulder every second.
Yeah people tend to judge people pretty harshly for staying in abusive situations. My ex does a lot (which is hilarious because she is completely blind to her own abusive behavior, and it wasn’t just me making her mad, she’s the same way with the new boyfriend). Some people like her are of the opinion if someone’s bothered by the abuse they would just leave. Which completely ignores all kinds of things, like those who stay because they love the person and want to help them, or those who are stuck with kids and no money, or multiple other reasons. And it doesn’t mean someone can hit you just because you haven’t left them! I pointed out to her once that at point she had shut off my phone, I had no job and she didn’t let me have access to any money she made, I had the kids that she threatened to keep if I left, she had made sure right soon after we got married that I didn’t get to talk to my friends anymore so I had no social support. It was easier said than done than to “just leave if you don’t like it”. And I think it’s common for abusive people to do such things and isolate people, so it’s not really fair to blame the victim for not being able to get out.
Mary, I don’t think you heard what I said in the proper context and things do tend to get misundrstood online though. My wife was abused before I even knew her. She told me she doesn’t like being in parking garages alone at night. I told her she shouldn’t be alone in parking garages at night. There was no animosity in my saying it, only love. Far from appalling.
Especially online…people tend to hear these posted tid-bits and project all kinds of things that were never really stated. Nobody asked when I told her or asked what the context of the conversation was. Just venom. But I understand where it came from. And I hold no grudge for a rape victims defensiveness. I just would think that as long as I have been posting here most would know I never treated a victim that way. It is interesting and rather amazing how my trial by bloggers had me convicted.
How many rape victims does it take to ruin a joke about a polygamist who got gang-raped to death by his wives?
As many that have their PTSD triggered, I suppose. It is usually best to avoid rape jokes unless you know your audience won’t be harmed by them.
truthseeker,
I was going to speak up that I didn’t remember you actually “scolding” your wife about that situation. I just usually stay out of these little arguments. What’s the use? I seem to see what both sides are saying, but everyone is so miffed they can’t see that they don’t disagree as much as that they don’t like the way it’s being said.
I think that maybe emotions and personal experiences really had a strong impact on the direction in which this thread went.
I’m sorry if I (definitely unintentionally) aided in the twisting of any of the posts.
That said, there are certain comments above which condone, defend, or otherwise indicate approval of callous, offensive, or derogatory remarks. I think that we should all-myself included-reconsider certain comments we made.
My takeaways are these:
-re-read what other people post, give them the benefit of the doubt, and slow my roll emotionally
-regarding subject matter, there are distinct differences between guys and girls. This does not mean a free pass for any gender. However, we should also not discount the inherent differences. Prudence calls for consideration of human nature as well as acceptance of the ‘exception that makes the rule’.
-While there are things one can do to avoid being in a bad circumstance more readily, it is not helpful to tell someone what they should have done. It is, however, entirely possible to encourage someone to avoid being in a compromising situation in the future.
-Agreement doesn’t equal correctness, but others’ insights-especially the insights of those we know to be considerate and wise commenters-can aid us in assessing our own thoughts and wisdom. Although popular doesn’t mean right, lots of questioning can aid us in seeing things from a broader perspective.
I hope everyone who I have misrepresented or ‘flown off the cuff’ at can accept my apologies. I also hope that we can all take away lessons from this (insane!) thread.
“How many rape victims does it take to ruin a joke about a polygamist who got gang-raped to death by his wives? “
None. The joke ruined itself with it’s own unfunniness.
How many women who regret their abortions does it take to ruin a joke about an abortionist who died from getting stabbed in the back of the neck with a Metzenbaum scissors?
Making a joke at the expense of the perpetrator is NOT the same thing as making jokes at the expense of the victim, truthseeker. It REALLY disturbs me you don’t seem to get that.
How many men with gonorrhea does it take to ruin a joke about sexual jihad in Syria?
Now you’re just being creepy.
Creepy…that’s an improvement from basher of rape victims.
ts,
I reread your post. Its very straight forward as to what you said you told her. “she should have avoided being alone in parking garage at night”, not that your wife has a very understandable fear of such places. I still find that comment very troubling but I will however give you the benefit of the doubt.
Thanks for the word of confidence Hans. It helps to have armadillo like skin.
Jack,My wife was sexually assaulted in a parking garage at U of I Circle campus one night. I am dumbfounded because you think that telling her she should have avoided being alone in parking garages at night is blaming her for having been raped.
Well, all right then, ts. Though it sounds like a hyptothetical question, it also sounds like it would have been piling on after the assault. Wouldn’t it have been better to have said (if you were there shortly after), “from now on…?”
But even then it would have to be some time after. Prevention, not recrimination.
Truthseeker, when you literally make a joke about a rape, directed at the victim, why are you surprised when people take offense and say you’re bashing rape victims? I seriously don’t understand where your head is at.
I would think it to be appalling if somebody told my wife should have been in the parking garage alone that night; but I don’t really think you are that kind of a person either so I will give you the benefit of the doubt too.
ts,
The kind of person I am is one who would hold the attacker responsible for his actions. Your wife has the right to go where she wants when she wants and not be victimized in any way.
So am I Mary. Like I said above more times than you can count on both hands.
This has officially become the most ridiculous thread I’ve read on this site.
Truth I can see that you really care about stopping perpetrators and protecting victims, I don’t see why you think making jokes about the victims is okay though. I’m not even being sarcastic or anything, it’s just a weird dichotomy I don’t understand. Personally I would like to stop perpetrators AND ideally not make fun of victims.
I still think the most ridiculous thread was the “contraceptive users might as well be having gay orgies” thread.
when you literally make a joke about a rape, directed at the victim, why are you surprised when people take offense and say you’re bashing rape victims?
Jack, do you think my joke might have offended the victim? Is it safe to say that the muslim men who become polygamists do so because they want a lot of sex?
Well dead men don’t take much offense to things, so I’ll go with no. But it tells me something about you, at least.
The subject of the comment was the irony of a polygamist with six wives dying died from too much sex. The fact that he was raped was not the focus of the joke nor even mentioned in the joke so I didn’t see the comment as the bashing of rape victims.
Oh my gawd. Around and around we go. No more.
I take that back. The rape was mentioned in the joke. It just wasn’t the focus and I wasn’t making fun of the rape. I was pointing fun at a polygamist dying from too much sex with his wives. I am done too.
Wait, we are only 27 comments away from 400
That’s EXACTLY like making fun of a promiscuous girl or guy dying during a rape. But whatever, thread’s over. I’m unsubscribing to remove the temptation to comment more.
No its not.
Learning,
The thread began coming off the rails since I insisted that minors having sex was improper. Then I cracked a joke about a polygamist whose wives tied him up and forced sex on him till he died and from the responses I got you’d think I was one of the people who raped him. Then I was told that it was appalling that I told my wife she shouldn’t have been alone in the parking garage the night she was sexually assaulted; by people who were not aware that I was just agreeing with her sentiment that she doesn’t like being alone in parking garages..especially at night. People are hungry for blood.
One who spares words is knowledgeable; one who is cool in spirit has understanding. Even fools who keep silent are considered wise; when they close their lips, they are deemed intelligent.
-Proverbs 17:27-28
And with that, I’m out.
Actually truthseeker, most of your efforts went into apportioning blame to, and demanding the punishment of, males in cases of minors having sex. Then you tried to distract attention from that fact.
Good advice MaryRose. I need to get back into my real world anyway. God Bless All.