Letters to the Editor
-
re: Parson Jim
Can you explain what this has to do with the Broadsheet post?
-
@AKA Smith, and the age of consent...
I have no idea why you think this post is about the age of consent.
This post is about what happens between consenting adults.
There are states and countries in which the age of consent is 14, and while that seems shockingly young to me, I recognize that that could just be because of the way I was brought up and where I was brought up. There are states and countries in which the age of consent is 18.
I don't give a shit about the age of consent.
What I care about is the age that people take responsibility for their choices.
I believe that kids that can be sent to war should be able to drink and fuck and vote.
I believe that kids that can drink and fuck and vote can take responsibility for their actions.
I believe women can do anything they goddamned choose to do.
I don't believe women need protection from some oppressive patriarchy.
I am a feminist.
You are not. You keep on explaining to us all that you think that young girls should be able to drink, fuck, and dress how they like, but with that comes no personal responsibility for who they fuck or what they drink or how much they drink.
Good luck with that Agent Smith, because as others have noted, your wishes, are pretty much what will get these kids weeded out in a Darwinian manner.
You portray these young kids as idiots that need protection from men and society.
Why then should society give allow them their choices?
My kids know that if they want to use the gameboy they need to show me they are responsible and won't leave it in the car, or leave it turned on. They know that if they want to read in bed late at night, it's their responsibility to turn the light off after the chapter ends. They know that if they want to leave the table early, they have to ask permission, and bring their dishes to the sink.
My kids will know that if they start fooling around at a party with some guy they just met, and that if both of them are drinking, and that if they pass out, then quite literally they are going to be fucked, and yes, if it is rape, I will do what I can to get the SOB tossed in jail, but they will still be fucked, and that they don't have Magical Vaginal Peace Rays to ward off STDs and babies and violent people, and I will console them, but I will also ask them what the fuck they were doing getting that drunk because they were acting like idiots.
My kids will know this ahead of time. And they will know that sex is a very fuzzy form of communication fraught with miscommunication. And they will know not to demand that men read their minds. And they will know not to pass out on the party floor.
And I think that will keep them safe from rape.
Now you on the other hand, are going to tsk tsk tsk about the brutes that raped your daughter and wail about the Patriarchy even as she dressed however she pleased, drank however she wanted, made out with whomever she wanted. You will wail about the evil Patriarchy, and you will yell at Rambling Rose who wants to know who taught your daughter to be such a dumbshit and act like a tramp.
Please don't tell me I'm a coward. The coward is the person unwilling to parent their children into becoming adults and then blame men for all the sexual woes in the world and demand society place them on never ending always expanding lists.
-
A previous AKA Smith post professing ignorance of the obvious
"Good link. Parson Jim never did come through for us when asked for a link about sentencing disparity between male and female teachers who molest their students."
-
@ Parson Jim
I have a lot of sympathy for you. I actually think you are and interesting person and would have an interesting story to tell if you stopped hating long enough to tell it.
Or maybe you need to decide who you want to hate:
Do you want to hate women?
Or do you want to hate pedophiles?
Or do you only want to hate female pedophiles?
Do you think hating female pedophiles somehow makes male pedophiles less dangerous?
Are you only concerned when boys are molested?
If this is so, what about when men molest boys?
If I say we should raise the age of consent to affect statuatory rape laws so that a woman who is 23 serves time for having sex with a boy who is 17, will you agree with me?
Did you read the link Splendide posted from Slate? If so, what do you think of it?
I would like you to read this link:
http://www.ocweekly.com/news/news/hot-for-teacher/24343/
The author made me really angry. It is about a case you posted about. I would like to know what you think about it.
I think we could have a really interesting conversation -- but you have to willing to converse.
-
Good morning Allie.
You said: "Doesn't absolve whoever touches you of whatever crime they might commit."
That is really all I wanted to hear. The actions of the victim -- even if irresponsible -- does not absolve the perpetrator. And yet we still act as if they somehow mitigate what the perpetrator does. The problem is that people think this way on juries. Remember the old phrase, "She was asking for it?" Do we really want juries thinking this way?
Juries are just people. They bring their fears and their prejudices with them to their deliberations.
My feeling is that Stepp's article is a form of victim-blaming. I cannot know for sure until I read the actual article, so today for the first time in years, I am actually going to buy Cosmopolitan, a magazine that I think is generally yucky so that I can read the original article.
Never have I said that young women should get shit-faced and pass out at parties. I don't actually recommend it. However, if one should and be raped, the fact that she behaved irresponsibly would not affect one bit the guilt of someone who raped her in my mind.
My point is that we must allow adults to make their own sexual choices. I really don't see how we can to otherwise and remain a free society. It is really very far in the mind of a victim blamer from saying, "You got drunk, you led him on, and then you had no right to tell him to put on the brakes" to saying "What the hell were you thinking by walking at night. You got what you deserved."
I think you take my point, because just a few days ago, you were arguing that there is nothing wrong with the risky behavior of picking up strangers in bathrooms. You were passionately defending people who did it. So how come the gay man gets a pass but the heterosexual woman doesn't?