Category Archives: age of consent

CSA Victimology: Delusional, Ludicrous, Malignant

19 Wednesday Apr 2023

Posted by in Abigail Simon, age of consent, CSA victimology, Uncategorized, women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Carol Tavris briefly summarizes, satirically with the phrase “we all know,” a dogma of the “child sexual abuse industry”: “Teenagers, whom we all know have no sexual feelings of any kind until they are 16 (at which time they magically become mature adults) are incapable of wishing to have sexual relations, so if they do have sexual relations before age 16, said relations must be oppressive, traumatic, and coerced.” (Carol Tavris, “The Uproar Over Sexual Abuse Research and its Findings,” Society, May/June 2000, p. 15.)

Tavris is wrong about one detail. For most CSA victimologists, the magical age is now 18 and was so when she wrote this in the year 2000. To quote Rind et al. in The Skeptical Inquirer

…Who is a “child”? CSA came to include any kind of sexual encounter between a minor under age eighteen and someone five or more years older. And what is “abuse”? Victimologists began with rape and incest, but then stretched definitions of CSA to include non-contact episodes (e.g., flashing), sex between children of differing ages, and episodes of mature adolescents willingly participating in sex with older teens or adults. Yet they maintained that all these encounters were traumatizing, using dramatic analogies such as slavery, head-on car crashes, being mauled by a dog, and torture to convey their belief about CSA’s nature.(“The Condemned Meta-Analysis on Child Sexual Abuse: Good Science and Long-Overdue Skepticism,” The Skeptical Inquirer, July/August 2001, 68-72.)

CSA victimologists and those they’ve inculcated believe that “(a) CSA causes harm, (b) the harm is pervasive in the population of persons with a history of CSA, (c) this harm is likely to be intense, and (d) CSA is an equivalent experience for boys and girls in terms of its widespread and intensely negative effects (emphasis added).The media has created “the image that CSA produces intensely negative effects for all its victims” and “some have attempted to explain much or all of adult psychopathology as a consequence of CSA.”  (Bruce Rind, Robert Bauserman, and Philip Tromovitch, “A Meta-Analytic of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples,” Psychological Bulletin, 1998, Vol. 124, p. 22.)

For debunking such idiocies in their infamous study, for telling the truth and stating the facts and noting the obvious and living in the real world, Rind et al. were unanimously condemned by the United States Congress. Yes, there was not one dissenter, not one heretic! Differentiating between pubescents under age 18 and young children and between males and females -e.g., contrasting the incestual rape of a 5-year-old girl with “the willing sexual involvement of a mature 15-year-old adolescent boy with an unrelated adult…(Rind, p. 23.)”- was “perhaps the researchers most inflammatory finding (Tavris).”

CSA victimologists on the right as well as the left were outraged by their contention that biological men under age 18 are innately different from adolescent girls and thus far more likely to react positively to sexual encounters with adults of both sexes -with Dr. Laura and her ilk viewing this distinction as insidiously condoning the pervasive abuse and exploitation of underage male teenagers by adult homosexuals.

Grotesque, Howling, Psychotic Nonsense

19 Wednesday Apr 2023

Posted by in Abigail Simon, age of consent, CSA victimology, Uncategorized, women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Unlike the scientific, apolitical, non-ideological Rind et al. study, Harris Mirkin’s notorious article (for which he almost lost his job at the University of Missouri-Kansas City) is full of leftist nonsense, fashionable and unfashionable. Nevertheless, surprisingly for a leftist, he accurately describes the bizarre and pernicious dogmas of CSA victimologists:

In the same way as adolescents are merged with little children, all sexual activity is equated with violent or coerced activity. Issues of control in the sexual area are treated differently from those in other areas. Pubescents and adolescents are usually thought of as hard to control, and attempts to mold their behavior and initiate them into legal and enjoyable adult activities are considered valuable. However, in the sexual area these assumptions are reversed. It is asserted that they are easily controlled, and they are conceptualized as little children who have no sexual desire of their own and can only be passive victims. According to the dominant formulas the youth are always seduced. They are never considered partners or initiators or willing participants even if they are the hustlers.

It is argued that they cannot give consent, that they cannot enjoy sex even if they think that they do, and that they suffer physical and psychological harm even if they are not aware of it. Contradictory symptoms (like heightened or reduced sexual desire) are attributed to childhood sexual experiences. All future evils will be attributed to past experiences of child abuse, while all future good things that are done will be attributed to overcoming the effects of child abuse, incest, or molestations…Moreover, harmful effects that come from social attitudes toward intergenerational sex are confounded with harmful effects that come from the acts themselves. (Harris Mirkin, “The Patterns of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality, and Pedophilia,” ipecweb/Library, 6-6-2003, p. 9.)

What he means, I assume, is that “harmful effects” that putatively “come from the acts themselves” actually “come from social attitudes toward intergenerational sex,” i.e., the dogmas of CSA victimology that he describes in the quoted paragraphs.

The Witch-Burning of Abigail Simon

18 Sunday Sep 2022

Posted by in "anarcho-tyranny", "traumatization", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, Cassandra, Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, Melissa Bittner, MRAs, "men's movement, sex offender registry, statutory rape, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

On Nov. 26, 2014, in Grand Rapids, MI, Abigail Simon (a former math tutor at a Catholic high school) was convicted at trial of three counts of “first-degree criminal sexual conduct,” a felony with a maximum sentence of 25-years to life in prison and a mandatory minimum of 8-25 years, for allegedly having sex with a  male student who, according to her testimony in court and statements to SVU detectives and prosecutors when interrogated,  was not only the aggressor in their sexual intrigue but also forced himself on her 3 times and “controlled her life” by threats and manipulation; and also the felony of “accosting a minor for immoral purposes” for exchanging hundreds of emails and text messages with her “victim,” a 6’3″, 220 lb. biological man of 15 and football star who initially confessed to authorities and also testified under oath at a pretrial hearing that Abigail’s version of what occurred was true but later recanted and claimed not only that he didn’t force himself on her but also that she was the initiator of their liaison and controlled the action and relationship. She told the authorities and testified in court that she responded to his hundreds of emails and text-messages to keep him away from her because she didn’t want to have sex with him and was afraid of him for the reasons above.

So what occurred, exactly? Who is telling the truth and who is lying? Only one of them or both to some degree? Only Abigail and her “victim,” nameless and faceless, know the answers, And I’m sure their memories, and interpretations of same, differ.

According to a man who believed her testimony and was thus sympathetic to Abigail, commenting on the internet after her conviction, he recanted and changed his story after being threatened with charges of rape by prosecutors who were 100% certain that Abigail was “guilty” and wanted to prosecute her not only for “accosting a minor for immoral purposes,” a felony with a maximum-sentence of 4-years in prison and other mandatory punishments, but also “first-degree criminal sexual conduct.”

On Jan. 14, 2015, the judge was “merciful,” imposing the mandatory-minimum sentence of “only” 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle tether/”bracelet and public sex-offender registration. He conceded that she was not a “predator” who was likely to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under statutory age much less commit violent and other mala in se crimes, and that her “victim” also knew that their intrigue was “wrong” and was thus “partly responsible,’ even if he didn’t rape her and “control her life” by threats and manipulation.  Thus he was not a CSA victimologist, fanatical and dogmatic, at her sentencing. (This would later change, as we’ll see, for whatever reasons.) But he had no choice, no “discretion” to impose a sane and “just” and rational and proportionate sentence, a sentence that would blight but not destroy her life.

Even if he had such discretion, however, he probably would have sentenced her to 4-6 years in prison if not longer rather than “only” 6-12 months in jail or 1-2 years in prison, knowing the hysteria and outrage that such “leniency” would provoke not only in Grand Rapids and Michigan but nationwide: near universal condemnation, publicly and privately, indignation and rebukes and tirades from CSA victimologists, their votaries and voices in the mass media, and the tens of millions of people they’ve browbeat and/or brainwashed, including politicians, police, and prosecutors, judges and jurors. And also MRAs, the misogynist crazies and liars of the soi-disant “men’s movement,” and millions of people, overwhelmingly males of course but more females than one would expect, whom they’ve vitiated and duped to various degrees with their woman-hating vitriol and mendacity. And, probably, a fusillade and torrent of hate-mail, possibly including death threats,, and perhaps even assaults and/or vandalism.

Under the law and to many if not most people, in fantasy as opposed to reality, she was so dangerous, such a “threat to society” and all the children of Michigan, that she couldn’t be released on bond but had to be enslaved in jail for almost two months before sentencing. At her sentencing, in a drab unisex denim jumpsuit, with no makeup, her medium-brown hair in a pony-tail with the blonde “highlights” faded, in handcuffs attached to a waist-chain and leg-irons for well over 2-hours, so debilitated and mortified by fear and shame (not for her “crimes,” but the chains, the crowd, the circus, the cameras, etc.) and despair and lack of sleep that she could barely walk or even stand and almost collapsed twice, she appeared to be on the verge of a “nervous breakdown” after “only” 7-weeks in jail.

Imagine her feelings, the excruciating torment, the emotional torture, the profound and crushing debasement, the inquisitorial cruelty, the powerlessness and desperation: chained like a wild beast or a feral male criminal,  a low-IQ savage and/or psychopath, big and fast and strong, violent and dangerous, and possibly deranged; shackled in handcuffs attacked to a waist-chain and leg-irons for over two hours for no exigent and practical reason, e.g., to prevent her from trying to escape and/or assaulting people, possibly causing serious injuries, and with two guards, a male and female, standing behind her, grim and vigilant, armed with guns and tasers and pepper spray. All unnecessary to protect anyone from anything. Gratuitous abuse and cruelty and degradation, pure and simple.

In contrast, when sentenced to death for the car-jacking, abduction, “false imprisonment,” gang-rape, sadistic beatings, torture, mutilation, and murder of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian, Lemaricus Davidson was in street clothes and he wasn’t shackled, though he was clearly a threat to assault the police and guards, probably trying to wrest the gun from one of them, probably a female -and, if successful, he could have shot and killed people before he was shot and killed or wounded and incapacitated; or to attack with his fists and feet the prosecutors, his lawyers, the victim’s parents, even the judge, possibly causing serious injuries before he was overpowered, incapacitated, probably by the use of a taser and pepper spray, subdued and shackled. I suggest you watch videos on youtube.com of courtroom mayhem and violence, altercations involving two or more people, punching, kicking, grabbing, the use of chairs as weapons, mostly between rapists and murderers and the families of their victims one can reasonably assume.

Incredibly, this subhuman beast and monster was afforded and treated with far more dignity and respect than was Abigail at her sentencing for a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum felony, assuming she was guilty of such and lying about her “victim” raping and terrorizing her And so, too, were the other savages and monsters who were sentenced not to death but to decades in prison for one of the most gruesome, sadistic, hideous, sickening, depraved, horrific, ghastly, hellish, “unspeakable,” and “heinous” crimes in all of U.S. and world history.

(In a sane and just and rational country, they would have all been executed well over 10-years ago and Abigail would not have even been charged with a crime and surely not a felony. She would have been punished, non-criminally, by dismissal and the revocation of her license and expulsion from the profession for 5-10 years. Or, at worst, charged with a misdemeanor, however defined, and sentenced to probation (and perhaps house-arrest) until her “victim” turned 16, the generic age of consent in MIchigan, No prison, no jail, no quasi-totalitarian surveillance, no “sex-offender treatment,” no electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet,” no public sex-offender registration. And that assuming she’s lying about her “victim” being the victimizer.)

And, in chains for over 2-hours, she was forced to hear the SVU detectives, prosecutors, various “experts,” CSA victimologists,” the “victim’s” mother, etc., demonize and vilify her as a monster and degenerate,  a “sexual predator,” “child molester,” “child sexual abuser,” possibly even a “rapist” and “pedophile”; and her “victim,” a biological man of 15 who enjoyed the sex more than she did irrespective of the facts and whether or not he forced himself on her, defined and pitied as a “victim” of “rape” and CSA who is “traumatized,” devastated, and “scarred for life,” a depiction of the crime and actors that is not only false but execrably and ludicrously so.

She, not her “victim,” will be traumatized, devastated, and scarred for life.

And the “victim’s” mother, vicious in her lust for vengeance, implored the judge to be “severe in his sentencing,” i.e., to impose the maximum sentence of 25-years to life. Obviously, she knew that the judge had no choice but to sentence Abigail to 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution. So to her, “only” 8-25 years in prison was too lenient for a woman who “used” a “child” for her “perverted desires” in a state and country in which violent and/or recidivist male criminals are repeatedly and systematically coddled. How crestfallen and outraged she must have been when the judge abjured her pleas and sentenced Abigail to “only” 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution.

In a poll,, conducted by local Media, over 10% of respondents thought her sentence was too indulgent! And roughly 30% thought it was just and rational and proportionate: a testament to the power and influence of the media and CSA victimology -and, to a lesser degree, MRAs the misogynist lunatics of the soi-disant “men’s movement,”, who believe or claim to believe, contrary to the facts, that women who “rape” biological men under age 18 are rarely sentenced to prison or even jail while men guilty of the “exact same crime” with females are almost always crucified with their lives utterly destroyed. I’m sure they were elated by Abigail’s hideously draconian sentence while expressing outrage that such “justice” for male victims is so rare as to be virtually non-existent.

8-25 years in prison for a first-offender convicted of a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum felony; 8-25 years in prison for crimes that are legal acts in dozens of other nations, including European countries; 8-25 years in prison for “crimes” in which the “victim” craves and enjoys the actus reus (i.e., the sex) far more than the woman who “rapes” and/or “molests” him and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization”; 8-25 years in prison for transporting a biological man of 15 to sexual paradise in a factually consensual relationship.

And that’s assuming she’s “guilty” and lying about his raping and terrorizing her. If her story is truthful, completely or essentially, in whole or in part, then she was sentenced to 8-25 years in prison for “sexual assault” because her “victim” sexually assaulted her – as did the “victim” of Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, who testified in court and admitted to police that he sexually harassed, molested, and raped her; and the “victim” of Melissa Bittner,” transparently innocent of sexually molesting a 16-year-old predator and criminal who sexually molested her but convicted of “sexual assault” and sentenced to prison and 20-years of public sex-offender registration.

8-25 years in prison in a country in which, during the 1990s, the decade in which the U.S. began to “get tough” on violent crime, the average time-served for murder (including non-negligent manslaughter) was less than 6-years and the average time-served for all violent crimes (aggravated assault, rape, robbery, homicide) was approximately 4-years. And these averages are even more execrable, appalling, and outrageous than they first appear, since one can reasonable assume that-90% of such felonies were committed by violent recidivists, overwhelmingly males with histories of violence and predation usually beginning at age 13 or 14, and most of whom should have been in prison rather than free to commit their latest violent felonies. And it’s likely that such averages are even lower today after 8-years of rule by Obama and Holder and Lynch and their advisors (including Al Sharpton) and appointees.

And she could have been sentenced to 25-years to life in prison for “crimes” that are legal acts in dozens of other nations, including European countries!

But a sentence of 8-25 years in prison is not punishment enough for a first-offender convicted of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibitum felonies are legal acts or misdemeanors in dozens of other nations, including European countries. Nor, given the dogmas and fantasies of CSA victimologists, is it protection enough for all the boys and girls of MIchigan and the United States, including not only biological men under the legal age of consent but also young women under statutory age and prepubertal boys and girls.

Since her conviction wasn’t overturned on appeal and the judge who sentenced her to 8-25 years and a lifetime of surveillance and persecution twice upheld her draconian and Orwellian sentence, she’ll be enslaved for 8-years, at least, and perhaps longer. But if she doesn’t die in prison she’ll still be punished until the day she dies.

When released from prison after “only” 8-years, most likely, or 10- or 12-years(?), she’ll be subjected to years of post-incarceration quasi-totalitarian surveillance, probably including years of “sex-offender treatment,” even after years of same in prison, and restrictions on her freedoms and intrusions into her private life that not ever dystopian novelists like Orwell and Kafka could have imagined or prophesized decades ago, most of which don’t apply to violent felons, including male recidivists, who’ve never been convicted of a sexual offense. For how many years must she endure such penalties? I assume she’ll be on parole for 17-years if released from prison after “only” 8-years of enslavement or 15-years if released from prison after “only” 10-years of enslavement.

And, finally, her punishment includes a life-sentence of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/” bracelet” she can never remove (not even when bathing, showering, sleeping) and registration for life as a uniquely deviant and dangerous criminal with her name, mugshot, and address on the internet for all to see with access to a computer, privately or publicly, and all which that entails in regard to danger and mortification, especially for a woman as infamous as Abigail due to weeks and months of local and state and national media coverage, tendentious and sensationalistic, surpassed only by Mary Letourneau.

All this for a first-offender convicted of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibitum felonies (found “guilty” of having sex and exchanging emails and text-messages with a 15-year-old biological man who, if she’s telling the truth as a whole or largely, raped and bullied and terrorized and manipulated her), a woman who has never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in her life and never will and is not a “threat to society” or to anyone nor even a danger to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under statutory age.

Not a single person of any age or either sex has been or will be any safer because of the imprisonment of Abigail for at least 8-years followed by decades of quasi-totalitarian surveillance and persecution. Not one violent or other serious crime has been or will be prevented or deterred by her hideously draconian/Orwellian life-sentence.

To call all of this insane is an understatement. It’s beyond insanity.

#For more details on how she’ll be punished for the rest of her life after she’s released from prison, the surveillance and penalties and laws to which she’ll be subjected until she dies, read “Abigail Simon: A Life-Sentence of Draconian/Orwellian Persecution.”

Time.com Summarizes the 22nd Most “Notorious Crime” of the “Past Hundred Years”

10 Sunday Jan 2021

Posted by in age of consent, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, innate sex differences, embodiment, maleness and femaleness, Mary Letourneau, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

What happens to a woman when she finds the man of her dreams, only he is a child? And if the woman is his teacher? American parents cringed at the story of Mary Kay Letourneau, who first met Vili Fualaau when she was his teacher in second grade. He did not start flirting with her until he was in sixth. She started to have sex with him the next year, when he was 13. Already the mother of four from a marriage that was disintegrating, she would bear the teenager’s daughter, but not before she ended up in prison on rape and molestation charges. She would then violate the rules for the suspension of her sentence by seeing him again -and becoming pregnant again. Letourneau’s beauty and struggles with manic depression made her illicit affair the fodder of tabloids and women’s magazine around the world. But there was something touching, if maddening, abut her refusal to renounce her love for the boy at the cost of her freedom. In 1998, after giving birth to her second child, she began serving a seven-year prison sentence. Released on parole in August 2004, she quickly married her young lover, who by then had turned 21. (Howard Chua-Eoan, “Mary Kay Letourneau’s Forbidden Love, 1978,” Time.com, 2007.)

Surprisingly, this account of her story is honest and accurate, neutral and objective, comparatively, in contrast to most of the media coverage, characterized and vitiated by falsehoods, intentional and unintentional, lies and canards, distortions and misinformation, rampant hysteria and tabloid sensationalism: the demonization of Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester,” a description that was/is false, objectively and scientifically, and malicious and slanderous. And the depiction, equally false, of Vili as a “victim” of “rape” and “child molestation,” tantamount or comparable to a prepubertal girl of 11 or 12 who is too young and immature to consent to or initiate sex and who is a true victim of a perverse and predatory male, an adult or underage adolescent, who rapes and molests her. The MSM as a whole was less a source of factual and objective news than an agent and myrmidon of CSA victimology propaganda and inculcation.

This journalist doesn’t refer to Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester.” Or Vili as a “victim.” He notes that he was 13, not 12, when they first had sex and that he started to flirt with her in sixth grade, conceding that he was the initiator of their sexual union but not exposing the nature and degree of his aggressions. It notes that her marriage was “disintegrating,” which implies that she didn’t destroy her marriage and betray her husband and desert her children by falling in love and having sex with Vili and twice becoming pregnant, but doesn’t mention that her marriage was “disintegrating,” primarily, because of her husband’s serial adulteries and philandering. She was finally going to divorce him after years of betrayal and infidelity, apparently, and perhaps he wanted to divorce her because he fell in love with and wanted to marry or live with another woman? And in describing her love for Vili as “touching” and her “struggles with manic depression,” he’s commiserative, mildly, rather than censorious.

It’s true that he was “only” 13, not 12, when they first had sex. But it’s also true that he was pubescent at age 10, “sexually-active” at age 12, for sure, and possibly even 11, and probably had more sexual partners, perhaps far more, at age 13 than did Mary at age 33. Raised as a Catholic, strictly and devoutly, it’s possible that the only man Mary had sex with before Vili was her husband. And Vili was the aggressor in their sexual union, forcing himself on her the first time they had intercourse. In response to my comments, she confirmed in one of the many letters we exchanged that the first time they had intercourse was “against my will.”

So, given such facts, his level of maturity was closer to that of a typical 16- or 17-old as opposed to a typical 13-year-old. In regard to maturity, the age of puberty, intelligence, sexual experience, etc, the nature of 13-year-old varies significantly. Millions of 13- and 14-year-olds, especially if pubescent at age 10 or 11 or 12, are more or far more intelligent, mature, “sexually-active,” sexually-experienced, etc., than millions of 16- and17-year-olds.

(For the record, which is pertinent, I was an atheist at age 10, when I was still a child, biologically, agnostic at 8 and 9 as I vaguely remember, and pubescent at age 11, which reveals a level of maturity far beyond my numerical age. And Vili was pubescent at age 10.)

The obligatory lie or canard that began in 1997 and continues to this day, over 20-years later, is that Mary “seduced” and “raped” the “child” and “little boy” when he was only 12-years-old. The commenters and reporters who say and write this are either lying or misinformed. Are they ignorant of the facts or are they lying to make her “crimes” appear more “heinous” and “shocking” and to give the absurd depiction and vilification of Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester” a spurious credibility and gravitas. Unlike Vili and many others, most 12-year-olds are prepubescent. Prepubertal 12-year-olds are children, biologically, whereas most 13-year-olds are pubescent, and also teenagers.

The Witch-Burning of Abigail Simon

30 Monday Mar 2020

Posted by in "anarcho-tyranny", "traumatization", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, Cassandra, Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, Melissa Bittner, MRAs, "men's movement, sex offender registry, statutory rape, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

On Nov. 26, 2014, in Grand Rapids, MI, Abigail Simon (a former tutor at a Catholic high school) was convicted at trial of three counts of “first-degree criminal sexual conduct,” a felony with a maximum sentence of 25-years to life in prison and a mandatory minimum of 8-25 years, for allegedly having sex with a  male student who, according to her testimony in court and statements to SVU detectives and prosecutors when interrogated,  was not only the aggressor in their sexual intrigue but also forced himself on her 3 times and “controlled her life” by threats and manipulation; and also the felony of “accosting a minor for immoral purposes” for exchanging hundreds of emails and text messages with her “victim,” a 6’3″, 220 lb. biological man of 15 and football star who initially confessed to authorities and also testified under oath at a pretrial hearing that Abigail’s version of what occurred was true but later recanted and claimed not only that he didn’t force himself on her but also that she was the initiator of their liaison and controlled the action and relationship. She told the authorities and testified in court that she responded to his hundreds of emails and text-messages to keep him away from her because she didn’t want to have sex with him and was afraid of him for the reasons above.

So what occurred, exactly? Who is telling the truth and who is lying? Only one of them or both to some degree? Only Abigail and her “victim,” nameless and faceless, know the answers, And I’m sure their memories, and interpretations of same, differ.

According to a man who believed her testimony and was thus sympathetic to Abigail, commenting on the internet after her conviction, he recanted and changed his story after being threatened with charges of rape by prosecutors who were 100% certain that Abigail was “guilty” and wanted to prosecute her not only for “accosting a minor for immoral purposes,” a felony with a maximum-sentence of 4-years in prison and other mandatory punishments, but also “first-degree criminal sexual conduct.”

On Jan. 14, 2015, the judge was “merciful,” imposing the mandatory-minimum sentence of “only” 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle tether/”bracelet and public sex-offender registration. He conceded that she was not a “predator” who was likely to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under statutory age much less commit violent and other mala in se crimes, and that her “victim” also knew that their intrigue was “wrong” and was thus “partly responsible,’ even if he didn’t rape her and “control her life” by threats and manipulation.  Thus he was not a CSA victimologist, fanatical and dogmatic, at her sentencing. (This would later change, as we’ll see, for whatever reasons.) But he had no choice, no “discretion” to impose a sane and “just” and  rational and proportionate sentence, a sentence that would blight but not destroy her life.

Even if he had such discretion, however, he probably would have sentenced her to 4-6 years in prison if not longer rather than “only” 6-12 months in jail or 1-2 years in prison, knowing the hysteria and outrage that such “leniency” would provoke not only in Grand Rapids and Michigan but even nationwide: near universal condemnation, publicly and privately, indignation and rebukes and tirades from CSA victimologists, their votaries and voices in the mass media, and the tens of millions of people they’ve browbeat and/or brainwashed, including politicians, police, and prosecutors, judges and jurors. And also MRAs, the misogynist crazies and liars of the soi-disant “men’s movement,” and millions of people, overwhelmingly males of course but more females than one would expect, whom they’ve vitiated and duped to various degrees with their woman-hating vitriol and mendacity. And, probably, a fusillade and torrent of hate-mail, possibly including death threats,, and perhaps even assaults and/or vandalism.

Under the law and to many if not most people, in fantasy as opposed to reality, she was so dangerous, such a “threat to society” and all the children of Michigan, that she couldn’t be released on bond but had to be enslaved in jail for almost two months before sentencing. At her sentencing, in a drab unisex denim jumpsuit, with no makeup, her medium-brown hair in a pony-tail with the blonde “highlights” faded, in handcuffs attached to a waist-chain and leg-irons for well over 2-hours, so debilitated and mortified by fear and shame (not for her “crimes,” but the chains, the crowd, the circus, the cameras, etc.) and despair and lack of sleep that she could barely walk or even stand and almost collapsed twice, she appeared to be on the verge of a “nervous breakdown” after “only” 7-weeks in jail.

Imagine her feelings, the excruciating torment, the emotional torture, the profound and crushing debasement, the inquisitorial cruelty, the powerlessness and desperation: chained like a wild beast or a feral male criminal,  a low-IQ savage and/or psychopath, big and fast and strong, violent and dangerous, and possibly deranged; shackled in handcuffs attacked to a waist-chain and leg-irons for over two hours for no exigent and practical reason, e.g., to prevent her from trying to escape and/or assaulting people, possibly causing serious injuries, and with two guards, a male and female, standing behind her, grim and vigilant, armed with guns and tasers. All unnecessary to protect anyone from anything. Gratuitous abuse and cruelty and degradation, pure and  simple.

In contrast, when sentenced to death for the car-jacking, abduction, “false imprisonment,” gang-rape, sadistic beatings, torture, mutilation, and murder of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian, Lemaricus Davidson was in street clothes and he wasn’t shackled  -although he was clearly a threat to assault the police and guards, possibly trying to wrest the gun from one of them, probably a female; and, if successful, people could have been shot or killed before he was shot and killed or wounded and incapacitated. Or he could have attacked the prosecutors, the victim’s parents, his lawyers, even the judge, possibly causing serious injuries before he was overpowered, incapacitated, probably by the use of a taser and pepper spray, subdued and shackled.

Incredibly, this subhuman beast and monster was afforded and treated with far more dignity and respect than was Abigail at her sentencing for a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum felony, assuming she was guilty of such and lying about her “victim” raping and terrorizing her And so, too, were the other savages and monsters who were sentenced not to death but to decades in prison for one of the most sadistic, hideous, gruesome, sickening, horrific, ghastly, hellish, “unspeakable” and “heinous crimes in all of U.S. and world history.

And, in chains for over 2-hours, she was forced to hear the SVU detectives, prosecutors, various “experts,” CSA victimologists,” the “victim’s” mother, etc., demonize and vilify her as a monster and degenerate,  a “sexual predator,” “child molester,” “child sexual abuser,” possibly even a “rapist” and “pedophile”; and her “victim,” a biological man of 15 who enjoyed the sex more than she did irrespective of the facts and whether or not he forced himself on her, defined and pitied as a “victim” of “rape” and CSA who is “traumatized” and “scarred for life,” a depiction of the crime and actors that  is not only false but execrably and ludicrously so.

She, not her “victim,” will be traumatized and scarred for life in fact as opposed to fantasy.

And the “victim’s” mother, vicious in her lust for vengeance, implored the judge to be “severe in his sentencing,” i.e., to impose the maximum sentence of 25-years to life. Obviously, she knew that the judge had no choice but to sentence Abigail to 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution. So to her, “only” 8-25 years in prison was too lenient for a woman who “used” a “child” for her “perverted desires” in a state and country in which violent and/or recidivist male criminals are repeatedly and systematically coddled. How crestfallen and outraged she must have been when the judge abjured her pleas and sentenced Abigail to “only” 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution. In a poll,, conducted by local media, over 10% of respondents thought her sentence was too indulgent! And roughly 30% thought it was “just” and rational and proportionate: a testament to the power and influence of the media and CSA victimology -and, to a lesser degree, MRAs.

8-25 years in prison for a first-offender convicted of a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum felony; 8-25 years in prison for crimes that are legal acts in dozens of other nations, including European countries; 8-25 years in prison for “crimes” in which the “victim” craves and enjoys the actus reus (i.e., the sex) far more than the woman who “rapes” and/or “molests” him and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization”; 8-25 years in prison for transporting a biological man of 15 to sexual paradise in a factually consensual relationship.

And that’s assuming she’s “guilty” and lying about his raping and terrorizing her. If her story is truthful, completely or essentially, in whole or in part, then she was sentenced to 8-25 years in prison for “sexual assault” because her “victim” sexually assaulted her – as did the “victim” of Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, who testified in court and admitted to police that he sexually harassed, molested, and raped her; and the “victim” of Melissa Bittner,” transparently innocent of sexually molesting a 16-year-old predator and criminal who sexually molested her but convicted of “sexual assault” and sentenced to prison and 20-years of public sex-offender registration.

8-25 years in prison in a country in which, during the 1990s, the decade in which the U.S. began to “get tough” on violent crime, the average time-served for murder (including non-negligent manslaughter) was less than 6-years and the average time-served for all violent crimes (aggravated assault, rape, robbery, homicide) was approximately 4-years. And these averages are even more execrable, appalling, and outrageous than they first appear, since one can reasonable assume that over 90% of such felonies were committed by violent recidivists, overwhelmingly males with histories of violence and predation usually beginning at age 13 or 14, and nearly all of whom should have been in prison rather than free to commit their latest violent felonies. And it’s likely that such averages are even lower today after 8-years of rule by Obama and Holder and Lynch and their advisors (including Al Sharpton) and judicial and bureaucratic appointees.

And she could have been sentenced to 25-years to life in prison for “crimes” that are legal acts in dozens of other nations, including European countries!

To call this insane is an understatement. It’s beyond insanity.

Jeffrey Epstein was not a Pedophile

06 Monday Jan 2020

Posted by in Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, innate sex differences, embodiment, maleness and femaleness, Jeffrey Epstein, Kathryn Ronk, Mary Letourneau, media coverage, sensationalism, Melissa Bittner, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Google searches for “Jeffrey Epstein, pedophile,” and “Jeffrey Epstein is a pedophile,” resulted in 1.1 million and 1.4 million results. And when reading the titles of dozens of these results, I found only one article that observed, correctly, that Epstein was not a pedophile, and explained why in some detail: “Jeffrey Epstein is a horrifying person, but that doesn’t mean he’s a pedophile,” Katie Herzog, The Stranger, 7-15-2019.

(I submit that calling Epstein and his crimes “horrifying” is just a bit excessive and hyperbolic -compared to the horrors and atrocities of the Carr Brothers and the Knoxville savages, for example, and myriads of other crimes almost no one has ever heard of because of media suppression.)

And I’m certain that nearly all of the “talking heads,” reporters and commentators, hosts and guests, on Fox and CNN and MSNBC, when discussing the Epstein case, referred to him as a “pedophile,” and I doubt that even one of them noted that he was not a pedophile. And so, too, hundreds of other TV programs, news and commentary, newspapers, local and national, and websites, prominent and obscure.

Even John Derbyshire, who once knew better, not long ago, but does no longer, apparently, referred to Epstein as a “pedophile.”

Whatever one thinks of Jeffrey Epstein and his decades of having sex with young women ages 14-17, apparently, he was not a pedophile. To quote /Wikipedia; “Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 or younger.”

And Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield:

….The DSM-TV American Psychiatric Association defines pedophilia in terms of recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children…It is therefore possible for an individual who meets these criteria to have never engaged in illegal sexual behaviors…All mental health professionals…should know this distinction. (“Special Problems with Sexual Abuse Cases,” in Coping with psychiatric and Psychological Testimony, Los Angeles Law and Psychological Press, 1995, p. 1336.)

Politicians, prosecutors, judges, journalists, reporters, commentators, all those with the power and influence, collectively and individually, to manipulate the emotions and shape the opinions of millions or even tens of millions of people, should also know this instead of provoking and misleading the public by defining adults who have sex with biological men and women under age 16 or even 18 as “pedophiles,” whether it’s Jeffrey Epstein or Abigail Simon and Mary Letourneau.

Pedophilia defines sexual desire, not criminal behavior. It’s reasonable to assume that most pedophiles, heterosexual and homosexual, have never raped or molested a prepubescent child. Thus if sexual attraction to young men and women under age 16 or even 18 is “pedophilia,” which is isn’t, then all men, heterosexual and homosexual, are pedophiles, which they are not.

Then all adult men who are attracted to young women under statutory age are “pedophiles,” just like Epstein, even if they’ve never had sex as adults with a young woman under statutory age. If Epstein was a “pedophile” for having sex with young women ages 14-17, then all adult men who desire to have sex with young women under age 18 but don’t have sex with them are “pedophiles,” but only if they’re 4-5 years older than the young women to which they’re sexually attracted, according to CSA victimologists.

Moreover, albeit the U.S. is sui generis in its hysteria over sex between adult men and women and male and female adolescents, as exemplified by the obsession with and hysteria over Epstein and his “pedophile ring” and “island/kingdom,” the generic age of consent is 16 in most jurisdictions. (Thus many or at least some of his sex-acts with girls of 16 and 17 were legal acts.) And the age of consent is 14 or 15 in dozens of other nations, including European countries.

If adult men and women having sex with young men and women ages 16 and 17 is pedophilia, but only if the adults are at least 4-5 years older than their de jure “victims,” then pedophiliac sex is legal in most states if the adult is not in a position of authority over their “victims.” And if sex between adults and young men and women ages 14 and 15 is “pedophilia,” then pedophiliac sex is legal in many other countries.

A pedophile is a man (including “older adolescents,” as noted by Wikipedia.com) with a sexual fixation on and obsession with prepubescent girls or boys. Even if women have sexual contact with prepubescent children, they aren’t necessarily pedophiles. In fact, it’s debatable if a woman can even be a pedophile under the APA definition, certainly not in the sense and to the degree that males are pedophiles, for the same reason that few if any women are fetishists, and certainly not in the male sense. To quote Ernest Becker:

This brings up the longstanding problem of why so few females are fetishists, a problem that has been solved by Greenacre and Boss. Their point is that the male, in order to fulfill his species role, has to perform the sexual act. For this he needs secure self-powers and also cues to arouse and channelize his desires. In this sense, the male is naturally and inevitably a fetishist of some kind and degree…The female does not have this problem because her role is passive…(The Denial of Death, p. 243.) Put differently, and simply, men have penises and women vaginas.

Albeit not a pedophile, Epstein was obviously a strange and profoundly disturbed man -not so much because he had sex with dozens of young women ages 14-17 but because, after he was arrested, prosecuted, convicted under a plea-bargain, and sentenced to 13 months in jail with work-release privileges, he continued to have sex with young women under statutory age, knowing that is was ineluctable, a virtual 100% certainty, that he’d be arrested and prosecuted again.

And this time, also ineluctably, the prosecutors would not have offered him so indulgent a plea-bargain and he would have pled “not guilty” and gone to trial and almost surely been convicted of who knows how many felonies. And as a repeat offender, his sentence would have been so harsh and long that he would have died in prison even if he lived into his 80s, assuming he wasn’t murdered, well before he turned 70, strangled or beaten to death as are many sex offenders, especially those convicted, innocent or guilty, of crimes against children, including teenagers.

And that’s what occurred, probably, strangled to death by another inmate with the collusion, active or passive, of the guards, shortly after he was incarcerated, assuming he didn’t commit suicide. Such outrages are a prison tradition, preventable but condoned and often facilitated and encouraged by the authorities. Men convicted of sex crimes against children and adolescents, innocent or guilty, are the most hated of all inmates and by far the most likely to be murdered.

(“No woman convicted of a sex crime has ever been killed, but they’ve been beaten, usually under the guise of another dispute,” to quote an article in NASOL, 8-13-2019. So the chances of Abigail and similar women being murdered in prison are remote since no woman convicted of a sex crime against children or teenagers has ever been murdered in jail or prison, though it’s not impossible, but not so with their being assaulted, perhaps brutally and viciously and resulting in serious injuries. And Abigail is the most infamous, and probably the most despised, of all 2000-plus inmates, and thus more likely to be assaulted than most of the other inmates in security level II.)

In stark contrast, there has never been and will never be a female Jeffrey Epstein. Not only has no women ever had sex with dozens or likely even a few young men under age 16 or 18 -but also, unlike Epstein, it’s likely that not one woman sentenced to jail or prison for having sex with a young man under statutory age has re-offended by having sex with another young man under statutory age. If so, their recidivism rate is ZERO, as noted previously.

Ominously, despite such realities, what frightens and disturbs me the most about the obsession with and hysteria over Epstein and his excoriation and vilification as a “pedophile” is that it will surely confirm and justify and probably intensify the obsession with and hysteria over adult women and especially teachers having sex with biological men under statutory age and their excoriation and vilification as “rapists” and “pedophiles” and the resultant draconian/Orwellian punishments.

Currently, in the MSM, Epstein has superseded Mary Letourneau as the most infamous and opprobrious sex criminal. But how long with that last, for prior to Epstein and after the obsession with and mass hysteria over the “priestly pedophilia crisis,” which was the first time that adult were defined, falsely, as “pedophiles” for having sex with pubescent teenagers, the media and culture was far more obsessed with and hysterical over women teachers having sex with male students than with male teachers and other adult men, including violent and/or recidivist criminals, having sex with underage adolescent girls. And Mary was the symbol and avatar of that obsession and mass hysteria, as was Abigail Simon, to a lesser degree, almost 20 years later.

Because of Epstein, I fear, adult women and especially teachers who have sex with young men under statutory age (and it’s now a felony in most states for teachers to have sex with 18-year-old students) will be more rather than less likely to receive hideously draconian/Orwellian sentences. There will be more rather than fewer Abigails, Kathryn Ronks, Cassandra Sorenson-Grohalls, Shannon Schmeiders, Michelle Taylors, Melissa Bittners, Brittany Zamoras, etc.

In a Sane and Just and Rational Country

14 Monday May 2018

Posted by in "anarcho-tyranny", "sex-offender treatment", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, sex offender registry, Uncategorized, women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

In a sane and just and rational country, women teachers who have sex with students, almost always young men ages 13-18, would be punished, non-criminally, by dismissal and revocation of their licenses and expulsion from the profession, whether for 5-10 years or for life depending on the facts and circumstances, “aggravating” and “mitigating.”.Or, at worst, charged with misdemeanors, however defined, and sentenced to 6-12 months of probation and perhaps 50-100 hours of some kind of community service: no prison, no jail, no “sex-offender treatment,” no quasi-totalitarian supervision, no electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” they can never remove (not even when sleeping, bathing, showering, having sex with a spouse or paramour), no registration for life or at least 20-30 years as uniquely deviant and dangerous criminals -all this for first-offenders convicted of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibita “crimes,” women who’ve never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in their lives and never will and are not a “threat to society” or to anyone or even a danger to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under statutory age, the only crime in which the “victim” enjoys the actus reus (i.e., the sex) far more than the woman who “rapes” and “molests” him under the law and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical victimization.

If he had been 16 rather than 15, just a few months and/or weeks older….

13 Friday Apr 2018

Posted by in "anarcho-tyranny", "sex-offender treatment", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, Kathryn Ronk, sex offender registry, Uncategorized, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The generic age of consent is 16 in Michigan. If Abigail’s “victim” had been 16 rather than 15, just a few months and/or weeks older, and she had not been his tutor, their affair would have been legal under Michigan Law -and that’s assuming she’s lying about his forcing himself on her, in which case she would have been the victim under the law and he would have been the criminal.

But since he was 15 rather than 16, just a few months and/or weeks short of his 16th birthday, and she was his tutor, thereby in a position of authority over him which, theoretically if not empirically, enhances the gravity of her crimes and the severity of his “victimization.” she was guilty of a felony with a maximum sentence of 25-years to life in prison and a mandatory minimum of 8-25 years in prison and a life-sentence of electronic-parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” she’s prohibited from removing, even when bathing, showering, and having sex with a spouse or paramour, and registration for life as a uniquely dangerous and degenerate criminal, her mug-shot, name, and address on the internet for all to see and act on such information: hate-mail, death threats, vandalism of property, criminal assaults. And years of “sex-offender treatment,” during and after her imprisonment, and years of quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision.

Ponder the insanity and absurdity and iniquity and arbitrariness! To repeat: to call all of this insane is actually an understatement; it’s beyond insanity. How I’d love to spend an hour or two in a bar with 7 or 8 of the politicians who were most culpable for enacting and imposing these grotesque, draconian, irrational, arbitrary, iniquitous, Orwellian laws; and in regard to Abigail and Kathryn Ronk and their hideously draconian punishments, obviously “cruel and unusual” in the sense of being totally unnecessary. How fascinating it would be to hear them try to defend such laws and the sentences of Abigail, Kathryn Ronk, and many other women, and the dogmas and myths upon which they’re based, and to refute my arguments and contentions.

Time.com Summarizes the 22nd Most “Notorious Crime” of the “Past Hundred Years”

05 Thursday Apr 2018

Posted by in age of consent, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, innate sex differences, embodiment, maleness and femaleness, Mary Letourneau, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

What happens to a woman when she finds the man of her dreams, only he is a child? And if the woman is his teacher? American parents cringed at the story of Mary Kay Letourneau, who first met Vili Fualaau when she was his teacher in second grade. He did not start flirting with her until he was in sixth. She started to have sex with him the next year, when he was 13. Already the mother of four from a marriage that was disintegrating, she would bear the teenager’s daughter, but not before she ended up in prison on rape and molestation charges. She would then violate the rules for the suspension of her sentence by seeing him again -and becoming pregnant again. Letourneau’s beauty and struggles with manic depression made her illicit affair the fodder of tabloids and women’s magazine around the world. But there was something touching, if maddening, abut her refusal to renounce her love for the boy at the cost of her freedom. In 1998, after giving birth to her second child, she began serving a seven-year prison sentence. Released on parole in August 2004, she quickly married her young lover, who by then had turned 21. (Howard Chua-Eoan, “Mary Kay Letourneau’s Forbidden Love, 1978,” Time.com, 2007.)

Surprisingly, this account of her story is honest and accurate, neutral and objective, comparatively, in contrast to most of the media coverage, characterized and vitiated by falsehoods, intentional and unintentional, lies and canards, distortions and misinformation, rampant hysteria and tabloid sensationalism: the demonization of Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester,” a description that was/is false, objectively and scientifically, and malicious and slanderous. And the depiction, equally false, of Vili as a “victim” of “rape” and “child molestation,” tantamount or comparable to a prepubertal girl of 11 or 12 who is too young and immature to consent to or initiate sex and who is a true victim of a perverse and predatory male, an adult or underage adolescent, who rapes and molests her. The MSM as a whole was less a source of factual and objective news than an agent and myrmidon of CSA victimology propaganda and inculcation.

This journalist doesn’t refer to Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester.” Or Vili as a “victim.” He notes that he was 13, not 12, when they first had sex and that he started to flirt with her in sixth grade, conceding that he was the initiator of their sexual union but not exposing the nature and degree of his aggressions. It notes that her marriage was “disintegrating,” which implies that she didn’t destroy her marriage and betray her husband and desert her children by falling in love and having sex with Vili and twice becoming pregnant, but doesn’t mention that her marriage was “disintegrating,” primarily, because of her husband’s serial adulteries and philandering. She was finally going to divorce him after years of betrayal and infidelity, apparently, and perhaps he wanted to divorce her because he fell in love with and wanted to marry or live with another woman? And in describing her love for Vili as “touching” and her “struggles with manic depression,” he’s commiserative, mildly, rather than censorious.

It’s true that he was “only” 13, not 12, when they first had sex. But it’s also true that he was pubescent at age 10, “sexually-active” at age 12, for sure, and possibly even 11, and probably had more sexual partners, perhaps far more, at age 13 than did Mary at age 33. Raised as a Catholic, strictly and devoutly, it’s possible that the only man Mary had sex with before Vili was her husband. And Vili was the aggressor in their sexual union, forcing himself on her the first time they had intercourse. In response to my comments, she confirmed in one of the many letters we exchanged that the first time they had intercourse was “against my will.”

So, given such facts, his level of maturity was closer to that of a typical 16- or 17-old as opposed to a typical 13-year-old. In regard to maturity, the age of puberty, intelligence, sexual experience, etc, the nature of 13-year-old varies significantly. Millions of 13- and 14-year-olds, especially if pubescent at age 10 or 11 or 12, are more or far more intelligent, mature, “sexually-active,” sexually-experienced, etc., than millions of 16- and17-year-olds.

(For the record, which is pertinent, I was an atheist at age 10, when I was still a child, biologically, agnostic at 8 and 9 as I vaguely remember, and pubescent at age 11, which reveals a level of maturity far beyond my numerical age. And Vili was pubescent at age 10.)

The obligatory lie or canard that began in 1997 and continues to this day, over 20-years later, is that Mary “seduced” and “raped” the “child” and “little boy” when he was only 12-years-old. The commenters and reporters who say and write this are either lying or misinformed. Are they ignorant of the facts or are they lying to make her “crimes” appear more “heinous” and “shocking” and to give the absurd depiction and vilification of Mary as a “rapist” and “pedophile” and “child molester” a spurious credibility and gravitas. Unlike Vili and many others, most 12-year-olds are prepubescent. Prepubertal 12-year-olds are children, biologically, whereas most 13-year-olds are pubescent, and also teenagers.

Recidivism Rates of Sex Offenders: Violent Rapists and Pedophiles vs. Women who have Sex with Biological Men under Statutory Age

01 Sunday Apr 2018

Posted by in "anarcho-tyranny", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, innate sex differences, embodiment, maleness and femaleness, MRAs, "men's movement, sex offender registry, statutory rape, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

CSA victimologists argue that sex-offenders, all  sex-offenders, not only violent rapists and pedophiles but also adults who engage in consensual sex-acts with pubescent teenagers under statutory age, have greater rates of recidivism than other categories of convicted felons and, consequently, must be forced to register as uniquely deviant and dangerous criminals.

NARSOL (formerly RSOL) has many articles confuting, persuasively, the contention that sex-offenders are more likely to re-offend than other classes of offenders, even recidivist criminals who’ve committed dozens of violent and other mala in se crimes but have never been convicted of a sexual offense.

Moreover, the recidivism rates of sex-offenders in general are profoundly misleading in that the overwhelming majority of males who commit violent/forcible rapes and gang-rapes, and virtually all of those who commit street/stranger rapes (e.g., who rape and gang-rape women in parks or break into homes and rape and gang-rape women, crimes which often involve murder and/or aggravated assault), are low IQ recidivist criminals who also commit other violent and mala in se crimes. This reality induces all kinds of confusion and can be easily manipulated, statistically, to foster the myth that sex-offenders in general are more likely to re-offend than other categories of offenders.

But even if one assumes, purely for the sake of argument, that NARSOL and other critics are wrong and that sex-offenders as a group do have higher rates of recidivism than other categories of felons, what’s true of sex offenders as a group does not apply to adults, first-offenders with no prior criminal records, who have consensual sex with pubescent teenagers under age 16 or 17 or 18, depending on the age of consent in each state, and especially to women who have sex with young men under statutory age.

It’s likely that not one woman teacher who had sex with a male student age 13-17 (and its now a felony in most states for teachers to have consensual sex with 18-year-old students) has ‘re-offended” by having sex with another young man under statutory age. If so, their recidivism rate is ZERO. And even if one or two of them have “re-offended,” i.e.,transporting another biological man under under statutory age to carnal elysium, which I doubt, their recidivism rate is far less than one percent or almost ZERO.

Males who commit violent/forcible rapes, overwhelmingly low-IQ stereotypical criminals (including biological men under age 18 who are absurdly defined as “children”), are driven by a propensity for violence and predation that is insoluble and difficult to control. This explains why they are likely to re-offend by committing not only rapes and gang-rapes but also aggravated assaults, muggings, armed robberies, burglaries, gang-shootings, murders, attempted murders, home invasions, etc.

True pedophiles convicted of raping and/or molesting prepubescent children, i.e., biological men (including those under age 18 who are defined as “children”) with a sexual fixation on and obsession with prepubescent children, are driven by a fetish and “paraphilia” that is incurable and often difficult to control, Ergo, they’re a risk to re-offend.

Adult females who have sex with young men under the age of 16 or 17 or 18 are not driven by a propensity for violence or a fetish or “paraphilia” that is insoluble and difficult to control. And that explains why it’s likely that not a single woman teacher who had sex with a male student has “re-offended” by having sex with another biological man under statutory age. That explains why their recidivism rate is likely ZERO and surely far less than ONE PERCENT. The reason for this is that they were attracted to and had sex with young men under age 18 for the same reason they’re attracted to and have had sex with adult men in their 20s and 30s and 40s and beyond.

But to CSA victimologists, virtually all of whom are feminists and left-liberals, and to MRAs, the misogynist crazies and vermin of the soi-disant “men’s movement,” and the millions and millions of men and women they’re browbeat and brainwashed, adult females who have consensual sex with young men under statutory age are tantamount or comparable to men (including underage adolescents) who commit violent/forcible rapes and to pedophiles who rape and molest prepubescent boys and girls, and thus are defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” and “child molesters” who must register for life or at least 20-30 years as uniquely deviant and dangerous criminals who are more likely to re-offend than criminals who are actually violent and seriously dangerous, including stereotypical and recidivist males who’ve committed dozens of violent and other mala in se crimes but who’ve never been convicted of a sexual offense albeit most of them have raped and/or gang-raped men in jails and prisons and/or women and adolescent girls.

Thus Abigail Simon must not only register for life as a uniquely dangerous and degenerate criminal, her name, mug-shot, and address on the internet for all to see along with myriads of other men and women who are not violent and dangerous, unlike legions of true criminals, nor even a “danger to re-offend” by having sex with another teenager under statutory age. She must also wear an electronic ankle-tether/”bracelet” she can never remove until she dies at age 77 or 84 or 96 or whenever -albeit she has never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in her life and never will and is not a “threat to society” or to anyone nor even a “danger” to “re-offend” by having sex with another biological man under statutory age.

To repeat: decrying this as “insane” is an understatement. It’s beyond insanity.