Fantasies of Traumatization

10 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "traumatization", Abigail Simon, age of consent, Cassandra, CSA victimology, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

"traumatization", traumatized, women as rapists

Do CSA victimologists believe that young men under age 16 or 18 are “traumatized” and “scarred for life” by having sex with adolescent girls of comparable age. What of the tens of millions of people they’ve vitiated with their theories and assertions, uncorroborated and chimerical and unknown to everyone until just recently in historical terms, as to how biological men under age 16 or even 18 are “traumatized” and “scarred for life” by penetrating adult women in factually consensual relationships.

Obviously, love affairs between underage adolescents, heterosexual or homosexual, can be hurtful, e.g, the pain of rejection, of “unrequited love,” “broken hearts” and “hurt feelings,” etc., exactly as they are for adults. But such is a result of an affair that is ended by one of the partners, or a marriage that ends in divorce with adult males and females, and not of the sex in-itself.

I’m not a woman and have never been an adolescent girl. But in contrast to young men under age 18 and their simple and single-minded lusts, one can understand, without experiencing, the ambivalence of young women, especially those under statutory age, their reluctance to submit to pressure from a male and acquiesce to coitus given the unequal nature of penile-vaginal penetration both in respect to bodily sensations, pleasurable (invariably and intensely so for males) and painful (often and only for women), and the fear of an unwanted pregnancy, which often happens. And think of all the sexually disparate emotional/psychological ramifications. And physical effects if the girl is impregnated. One can understand, without direct experience, how they might feel “dirty,” “used,” abused, exploited, mortified, etc., by the sex alone. One can understand why they are far more likely than males to feel a sense of “guilt” and “shame” even if they weren’t raised to believe that sex outside of marriage is “sinful” and immoral.

But how many people would argue that both actors in such love affairs and romances and dalliances and “one-night stands,” males and females, are “traumatized” and “scarred for life,” invariably and irremediably, by the sex alone? And for males who have sex with females, any hurt or harm is a result of a love affair which ends in rejection and perhaps humiliation, not of the sex in-itself.

Who would argue that young men of 15 and 16 are “victims” for having sex with young women of 16 and 17, especially if they’re the aggressors and initiators and are much bigger and stronger and more sexually-experienced, much less “victims” of rape” and “child sexual abuse.” Who would argue that young men under age 16 or even 18 can’t assent to or initiate sex, willingly and knowingly, with adolescent girls under age 16 or 18.

Who would argue that 17-year old biological men, absurdly defined as “children” and even “little boys” and conflated with prepubescent girls, are “traumatized” and “scarred for life” by consenting to or initiating sex with “adult” females of 18 or 19? “Traumatized” by the sex, not the relationship.

CSA victimologists believe that young men under age 16 or 18 are “victims” who are “traumatized” and “scarred for life” because of an “imbalance of power” in adult-“child” relationships. The “victim” is damaged, profoundly and permanently, not by the sex alone, which by itself is the same as sex between underage adolescents, but by the sex in interaction with the relationship. But for the relationship and “imbalance of power” to be “traumatizing” the adult must be at least 4-5 years older than the “child.”

Underage teenagers are invariably and profoundly harmed for life not because they’re “children” per se but because they’re “children” who have sex with adults who are sufficiently (at least 4-5 years) or significantly older, and thus far more powerful in theory and by definition, irrespective of the facts and circumstances.

Consequently, the sex is invariably and inherently “nonconsensual,” “abusive,” “coercive,” exploitative, “traumatizing,” tantamount to “rape” and often defined as such or as “sexual assault,”even if the “victims” are much bigger and stronger and were the aggressors and initiators and even if they’re criminals and delinquents who’ve committed violent and other mala in se crimes and whom their de jure “victimizers” fear, justifiably, rationally, understandably.

In theory and by definition, a biological men under age 16 or 18 can’t consent to or initiate sex, willingly and knowingly, with an adult female who is at least 4-5 years older. And he can’t actually enjoy the sex even if he falsely believes that he does and is exultant rather than devastated, and is a “victim” of “rape” and “sexual assault” who is “traumatized” even if he’s totally unaware of his “victimization” and experiences his putative “traumatization” as exhilarating, gratifying, empowering.

And this “imbalance of power” and resultant “traumatization is exacerbated, the “scares” are wider and deeper and more crippling (emotionally) and disfiguring (metaphorically), if the adult woman is in a position of authority. He’s “traumatized” not only by an “imbalance of power” based on a disparity of age but also an “imbalance of power” based on the woman’s position of authority, irrespective of the facts and circumstances, even if he’s the aggressor and initiator and/or the woman doesn’t use her power and authority to coerce and manipulate him into engaging in “unwanted sex.”

But exactly how does the woman being an adult and at least 4-5 years older magically render the sex traumatizing? The magical age-disparity of 4-5 years is totally arbitrary, subjective, purely theoretical, empirically uncorroborated, and far less crucial than sundry other variables: intrinsic sexual differentiation, physically and psychologically, penetration, sex and strength, testosterone, aggressiveness, the propensity for violence and criminality, who fears whom, who was the aggressor and initiator and who was the passive and receptive actor. Precisely how does an affair that is deeply fulfilling and sex acts that are supremely pleasurable, as everyone would concede if the actors are two adults of 18 or 19, mysteriously and magically become “traumatizing” if the male is under 16 or even 18 and the female is at least 4-5 years older?

And how does the woman being in a position of authority magically render the sex even more traumatizing even if the “victim” was the aggressor and initiator and/or she didn’t misuse her authority to coerce and manipulate her “victim” into engaging in “unwanted sex”?

The Witch-Burning of Abigail Simon

15 Friday Jan 2016

Posted by Michael Kuehl 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

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, sex offender registry, women as rapists, women sex offenders

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.”