• About

freeabigailsimon

~ women punished for having sex with biological men under age 18.

freeabigailsimon

Category Archives: “sex-offender treatment”

Does Abigail Know that Feminism is Culpable, Seminally and Predominantly, for Destroying her Life?

04 Tuesday Oct 2022

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "sex-offender treatment", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, feminism, sex offender registry, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

feminism, innate sex differences, plea-bargain, women as rapists, women sex offenders

As noted previously, in a few posts, Abigail was prohibited from receiving and reading a letter and articles I sent to the Huron Valley Correctional Facility. To the authorities, my words were a “threat to security, good order, or discipline.”

Did the left-feminist ideologues and totalitarians who rule the prison and the lives of inmates believe that Abigail would have gone berserk and attacked the guards and/or other inmates, perhaps inciting a riot or mass revolt, had she been allowed to read my heterodox and “politically-incorrect” arguments and contentions? Or simply that they would have vitiated the efficacy of her “sex-offender treatment”?

So, in effect, I’m a victim of censorship, denied the right to correspond with Abigail and ask her many questions about her intrigue with a 15-year-old student and biological man, her phantasmal and theoretical “victim” whom she claims forced himself on her three times and “controlled her life” by threats and manipulation; her arrest, prosecution, trial, why she rejected the plea-bargains, her life in jail and prison; her life, especially as an adult, before it was shattered, forever and needlessly, by the criminal injustice system; her ideals, values, and opinions on various issues and subjects: e.g., what did she think of Mary Letourneau and her affair with a student and her sentence of 8-years in jail and prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration. What did she think of such laws and penalties, to the extent that she was aware of them, before they ruined her life?

Like most educated women, the overwhelming majority, alas,, I presume that Abigail is a left-liberal, probably more liberal than extreme/radical left, though I could be wrong. And, moreover, that she defines and thinks of herself as a feminist, however defined, broadly or narrowly, vaguely or precisely, accurately or inaccurately. If so, does she know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life.

In pre-feminist America, including the 1960s, the decade of  the “sexual revolution,” “statutory rape” laws didn’t even apply to women in most jurisdictions. And if they did so apply to women in some states or if women who had sex with young men under age 16 or 18 were guilty of a “moral’s offense,” however defined, how many women were arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to jail or prison for such offenses? (Read my blog-post on Kirk Douglas) And how many were sentenced to 8-25 years in prison, like Abigail, or 6-15 years, like Kathryn Ronk, or enslaved for 8-years, like Mary Letourneau; or 40-years, like Shannon Schmeider, with a chance for parole after “only” 20 years; or life with a chance for parole after “only” 10-years, apparently, like Michelle Taylor; or 20-years with no chance for parole, like Brittany Zamora, and who knows how many other women, teachers and non-teachers, who received similar prison sentences. In pre-feminist America, was there even one woman who received such a draconian sentence for having a love affair or mere tryst with a biological man under age 18?

And even if incarcerated, none of them, upon their release, were subjected to years of quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision, mandatory “sex-offender treatment,” electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle tether/”bracelet,” and registration for life or at least 20-30 years as uniquely dangerous and degenerate criminals, their mug-shots, names, and addresses on the internet for all to see and all that that entails in regard to danger and mortification.

None of these laws and policies, these draconian/Orwellian punishments, inflicted on Abigail and myriads of other women for no exigent and practical reasons, would exist if not for feminism. Beginning in the early 1970s, in deference to feminism and the anti-rape movement which began, publicly and officially, in 1971 with the New York radical feminist rape conference, sex crime laws were revamped. State legislators, overwhelmingly male, enacted and imposed laws written by feminist lawyers.

De facto consensual sex between adults and young men and women under age 16 or 18, depending on the age of consent in each jurisdiction, was now a “gender-neutral” crime that applied equally to women and was equated or conflated under the law with violent-forcible rape and the rape and/or molestation of prepubescent children. And women were now defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships

Most infamously, Mary Letourneau was convicted of “child rape” under Washington law, and sentenced to almost a decade in jail and prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration, albeit she didn’t rape her “victim,” obviously, nor did she use violence/force or threats of same to compel his submission, nor was she guilty of molesting a prepubescent child. Her victim” was the aggressor and initiator who forced himself on her the first time they had intercourse. (Read my articles and blog-posts on her case for more details and analysis.)

Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall was convicted of “sexual assault of a child,” which implies that she was guilty of violence/force or threats of same in sexually abusing and violating a helpless and innocent  prepubescent boy, and sentenced to 4-years in prison and a lifetime of sex-offender registration -when, in fact, she was the victim of abuse and her “victim” was the abuser and victimizer. He was not a child, biologically, but a man in size and sexuality, a delinquent and criminal of 15 who, as her student, constantly harassed and implored her for sex at school and in her classroom, molested and kissed her against her will, and finally raped her when she visited him at home on school business, apparently when no one else was present. She didn’t report the rape lest he “go to prison and become more of a delinquent.” Exploiting her altruism and compassion, not only misguided and foolish but ill-deserved and self-destructive, he manipulated and bullied her into having sex with him in an intrigue she didn’t know how to “end without hurting him,” resulting to her arrest and all that followed,

The real criminal, sexually and otherwise, was not punished, and who knows how many crimes he committed before he raped and molested Cassandra, and who knows how manyy crimes he’s committed thereafter. Did he rape any more women or adolescent girls, or even murder someone, like the “victim” of Melissa Bittner, who was convicted of
“sexual assault” and sentenced to prison and much else because she was sexually assaulted by a 16-year-old delinquent. (See the posts on her case for more details.)

Ironically and paradoxically, such iniquities and outrages and travesties, inflicted even on women who were raped and molested by their de jure “victims” but still charged with and convicted of felony sex offenses, and the draconian-Orwellian sentences, are inconceivable apart from feminism and the anti-rape movement and CSA victimology.

CSA victimology and it’s tenets and dogmas and the resultant mass-hysteria, psychosis, moral panics, witch-hunts, and imprisonment and persecution of myriads of men and women who were/are either innocent or guilty of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibita felonies, overwhelmingly first-offenders who, even if not innocent, were/are not violent and dangerous, people who’ve never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in their lives and almost surely never will and are not a “threat to society or to anyone nor even a “danger to reoffend” by having sex with another biological man or woman under statutory age – this madness and reign of terror is inconceivable apart from feminist ideology and it’s decades-long jihad against sexual victimization, real and imagined.

Nor would adult women who have sex with young men under statutory age be absurdly defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” if not for feminism and the myth and premise that men and women and boys and girls are exactly the same apart from the inescapable differences in anatomy and the conflation of prepubescent boys and girls with pubescent male and female adolescents. And even the inescapable differences in anatomy and their relevance to and importance in sexual postures and possibilities are denied and trivialized as irrelevant and insignificant by feminists and other leftists and egalitarians (most fanatically, obsessively, and viciously by MRA, the misogynist crazies and liars of the soi-disant “men’s movement”) who define and vilify adult women as “rapists” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships  “sex-equality dogma taken to lunatic extremes,” to quote John Derbyshire, and the only crime in which the “victim” enjoys the actus reus (i.e. the sex) more than the woman who “rapes” and/or “molests” and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization.” Nor would young men under age 16 or even 18 who consent to or initiate sex with adult women be defined as “victims” of “rape” and CSA who are “traumatized” and “scarred for life.”

Abigail was convicted of “criminal sexual misdonduct,” a vague term, legally and empircally, under which all sorts of sex-acts that are now crimes, nearly always felonies, are subsumed: everything from violent-forcible rape, iinclding the most sadistic, brutal, vicious rapes and gang-rapes, truly “heinous” crimes that often also involve aggravated assault, kidnapping, “false imprisonment,” home invasions, torture, mutilation, and murder; to the molestation of prepubescent children; to factually consensual sex between adults and young men and women under statutory age, including women who are convicted of felonies for having sex with biological men under age 16 or 18 (or even 18-year-olds if the women is a teacher or tutor like Abigail and the “victim” is a student under her authority.

In contrast, legally and empirically, “statutory rape” is not a vaguely defined criminal offense. It defines, clearly and accurately, a specific and objective act. The modifying “statutory” denotes an absence of violent/force or threats of same to compel the submission of the “victim” -i.e., it reveals that the sex was consensual, factually as opposed to legally- while “rape” signifies the reality of penile-vaginal penetration, an act which only males can perpetrate. Thus even to define the women above as “statutory rapists” and their “crimes” as “statutory rape” is objectively and empirically false and thus absurd.

To repeat: Does Abigail know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life, culpable for her sentence of 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether she can never remove and public sex-offender registration. And so, too, now and in the past and future, he women above and far too many others whose lives have been and will be blighted or destroyed by modern feminism and CSA victimology.

 

Does Abigail Know that Feminism is Culpable, Seminally and Predominantly, for Destroying her Life?

03 Tuesday Mar 2020

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "sex-offender treatment", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, feminism, sex offender registry, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

feminism, innate sex differences, plea-bargain, women as rapists, women sex offenders

As noted previously, in a few posts, Abigail was prohibited from receiving and reading a letter and articles I sent to the Huron Valley Correctional Facility. To the authorities, my words were a “threat to security, good order, or discipline.”

Did the left-feminist ideologues and totalitarians who rule the prison and the lives of inmates believe that Abigail would have gone berserk and attacked the guards and/or other inmates, perhaps inciting a riot or mass revolt, had she been allowed to read my heterodox and “politically-incorrect” arguments and contentions? Or simply that they would have vitiated the efficacy of her “sex-offender treatment”?

So, in effect, I’m a victim of censorship, denied the right to correspond with Abigail and ask her many questions about her intrigue with a 15-year-old student and biological man, her phantasmal and theoretical “victim” whom she claims forced himself on her three times and “controlled her life” by threats and manipulation; her arrest, prosecution, trial, why she rejected the plea-bargains, her life in jail and prison; her life, especially as an adult, before it was shattered, forever and needlessly, by the criminal injustice system; her ideals, values, and opinions on various issues and subjects: e.g., what did she think of Mary Letourneau and her affair with a student and her sentence of 8-years in jail and prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration. What did she think of such laws and penalties, to the extent that she was aware of them, before they ruined her life?

Like most educated women, the overwhelming majority, alas,, I presume that Abigail is a left-liberal, probably more liberal than extreme/radical left, though I could be wrong. And, moreover, that she defines and thinks of herself as a feminist, however defined, broadly or narrowly, vaguely or precisely, accurately or inaccurately. If so, does she know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life.

In pre-feminist America, including the 1960s, the decade of  the “sexual revolution,” “statutory rape” laws didn’t even apply to women in most jurisdictions. And if they did so apply to women in some states or if women who had sex with young men under age 16 or 18 were guilty of a “moral’s offense,” however defined, how many women were arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to jail or prison for such offenses? (Read my blog-post on Kirk Douglas) And how many were sentenced to 8-25 years in prison, like Abigail, or 6-15 years, like Kathryn Ronk, or enslaved for 8-years, like Mary Letourneau; or 40-years, like Shannon Schmeider, with a chance for parole after “only” 20 years; or life with a chance for parole after “only” 10-years, apparently, like Michelle Taylor; or 20-years with no chance for parole, like Brittany Zamora, and who knows how many other women, teachers and non-teachers, who received similar prison sentences. In pre-feminist America, was there even one woman who received such a draconian sentence for having a love affair or mere tryst with a biological man under age 18?

And even if incarcerated, none of them, upon their release, were subjected to years of quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision, mandatory “sex-offender treatment,” electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle tether/”bracelet,” and registration for life or at least 20-30 years as uniquely dangerous and degenerate criminals, their mug-shots, names, and addresses on the internet for all to see and all that that entails in regard to danger and mortification.

None of these laws and policies, these draconian/Orwellian punishments, inflicted on Abigail and myriads of other women for no exigent and practical reasons, would exist if not for feminism. Beginning in the early 1970s, in deference to feminism and the anti-rape movement which began, publicly and officially, in 1971 with the New York radical feminist rape conference, sex crime laws were revamped. State legislators, overwhelmingly male, enacted and imposed laws written by feminist lawyers.

De facto consensual sex between adults and young men and women under age 16 or 18, depending on the age of consent in each jurisdiction, was now a “gender-neutral” crime that applied equally to women and was equated or conflated under the law with violent-forcible rape and the rape and/or molestation of prepubescent children. And women were now defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships

Most infamously, Mary Letourneau was convicted of “child rape” under Washington law, and sentenced to almost a decade in jail and prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration, albeit she didn’t rape her “victim,” obviously, nor did she use violence/force or threats of same to compel his submission, nor was she guilty of molesting a prepubescent child. Her victim” was the aggressor and initiator who forced himself on her the first time they had intercourse. (Read my articles and blog-posts on her case for more details and analysis.)

Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall was convicted of “sexual assault of a child,” which implies that she was guilty of violence/force or threats of same in sexually abusing and violating a helpless and innocent  prepubescent boy, and sentenced to 4-years in prison and a lifetime of sex-offender registration -when, in fact, she was the victim of abuse and her “victim” was the abuser and victimizer. He was not a child, biologically, but a man in size and sexuality, a delinquent and criminal of 15 who, as her student, constantly harassed and implored her for sex at school and in her classroom, molested and kissed her against her will, and finally raped her when she visited him at home on school business, apparently when no one else was present. She didn’t report the rape lest he “go to prison and become more of a delinquent.” Exploiting her altruism and compassion, not only misguided and foolish but ill-deserved and self-destructive, he manipulated and bullied her into having sex with him in an intrigue she didn’t know how to “end without hurting him,” resulting to her arrest and all that followed,

The real criminal, sexually and otherwise, was not punished, and who knows how many crimes he committed before he raped and molested Cassandra, and who knows how manyy crimes he’s committed thereafter. Did he rape any more women or adolescent girls, or even murder someone, like the “victim” of Melissa Bittner, who was convicted of
“sexual assault” and sentenced to prison and much else because she was sexually assaulted by a 16-year-old delinquent. (See the posts on her case for more details.)

Ironically and paradoxically, such iniquities and outrages and travesties, inflicted even on women who were raped and molested by their de jure “victims” but still charged with and convicted of felony sex offenses, and the draconian-Orwellian sentences, are inconceivable apart from feminism and the anti-rape movement and CSA victimology.

CSA victimology and it’s tenets and dogmas and the resultant mass-hysteria, psychosis, moral panics, witch-hunts, and imprisonment and persecution of myriads of men and women who were/are either innocent or guilty of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibita felonies, overwhelmingly first-offenders who, even if not innocent, were/are not violent and dangerous, people who’ve never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in their lives and almost surely never will and are not a “threat to society or to anyone nor even a “danger to reoffend” by having sex with another biological man or woman under statutory age – this madness and reign of terror is inconceivable apart from feminist ideology and it’s decades-long jihad against sexual victimization, real and imagined.

Nor would adult women who have sex with young men under statutory age be absurdly defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” if not for feminism and the myth and premise that men and women and boys and girls are exactly the same apart from the inescapable differences in anatomy and the conflation of prepubescent boys and girls with pubescent male and female adolescents. And even the inescapable differences in anatomy and their relevance to and importance in sexual postures and possibilities are denied and trivialized as irrelevant and insignificant by feminists and other leftists and egalitarians (most fanatically, obsessively, and viciously by MRA, the misogynist crazies and liars of the soi-disant “men’s movement”) who define and vilify adult women as “rapists” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships  “sex-equality dogma taken to lunatic extremes,” to quote John Derbyshire, and the only crime in which the “victim” enjoys the actus reus (i.e. the sex) more than the woman who “rapes” and/or “molests” and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization.” Nor would young men under age 16 or even 18 who consent to or initiate sex with adult women be defined as “victims” of “rape” and CSA who are “traumatized” and “scarred for life.”

Abigail was convicted of “criminal sexual misdonduct,” a vague term, legally and empircally, under which all sorts of sex-acts that are now crimes, nearly always felonies, are subsumed: everything from violent-forcible rape, iinclding the most sadistic, brutal, vicious rapes and gang-rapes, truly “heinous” crimes that often also involve aggravated assault, kidnapping, “false imprisonment,” home invasions, torture, mutilation, and murder; to the molestation of prepubescent children; to factually consensual sex between adults and young men and women under statutory age, including women who are convicted of felonies for having sex with biological men under age 16 or 18 (or even 18-year-olds if the women is a teacher or tutor like Abigail and the “victim” is a student under her authority.

In contrast, legally and empirically, “statutory rape” is not a vaguely defined criminal offense. It defines, clearly and accurately, a specific and objective act. The modifying “statutory” denotes an absence of violent/force or threats of same to compel the submission of the “victim” -i.e., it reveals that the sex was consensual, factually as opposed to legally- while “rape” signifies the reality of penile-vaginal penetration, an act which only males can perpetrate. Thus even to define the women above as “statutory rapists” and their “crimes” as “statutory rape” is objectively and empirically false and thus absurd.

To repeat: Does Abigail know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life, culpable for her sentence of 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether she can never remove and public sex-offender registration. And so, too, now and in the past and future, he women above and far too many others whose lives have been and will be blighted or destroyed by modern feminism and CSA victimology.

 

Does Abigail Know that Feminism is Culpable, Seminally and Predominantly, for Destroying her Life?

28 Saturday Jul 2018

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "sex-offender treatment", Abigail Simon, Abigail Simon sentence, criminal sentences, CSA victimology, feminism, sex offender registry, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

feminism, innate sex differences, plea-bargain, women as rapists, women sex offenders

As noted previously, in a few posts, Abigail was prohibited from receiving and reading a letter and articles I sent to the Huron Valley Correctional Facility. To the authorities, my words were a “threat to security, good order, or discipline.”

Did the left-feminist ideologues and totalitarians who rule the prison and the lives of inmates believe that Abigail would have gone berserk and attacked the guards and/or other inmates, perhaps inciting a riot or mass revolt, had she been allowed to read my heterodox and “politically-incorrect” arguments and contentions. Or simply that they would have vitiated the efficacy of her “sex-offender treatment.”

So, in effect, I’m a victim of censorship, denied the right to correspond with Abigail and ask her many questions about her intrigue with a 15-year-old student and biological man, her phantasmal and theoretical “victim” whom she claims forced himself on her three times and “controlled her life” by threats and manipulation; her arrest, prosecution, trial, why she rejected the plea-bargains, her life in jail and prison; her life, especially as an adult, before it was shattered, forever and needlessly, by the criminal justice system; her ideals, values, and opinions on various issues and subjects: e.g., what did she think of Mary Letourneau and her affair with a student and her sentence of 8-years in jail and prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration. What did she think of such laws and penalties, to the extent that she was aware of them, before they ruined her life?

Like most educated women, the overwhelming majority, alas,, I presume that Abigail is a left-liberal, probably more liberal than extreme/radical left, though I could be wrong. And, moreover, that she defines and thinks of herself as a feminist, however defined, broadly or narrowly, vaguely or precisely, accurately or inaccurately. If so, does she know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life.

In pre-feminist America, including the 1960s, the decade of  the “sexual revolution,” “statutory rape” laws didn’t even apply to women in most jurisdictions. And if they did so apply to women in some states or if women who had sex with young men under age 16 or 18 were guilty of a “moral’s offense,” however defined, how many women were arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to jail or prison for such offenses? (Read my blog-post on Kirk Douglas) And how many were sentenced to 8-25 years in prison, like Abigail, or 6-15 years, like Kathryn Ronk, or enslaved for 8-years, like Mary Letourneau; or 40-years, like Shannon Schmeider, with a chance for parole after “only” 20 years; or life with a chance for parole after “only” 10-years, apparently, like Michelle Taylor; or 20-years with no chance for parole, like Brittany Zamora, and who knows how many other women, teachers and non-teachers, who received similar prison sentences. In pre-feminist America, was there even one woman who received such a draconian sentence for having a love affair or mere tryst with a biological man under age 18?

And even if incarcerated, none of them, upon their release, were subjected to years of quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision, mandatory “sex-offender treatment,” electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle tether/”bracelet,” and registration for life or at least 20-30 years as uniquely dangerous and degenerate criminals, their mug-shots, names, and addresses on the internet for all to see and all that that entails in regard to danger and mortification.

None of these laws and policies, these draconian/Orwellian punishments, inflicted on Abigail and myriads of other women for no exigent and practical reasons, would exist if not for feminism. Beginning in the early 1970s, in deference to feminism and the anti-rape movement which began, publicly and officially, in 1971 with the New York radical feminist rape conference, sex crime laws were revamped. State legislators, overwhelmingly male, enacted and imposed laws written by feminist lawyers.

De facto consensual sex between adults and young men and women under age 16 or 18, depending on the age of consent in each jurisdiction, was now a “gender-neutral” crime that applied equally to women and was equated or conflated under the law with violent-forcible rape and the rape and/or molestation of prepubescent children. And women were now defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships

Most infamously, Mary Letourneau was convicted of “child rape” under Washington law, and sentenced to almost a decade in prison and a lifetime of public sex-offender registration, albeit she didn’t rape her “victim,” obviously, nor did she use violence/force or threats of same to compel his submission, nor was she guilty of molesting a prepubescent child. Her victim” was the aggressor and initiator who forced himself on her the first time they had intercourse. (Read my articles and blog-posts on her case for more details and analysis.)

Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall was convicted of “sexual assault of a child,” which implies that she was guilty of violence/force or threats of same in sexually abusing and violating a helpless and innocent  prepubescent boy, and sentenced to 4-years in prison and a lifetime of sex-offender registration -when, in fact, she was the victim of abuse and her “victim” was the abuser and victimizer. He was not a child, biologically, but a man in size and sexuality, a delinquent and criminal of 15 who, as her student, constantly harassed and implored her for sex at school and in her classroom, molested and kissed her against her will, and finally raped her when she visited him at home on school business, apparently when no one else was present. She didn’t report the rape lest he “go to prison and become more of a delinquent.” Exploiting her altruism and compassion, not only misguided and foolish but ill-deserved and self-destructive, he manipulated and bullied her into having sex with him in an intrigue she didn’t know how to “end without hurting him,” resulting to her arrest and all that followed,

The real criminal, sexually and otherwise, was not punished, and who knows how many crimes he committed before he raped and molested Cassandra, and who knows how manyy crimes he’s committed thereafter. Did he rape any more women or adolescent girls, or even murder someone, like the “victim” of Melissa Bittner, who was convicted of
“sexual assault” and sentenced to prison and much else because she was sexually assaulted by a 16-year-old delinquent. (See the posts on her case for more details.)

Ironically and paradoxically, such iniquities and outrages and travesties, inflicted even on women who were raped and molested by their de jure “victims” but still charged with and convicted of felony sex offenses, and the draconian-Orwellian sentences, are inconceivable apart from feminism and the anti-rape movement and CSA victimology.

CSA victimology and it’s tenets and dogmas and the resultant mass-hysteria, psychosis, moral panics, witch-hunts, and imprisonment and persecution of myriads of men and women who were/are either innocent or guilty of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibita felonies, overwhelmingly first-offenders who, even if not innocent, were/are not violent and dangerous, people who’ve never committed a violent or other mala in se crime in their lives and almost surely never will and are not a “threat to society or to anyone nor even a “danger to reoffend” by having sex with another biological man or woman under statutory age – this madness and reign of terror is inconceivable apart from feminist ideology and it’s decades-long jihad against sexual victimization, real and imagined.

Nor would adult women who have sex with young men under statutory age be absurdly defined and vilified as “rapists” and “pedophiles” if not for feminism and the myth and premise that men and women and boys and girls are exactly the same apart from the inescapable differences in anatomy and the conflation of prepubescent boys and girls with pubescent male and female adolescents. And even the inescapable differences in anatomy and their relevance to and importance in sexual postures and possibilities are denied and trivialized as irrelevant and insignificant by feminists and others (most fanatically, obsessively, and viciously by MRA, the misogynist crazies and liars of the soi-disant “men’s movement”) who define and vilify adult women as “rapists” for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships  “sex-equality dogma taken to lunatic extremes,” to quote John Derbyshire, and the only crime in which the “victim” enjoys the actus reus (i.e. the sex) more than the woman who “rapes” and/or “molests” and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization.” Nor would young men under age 16 or even 18 who consent to or initiate sex with adult women be defined as “victims” of “rape” and CSA who are “traumatized” and “scarred for life.”

Abigail was convicted of “criminal sexual misdonduct,” a vague term, legally and empircally, under which all sorts of sex-acts that are now crimes, nearly always felonies, are subsumed: everything from violent-forcible rape, iinclding the most sadistic, brutal, vicious rapes and gang-rapes, truly “heinous” crimes that often also involve aggravated assault, kidnapping, “false imprisonment,” home invasions, torture, mutilation, and murder; to the molestation of prepubescent children; to factually consensual sex between adults and young men and women under statutory age, including women who are convicted of felonies for having sex with biological men under age 16 or 18 (or even 18-year-olds if the women is a teacher or tutor like Abigail and the “victim” is a student under her authority.

In contrast, legally and empirically, “statutory rape” is not a vaguely defined criminal offense. It defines, clearly and accurately, a specific and objective act. The modifying “statutory” denotes an absence of violent/force or threats of same to compel the submission of the “victim” -i.e., it reveals that the sex was consensual, factually as opposed to legally- while “rape” signifies the reality of penile-vaginal penetration, an act which only males can perpetrate. Thus even to define the women above as “statutory rapists” and their “crimes” as “statutory rape” is objectively and empirically false and thus absurd.

To repeat: Does Abigail know that feminism is culpable, seminally and predominantly, for destroying her life, culpable for her sentence of 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether she can never remove and public sex-offender registration. And so, too, now and in the past and future, he women above and far too many others whose lives have been and will be blighted or destroyed by modern feminism and CSA victimology.

 

In a Sane and Just and Rational Country

14 Monday May 2018

Posted by Michael Kuehl 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

"anarcho-tyranny", Abigail Simon sentence, age of consent, registry, sex offender registry, sex offenders, women as rapists, women sex offenders

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 Michael Kuehl 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

"anarcho-tyranny", age of consent, registry, sex offender registry, sex offenders, women sex offenders

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.

Beyond Insanity: 34-year-old Nevada woman sentenced to life in prison for allegedly “forcing” a 13-year-old male to touch her breast.

27 Monday Nov 2017

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "anarcho-tyranny", "sex-offender treatment", "traumatization", age of consent, plea-bargain, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women sex offenders

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

age of consent, plea-bargain, registry, sex offender registry, sex offenders, women as rapists

“Does the Punishment Fit the Crime? ” So asks www. kolotv.com. in a brief article:

An Elko County woman convicted of forcing a 13-year-old boy to touch her breasts was sentenced to life in prison. Michelle Lyn Taylor, 34, was convicted of lewdenss with a minor under 14 in November. Taylor’s attorney, public defender Alina Kilpatrick says it is the harshest sentence ever dealt to a female sex offender in Nevada. Kilpatrick  called the sentence unconstitutional. “This is cruel and unusual punishment,” Kilpatrick said. “She put his hand on her boob while she was wearing a bra, now she’s getting life.”

Elko County District Attorney Gary Woodbury said Taylor was “convicted of precisely what she did,” and under the state sentencing guidelines, life in prison was mandatory. Woodbury says Taylor did not want to negotiate a plea deal because she did not want to have to register as a sex offender. Woodbury says Taylor felt her life would be over if she had to register (as a sex offender) so it wouldn’t matter what she was convicted of.  Woodbury says while it might be some adolescent male’s fantasy to have sex with a woman, in this case it was a traumatic event. The child has needed and continues to receive therapy.

She was arrested, prosecuted, and convicted at trial in 2010. Apparently, she was so drunk that she didn’t even recall what occurred exactly. And, apparently, she was found guilty of this heinous crime solely on the “he said/she said” uncorroborated testimony of a 13-year-old male. There was no physical evidence, obviously, nor any neutral witnesses.

According to some accounts, Taylor wanted to have sex with the young man. In the fantasy world inhabited by CSA victimologists, most of whom are women and nearly all of whom are feminists and left-liberals, and that of MRAs, the misogynist lunatics of the soi-disant “men’s rights movement,” and all those they’ve brainwashed, biological men under age 16 or 18 (and even “adults” of 18 if the woman is a teacher or tutor like Abigail Simon) are too impotent and innocent and paralyzed by fear to say “no” and reject the advances of a female who is an adult and at least 4-5 years older -albeit they are horrified and repulsed by the prospect of having sex with them even if they’re as ravishing as Debra Lafave or as lovely as Mary Letourneau. But in this situation, obviously, a 13-year-old male was fully capable of saying “no” and resisting a woman’s advances and importunities, probably because she was overweight, unattractive, and sloppy drunk.

“A traumatic event” and “the child has needed and continues to receive therapy.” To MRAs and CSA victimologists, all such “events” -whether love affairs or trysts or even a single act of “sexual contact”- are “non-consensual”  and coercive by definition and “traumatic” for the “child” and “victim” irrespective of the facts and circumstances. The young men are “victims” of “rape” and CSA even if they were the aggressors and initiators and even if they raped and/or molested their “victimizers.’ And they’re devastated and “traumatized”  and must be subjected to months or even years of psycho-therapy, even if they claim to have enjoyed the sex, whether coitus or fellatio or simply kissing and fondling and “sexual contact,” because they did enjoy it many or  or a few times or just once , usually far more than the women who “raped” and “molested” them, and thus are not aware of being “traumatized” because, in fact as opposed to fantasy,  they were and are not “traumatized.”

In reality, any “trauma” he suffered was a corollary of Nevada’s draconian sex-crime laws, the criminal justice system, the trial, cross-examination, the media coverage, and mandatory psycho-therapy which in theory can only cure or mollify his “trauma” by persuading him that he was “traumatized” and “scarred for life” by touching a woman breast while she was wearing a bra, not by the act of touching a woman’s breast in private, And how can a woman “force” a young man to touch her breast “against his will” if he’s bigger and stronger than her?

It would be interesting and revealing to know the average time-served in Nevada for males convicted of violent crimes: aggravated assaults, robbery, violent/forcible rapes, gang shootings, home invasions, murder, etc. And I’m sure that over 90% of the males who commit such felonies are recidivists, a majority  of whom should have been in prison rather than free to commit more violent and mala in se felonies. And what is the average time-served in jail or prison for adult men who have sex with underage teenagers?

And are men guilty of a felony with a mandatory sentence of life in prison if convicted at trial of forcing adolescent girls under age 14 to touch their chests while clothed? Men don’t have breasts, of course, but they have nipples. And women are guilty of felonies and defined and vilified as “rapists” for engaging in coitus with biological men under statutory age even though they don’t have penises with which to penetrate and impregnate their “victims.”

The public defender noted that the woman was wearing a bra when she allegedly “forced” the young man to touch her breast. I assume that she would have received a life sentence if she was wearing not only a bra but also a blouse or sweater or winter coat when she allegedly “forced” him to touch her breast.

Finally, if a young man of 13 or 14 or 15  (or even 16 or 17 in states in which the generic age of consent is 17 or 18 rather than 16) is “traumatized” by touching an adult woman’s breast while she’s fully clothed or wearing a bra, then what of infants who suck their mother’s nipples every day during months of breast-feeding? Should breast-feeding be criminalized, as a felony, at least if the mother claims that she enjoys the sensations of her baby sucking her nipples and finds it at least mildly erotic? Or in all instances, with all the penalties that are inflicted on adult women who have affairs or trysts or engage in a single act of sexual contact with biological men under statutory age?

More on Traumatization

26 Wednesday Apr 2017

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "sex-offender treatment", "traumatization", age of consent, MRAs, "men's movement, Uncategorized, women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

age of consent, MRAs, traumatized

“Trauma” defined: “a mental condition caused by severe shock, especially when the harmful effects last for a long time.” (Oxford learners dictionaries); “a deeply distressing or disturbing experience.” (Oxford dictionaries); “a very difficult or unpleasant experience that causes someone to have mental or emotional problems usually for a long time”; “a disordered psychic or behavioral state resulting from severe mental or emotional stress….(Merriam-Webster)

The above, according to the “conventional wisdom,” defines the varied experiences, the emotions, the psychic states of and effects on young men under age 16 or even 18 who have sex with adult females who are at least 4-5 years older. Invariably so, according to the dogmas of CSA victimologists, irrespective of the facts and circumstances: whether the women seduced them or they were the aggressors and initiators or their liaisons could be defined as a mutual coming together, or whether they had sex dozens of times over a period of months or engaged in a single act of coitus or fellatio or “sexual contact,” and so forth.

In nearly all instances, in reality and fact as opposed to theory and fantasy, the experiences of young men under age 18 who have sex with adult women are the antithesis of traumatization.

Generally, in reality and fact as opposed to theory and fantasy, if one is traumatized by one or a few or many experience(s), one feels the trauma, immediately and profoundly, viscerally and unequivocally, and knows one is traumatized. One isn’t traumatized if one isn’t aware of being traumatized. If there is any doubt as to whether one was traumatized, then one wasn’t traumatized.

If one is traumatized, deeply and genuinely, by one or a few or many experiences, one doesn’t need to be subjected, willingly or compulsorily, to hours and days and weeks and months and years of psycho-therapy to make one realize that one was traumatized, unconsciously, by an act or acts that one experienced, consciously, as supremely pleasurable, and remembers fondly as gratifying, exciting, fulfilling, empowering.

Unless they’re insane and/or masochistic, people don’t assent to or initiate acts that they know will be traumatizing. And, even more so, they don’t continue to assent to or initiate acts which they experienced as traumatizing.

In regard to instances in which adult women try to seduce or initiate sex with young men under statutory age: If biological men under age 18 don’t want to have sex with adult females for whatever reasons -because they’re in love with girls their own age and don’t want to betray them; because they’re “players” and “super-studs” who’ve had sex many times before and only have sex with females who are at least an “8” and the woman who wants to have sex with them is only a “6′ or at best a “7”; because they were raised to believe that sex outside of marriage is “sinful” and immoral by fundamentalist-evangelical Christian parents; because they’re homosexual, etc.- all they have to do is say “no,” rudely or politely, brusquely or apologetically, to repel their advances and importunities.

Once again, we see how CSA victimologists and those they’ve indoctrinated, most perniciously the ruling-elites and governing-classes,  conflate biological men under age 16 or even 18 with prepubescent girls of 10 and 11. Just as the latter are too young and sexless and innocent to say “no” and resist the sexual aggressions of adult men 18-years of age and older and pubescent teenage males under age 18, so the former are too young and immature to say “no” and repel the advances of women who are nearly always smaller and weaker and usually far smaller and weaker than their putative “victims,” and will not resort to violence/force or overt threats of same (physical assaults and/or weapons) if rebuffed since they’re not violent and deranged and psychopathic -and even if they were violent, they too small and weak to compel the submission of young men under age 16 or 18 who are larger and stronger.

And how many times, in all of history, has a women used a knife or gun to terrorize a young man under statutory age (or of any age from 18 to 80) into submitting to coitus or other sex-acts “against his will”?  At worst, such crimes are so rare as to be negligible, statistically, and virtually nonexistent in contrast to the known and told and unknown and untold millions and millions of rapes and gang-rapes and sexual assaults that adult men and underage teenage males have committed against adult women and underage teenage and prepubescent girls and boys. And also, appallingly, the myriads if not millions of male-on-male rapes and gang-rapes and sexual assaults, predominantly in jails and prisons and detention camps.

Thus, in the minds of CSA victimologists (and also MRAs, for divergent reasons and motives), they have no choice but to engage in sex-acts that will “traumatize,” “devastate,” and “scar” them for life: even if they’ve had sex before, often many times before, with underage adolescent girls, and/or outweigh the women who “rape” them by 50-100 lbs. and are 4-6 times stronger in the upper body. But they’re not too young and immature to be charged with felonies and possibly “waived” into adult court if they rape adult females and underage adolescent girls.

The reason why few biological men under statutory age will reject the advances of adult females is because they want to have sex with them, just as they want to have sex with underage adolescent girls, and know the sex with be pleasurable.

If biological men under age 18 have had sex once or a few or many times with adolescent girls under age 18, then they know that acts of coitus and fellatio with adult women, teachers or whoever, will be just as if not even more exciting and gratifying and empowering, physically and psychologically, depending on the circumstances: e.g., the milieu in which they “make love,” the expertise of the woman in the fine arts of love-making, the attractiveness and desirability of the woman, etc.

If they’re virgins and have never had sex with a female, they’ve surely masturbated, most weekly, many daily, and experienced their orgasms as pleasurable: the tickle, the tingle, the sting, and the spit, and then deep relaxation, the joys of onanism. So even if they’re virgins, they know that that sliding or jamming their penises into the vagina of an adult women and ejaculating inside her will be even more gratifying, physically and psychologically, than self-pleasuring by hand in a bedroom or bathroom or wherever in onanistic solitude,  vitiated by anxiety if their parents are home and nearby or if in a public restroom. Or so, too, with her warm, wet lips and tongue fellating him to orgasmic ecstasy.

Ironically, the hysterical and dogmatic fantasy and insistence of the modern anti-sex feminist left that young men under age 16 or even 18 who eagerly assent to or initiate sex with adult women at least 4-5 years older will be “traumatized” and “scarred for life” is comparable to the hysterical and dogmatic fantasy and insistence of anti-sex Christian puritans that young men who masturbated would “go insane” before they were sentenced to hell for eternity. if they didn’t believe that Jesus was the son of God who was born of a virgin and resurrected the moment he died on the cross. If they did so believe, they would still have “gone insane” from onanism but would have ascended to Heaven after death to enjoy an eternity of bliss as an immortal soul and disembodied mind who can’t have sex with other souls or masturbate.

“Ed” comments at RSOL

24 Monday Oct 2016

Posted by Michael Kuehl in "sex-offender treatment", "traumatization", Abigail Simon, age of consent, CSA victimology, sex offender registry, statutory rape, Uncategorized, women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters", women as rapists, women sex offenders

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

"traumatization", Abigail Simon, age of consent, registry, sex offender registry, sex offenders, traumatized, women sex offenders

“Ed” denounces the lunacy and iniquity of SO laws and mandatory “treatment” -if only for adult men who have sex with young women under age 16 or 18 who are falsely defined as “children”: the pseudo-science, the delusions, the canards, the lies. And also the greed, mandatory psycho-therapy as a “racket” and business that critics deride as the “child sexual abuse industry.”

Most of our RSOL’s time is spent fighting the public registry and residency restrictions for former SOs; we should also be fighting mandatory treatment for those simply guilty of journalistic curiosity. I am currently fighting this battle alone. But I am armed with excellent scholarly articles that point up all the recent research into the serious flaws built into the sex offender laws as relating to “deviance” and the law supervised release standards that mandate “treatment.” There are a goodly number of RSOs who are not mentally ill and who do not have paraphilias of any sort. We may be on supervised release, but we have a fundamental constitutional right to refuse so-called “treatment” that is neither wanted nor needed by those who get their living by providing it.

Personally, I fail to see “deviance” in any straight heterosexual male of any age who can appreciate the beauty and grace of young women who are biological adults in terms of secondary sex characteristics but are currently under age legally. Today the law sees them as “children” and “victims” if any male they become sexually involved with is more than four years older than them. This is an insane situation and a contradiction in and of itself of natural law, as evidenced by the results of the latest scientific research.

This research is currently unaccepted by all in the prison industrial complex who are engaged in profiting by casting a very wide net over anyone convicted of a sexual offense. If the necessary and progressive legislative corrections are ever made in the criminal justice system, those providing treatment will lose half their clientel and thus half their income. It is now as it has always been -all about the money….(RSOL, “Success at NACDL Seminar,” nationalrsol.org/blog, 11-28-2015)

I replied:

Excellent points, Ed. I fully concur. Mandatory “sex-offender treatment” for adults who have sex with young men and women under age 16 or even 18 is travesty and iniquity, irrational and gratuitous. “Treatment” for what, precisely and specifically, heterosexuality? Heterosexual adults are attracted to young men and women under age 18 for the same reason they’re attracted to men and women of 18 and 19 and to those in their 20s and 30s and 40s and beyond.

People can argue, reasonably, that having sex with those under age 16 is “wrong” and “immoral” and “inappropriate” and, for teachers, unprofessional. I, for one, wouldn’t even say that in many instances. But such acts per se are not “deviant” in the sense of being aberrant or unnatural. And, consequently, adults who have sex with young men and women under age 16 or even 18 are not afflicted with some kind of serious “disorder” or “paraphilia” that requires months and years of psycho-therapy and “sex-offender treatment.” mandatory and punitive and degrading, both in and out of jails and/or prisons, and conducted by fanatics and mountebanks, or simply greedy opportunists. Yes, the “child sexual abuse industry.”

If adults who have sex with young men and women under age 16 or even 18 are afflicted with a disorder and “paraphilia” and thus in need of psycho-therapy, then so are adults who are attracted to young men and women under age 16 or even 18 even if they don’t have sex with them, which includes almost everyone, male and female, heterosexual and homosexual, everyone but pedophiles, true pedophiles, who are exclusively attracted to prepubescent children, girls or boys. If such people are “pedophiles,” then everyone is a “pedophile” with the exception of authentic pedophiles.

And the laws and policies he assails as insane and unjust are even more so when applied to women who transport young men under age 18 to carnal elysium. And even to those who were sexually-harassed, molested, sexually-assaulted, and raped by their “victims,” like Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall, Melissa Bittner, and possibly Abigail Simon.

 

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • October 2025
  • April 2024
  • February 2024
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • December 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • November 2021
  • July 2021
  • May 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • July 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • January 2020
  • July 2019
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016

Categories

  • "anarcho-tyranny"
  • "sex-offender treatment"
  • "traumatization"
  • Abigail Simon
  • Abigail Simon sentence
  • age of consent
  • appeal
  • Barton Dieters
  • Cassandra
  • Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall
  • criminal sentences
  • CSA victimology
  • Debra Lafave
  • feminism
  • innate sex differences, embodiment, maleness and femaleness
  • Jeffrey Epstein
  • John Derbyshire, Debra Lafave
  • Kathryn Ronk
  • lawsuit
  • Mary Letourneau
  • media coverage, sensationalism
  • Melissa Bittner
  • Melisssa Bittner
  • MRAs, "men's movement
  • plea-bargain
  • prison security levels
  • prisoner rights, mail, censorship
  • sex offender registry
  • statutory rape
  • Uncategorized
  • Willie Horton
  • women as "pedophiles" and "child molesters"
  • women as rapists
  • women sex offenders

Meta

  • Create account
  • Log in

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • freeabigailsimon
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • freeabigailsimon
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar